Леди Чаттерлей (2006) Online

I think DH Lawrence would be proud of this film...Pascale Ferran transformed this story we all imagine as an erotic cliché in a very sensible and sensitive movie. Because Lady Chatterley is not the story of a more or less sex-addict bourgeoise we have seen in so many rubbish erotic movies, inspired by the novel. It is much more about a woman who discovers the materiality of world threw a love story. She discovers also that "some people are not naturally made to command others" and in a way her love story with Parkin is a truly waking up to other people and life around her. She discovers her body and the world of the first industrial revolution has it used to be: unfair and unequal. Lady Chatterlay is not only an erotic story but also a very politic and subversive one. DH Lawrence is well known for being very critical about the British society of 1920's and the human side-effects of industrial development. Pascal Ferran perfectly understood the deep meaning of the novel. Moreover, she transmuted those ideas in a very french movie (but in fact the best french author cinema). The way she has filmed the two characters is very intimate but never silly, and that's a great achievement! In a way, her style is very closed to Piala's one. Harsh and poetic at the same time, precise and evocative, sensible and sensitive. This film is very precious!

I have seen the BBC adaptation of the DH Lawrence novel made by Ken Russell with Joely Richardson and Sean Bean and there is no comparison: I prefer the French adaptation even if the film is not always faithful to the book on some points (for example, in the book, Sir Clifford is having problems with his miners and his employees because he is very arrogant but in the film, Pascale Ferran does not mention these problems). The actors are maybe a little more good-looking in the BBC version but that's about it (sorry, Sean Bean). And if you want to see a film about a beautiful but bored, aristocratic woman whose sensuality is suddenly re-awakened by her meeting with the sullen, unsociable but virile Parkin/Mellors, then this film is for you. Pascale Ferran seemed to have focused her film on the love-story between Lady Constance/Connie and Parkin, the gamekeeper and the discovery or re-discovery of one's senses. That is why you have beautiful shots of nature, of magnificent trees in spring and why you have many scenes in which Constance is walking in the forest and just listening to the songs of birds. The forest is also the place where she discovers her own sensuality. The actors are brilliant, they magnificently show all sorts of emotions on their faces and the love-making scenes are all made with much reserve, with subtlety...It is all refined and very beautifully-done. I loved this Connie, I could relate to her and I loved the long pauses and the looks between the two leads, the big shots on the hands, on some legs or other parts of the body and some refined clothes. The costumes are also important. This movie reminds me a little of some scenes of The Piano by Jane Campion and if you enjoyed The Piano, I am sure you will like this French adaptation. Definitely a 'must-see'. It is a little long, more than 2 hours and a half, I think but if you are used to watching long BBC period dramas like me, you will have no fear in watching this!

'Lady Chatterley' is based on a version of one of the most famous and controversial English novels of the twentieth century. There have already been many screen variations on D.H.Lawrence's story of the wife of a paralyzed and impotent English aristocrat who finds sexual gratification and a new life with her husband's gamekeeper. One can see why this film won the Cesar last year. As they should be, the scenes between Lady C. and the gamekeeper are the unforgettable element, and the heart of the film is the actors. Marina Hinds is radiant, a cross between Ingrid Bergman and Mariel Hemingway in looks but fresher and more authentic than either. When this Lady C. and the gamekeeper make love, it's as real and tender and sexual and quick as you could imagine, or, dare one say, as such things might really be. Jean-Louis Coulloc'h as Parkin is a rather burly fellow, slightly balding, with a sensitive face, taciturn but dignified, and not inarticulate. He is not simple and peasant-like. He is manly, but he's a loner, happiest by himself. Hippolyte Girardot as Sir Clifford is not a handsome man, but importantly he is neither angry nor excessively dignified. No one overplays his role -- they play things straight, and that's the overriding virtue of this movie. It lets the elements speak for themselves, and the result is a revelation.

Surely an essential element of the book Lawrence was trying to write was a realistic sexuality seen directly and tenderly, without embarrassment. But Lawrence saw it differently in the three successive versions he wrote, of which only the third is widely published and known. They are 'The First Lady Chatterley', 'John Thomas and Lady Jane', and 'Lady Chatterley's Lover'. As Helen Croom explains, the second version introduces the "sexual healing" aspect not in the first, but is more tender than the third, in which the gamekeeper, his name changed from Parkin to Mellers, has become "hard and bitter" and the relationship has been made more purely sexual, with the addition of purple passages intermingled with a liberal use of Anglo-Saxon sexual "four-letter" words. The second version is simpler and more tender, and so is this film. Croom feels the well known third version really isn't the best. Its fetishizing of sexuality takes us away from what Lawrentce does best, which is relationships, and the wonderful thing about Ferran's Lady Chatterley is how simply and directly the relationships are and how every moment changes them.

