Unlimitedia Sick Product of a Sick System

SunnyHello Nice effects though.

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

george karpouzas The most positive aspect of this movie is the meticulous evocation of the social environment of the French and international jet-set residing in Paris during the beginning of the 20nth century in the "golden", at least for some, years of the 3rd French Republic, which after the horrors of the 1st World War was named "Belle Epoque". Those rich people had also potent sexual needs for which a specialized class of women was called to cater for, a sort of elevated form of prostitutes, similar to the "heterai" of ancient Athens, enjoying riches and high-life but also excluded from respectable society, known also as "demi-mondaines", in the sense that they neither low enough to be part of the underworld neither good enough for normal society.One of them Lea de Lonval, played by Michelle Pfeiffer has aged for the standards of that age and her profession, when a former colleague and antagonist, requests her help to train her 19 year-old son, not even an adult but the criteria of early 20nth century, in the ways of the world and of love, in order to save him from his spendthrift and promiscuous life, guiding him through her expert hands.Unfortunately this temporary solution, that was going to be superseded by an arranged marriage for the boy, develops to a deep love which eventually brings tragedy to the couple.A study of perhaps outgrown social conventions of a bygone age and of a social environment which is rich but rife with antagonism and resentment, this movie based on two novels by the acclaimed and controversial French author Collete, is a fine evocation of a charming but flawed world, which may be found wanting in moral fibre by Anglosaxon Protestant moral criteria.Regardless of the personal opinion one may have about the people portrayed in this film, it is true that they are very ably presented both in their emotional profile as well as in their material surroundings. The mental picture of this era that I have coincides with what I saw in this film, although I have not read the novels themselves to judge if the movie is loyal to their letter;I guess it is loyal to their spirit.The negative aspects of the movie are the rather vulgar voice of the narrator who speaks in a tone, as if in a TV show concerned with the sexual escapades of modern Hollywood celebrities. Not that the "demi-mondaines" of the Third Republic were morally better than modern Hollywood celebrities, but the passing of time has let an aura to them, destroyed by the intrusion of the annoying voice of the narrator.The other point is that the language of the movie is English, while it describes an environment who spoke French, given that the international language of the rich was still French, at least of those residing in Paris, in early 2Onth century, that is before the USA had totally eclipsed Old Europe in the world stage.But those details are minor and you should watch this film, to savour the beautiful costumes, rich interiors, fine landscapes and all those elements that were unable to offer true happiness to the protagonists given that social convention barred their love from flourishing.

Colin George "Cheri," based on the novels by French author Colette, is not a film targeted at men in their early twenties, nor is it the type of film I would have autonomously sought out, however the power of a free screening will dispel just about any of my cobwebbed genre prejudices, at least so far as putting me in a seat. "Cheri," unfortunately, is neither a particularly compelling love story nor a particularly convincing period piece. Stephen Frears, who helmed 2006's Oscar-baiting "Queen," but is perhaps best known for heady romcom "High Fidelity," directs, and though the most glaring issues with the film are issues with the screenplay as an adaptation, Frears' direction doesn't elevate the occasionally interesting banter or the by- the-numbers romantic beats.The bottom line is that "Cheri" plays it safe. For a story about an intergenerational relationship between a moody teenager (Rupert Friend) and a retired lady of the evening (Michelle Pfeiffer), "Cheri" risks offending exactly no one. The film is apparently R-rated, which is puzzling, as the scenes of sensuality barely border on the suggestive, and I completely fail to recall the "brief drug use" outlined by the MPAA. It's a sallow, forgettable piece of film-making that owes its only redeeming qualities to earlier, edgier artists. "Harold and Maude," for example, sort of broke the age barrier for romance films back in '71, and the cinematic landscape is peppered with more interesting depictions of prostitutes."Cheri" also lacks a consistent, elegant art direction, usually a staple in even mediocre period pieces. Production designer Alan MacDonald's costumes are gaudy and caricatural, though perhaps impressive if only for their sheer audacity. If widest sunhat diameter or most phosphorescent gown are new categories at this year's academy awards, "Cheri" has them in the bag. Macdonald's set design also under-impresses, rarely providing more than a stodgy veneer of the early nineteenth century, a chasm between the source material that's only widened by the wincingly mawkish dialogue. Christopher Hampton's screenplay paints Lea and her eponymous partner Cheri as cardboard lovers, and Pfeiffer and Friend's sexual chemistry is almost non-existent.The rest of the performances are passable, though the inauthentic dialogue is a constant stumbling block, even for the usually-stellar Kathy Bates, who seems oddly defanged and miscast in her supporting role as Cheri's manipulative mother. The characters are veiled in a layer of faux-elegance, feeling more often like uniformed impressions of turn-of-the- century women than the genuine article. The suspension of disbelief is kept at arm's length.But I don't mean to suggest that "Cheri" is at all a worthless film; it's just an unnecessary one, which is almost as bad. The story itself is adequate, but has no strong reason for existence. Colette's novels ("Cheri" and "The Last of Cheri"), which were combined for the film version, saw publication in France in 1920 and 1926 respectively, assumedly to a more scandalized audience then today's, which were so recently witness to the spectacle of Sacha Baron Cohen's "Bruno.""Cheri" is too reserved a film to justify recommendation. It brings nothing new to the film-making landscape in either content or craft, and though the score by Alexandre Desplat is impressive, probably the picture's highlight, it seems to have wandered into "Cheri" from some more interesting film, upbeat and suspenseful while the plot is languid and sedentary.I don't think I'm letting my prejudice get the better of me in the case of "Cheri." Romance fan or no, there isn't a clear reason why Frears' latest is worth seeking out, even for free.

selffamily the elegant and beautiful Michelle Pfeiffer is ageing and her last great romance has faded, leaving her alone and wealthy. Let's put something right here - the ladies in this film were NOT prostitutes, they were courtesans, something totally different, like serial monogamous mistresses if you like. A concept totally accepted in Europe, especially at this time. So taking on the responsibility of her younger 'godson' at the request of his mother, another retiree, she whisks him away to the country and they begin his education, which turns into a relationship and which goes on for several years. His mother becomes twitchy for grandchildren and arranges a marriage for him, and the lovers part, clearly unaware of the pain that this will trigger. And so it goes - their actions and reactions form the rest of the story, which is beautifully drawn, sumptuously dressed and depicted with class and glamour. My only query is why American Actors and British Actors? Otherwise, a beautiful film, well portrayed and I look forward to more.

lastliberal Let's see; Michelle Pfeiffer is 51, and Rupert Friend is 28. A typical cougar relationship, except there were no cougars in the late 19th Century France, during the Belle Epoque.This is a period of excess and Lea de Lonval (Pfeiffer) is living on her earnings, and she is teaching Cheri (Friend). the son of a friend (Kathy Bates), a fellow retired prostitute, about life. After six years of companionship, she has grown attached to Cheri, and is dismayed to learn his mother wants him married to the daughter (Felicity Jones) of another prostitute (Iben Hjejle).It is definitely a period piece with lavish costumes and sumptuous living, and emotions the rule of the day.What should have been a French film is decidedly English, but it was enjoyable nonetheless.