'Lady Chatterley' takes its time, and in the version shown at the San Francisco film festival, it's three hours long. The spaces between the scenes are as important, and so are the silences. As the story begins, Lady Chatterley becomes overwhelmed by lassitude. Her doctor tells her she must get out. This is what leads her to walk around on her husband's estate. She sees Parkin from behind with his shirt off washing up. He's not some aerobicized Natutilus male but a work-conditioned man with a solid, muscular, bull-like torso. She moves away at first and doesn't speak to him, but later it's obvious if not now that a desire has been planted to know what it feels like to touch this body. Later she asks for a key to the "cabane" where Parkin comes to work, and to go there herself. The utter quiet of the place awes her. There's a sense in the shots of big expanses of tree and grass, of immersion in the outdoors.

What's striking is that there's no tension in this story. One day she's there, and Parkin asks Lady C. if she wants it. She does and then they begin making love there on the floor of the "cabane" regularly. She comes to life. This is when Marina Hinds begins to glow with natural happiness. No one is suspicious, there's never any danger that they'll be caught. Sir Clifford is stiff and uncomfortable, but it isn't overdone but in fact is very subtle. Much of the time it's notable how well he does. At dinner parties he's like anybody else. And Parkin isn't gruff and rough. Nor does he as in the published third version make up little pet names for their private parts.

Lady Chatterley is a vibrant young woman who needs sexual experience and comes to life when she begins having it; and she's beautiful and the gamekeeper wants her, and he isn't ashamed or afraid of having her. Then she goes away on a trip to Europe that's been planned before, with a lady friend and a man, and that gives her a chance to cover things up. But after the trip, things change. Because this is a Thirties period film set in France, Lady Chatterley and her husband are formal in addressing each other, and she and Parkin don't use the familiar "tu" till she comes back. Parkin isn't a romanticized Noble Savage, some incarnation of the physical. He's physical all right, but he dresses in a shirt and tie.

The most peculiar thing is that without any apology or explanation all the people and places are English, but everyone speaks French. This is as if to say: This seems very real, but it's a fable, and we're not going to fake it about that.

There have been many film versions of 'Lady Chatterley'. Ferran's is an elegant production, in many ways conventional (it was made for television, in a longer version), and it's without self-conscious stylistic gestures -- with the one notable exception of the very measured pace. Nothing gets in the way of the actors and the setting -- the big aristocratic house, the great lands around the property. There's not much more to say. If you want to experience a revolutionary moment in twentieth century English fiction that's still quite alive today, you will have to see this. It's a remarkable film. Some boning up on the writer and the period won't hurt.

SFIFF 2007.

I didn't really expect too much from this movie and hearing the running time was just short of three hours, was fully prepared to leave after getting a flavour of it. How wrong I was, this is a very fine film and doesn't drag for a moment. It is beautiful, believable and nothing short of a wonderful sexy surprise. All the support acting is measured and helps provide a solid counterbalance for the central couple who gradually learn to let go their inhibitions and slide blissfully from lust to love. It is all very gradually done from Chatterley's first glimpse of the gamekeeper washing himself outside his hut and her consequent, and at the time seemingly over the top, need to sit to gather her senses, literally; to the powerful scene where she asks him to turn and display his erect penis and the wondrous scenes of the naked couple cavorting ecstatically in the pouring rain. All in all a fine mix of the wonders of nature, the manliness of the hand made, the power of sex and the need for love. The more overt political elements that Lawrence would probably have wanted put more to the fore are probably better dealt with here, kept more in the background. Brave film making, especially at a time when being so positive about 'sexual healing' seems so out of vogue.

DH Lawrence's novels may be tough to translate to the screen, so much of his writing is dependent on the words on the page as they form images of extraordinary beauty and sensuality. His novels are quintessentially British and reflect on the dehumanizing effects of modernity and industrialization, confronting issues relating to emotional health and vitality, spontaneity, sexuality, and human instinct. During his lifetime he was even labeled a pornographer, but that was then and now is now, and under the gifted guidance of director/writer (with Roger Bohbot and Pierre Trividic) Pascale Ferran, Lawrence's exquisite tale of sexual awakening has found what for this viewer is the finest transition of the novel to the screen.

The place is England after WW I and Sir Clifford Chatterley (Hippolyte Girardot) is the paraplegic wealthy husband of Constance/Lady Chatterley (a radiant Marina Hands). Quite apropos for the era, Constance tends to her impotent husband, does needlepoint, and takes walks to while away her boredom. On one of her walks she encounters the gamekeeper Parkin (Jean-Louis Coullo'ch), seeing a partially nude man for the first time in her life. The impact awakens her somnolent sexuality and she manages to visit Parkin daily, gradually allowing her lust to unfold. Parkin is 'below her class' but is a masculine, sensuous embodiment of everything Constance has never experienced. They slowly bond and both of them become passionately in love, finding lovemaking in Parkin's hut, in the woods, in the rain - wherever they encounter. Constance wants to have a baby and convinces Clifford that she can become impregnated and the resulting child would be 'Clifford's' by pact. Constance travels to London, the Riviera, and other ports, only to return home believing that Parkin has reclaimed his ex-wife. But there are many surprises that greet her and the manner in which the story resolves (in Ferran's hands) leaves us unsure of the future.

The film is captured amidst the beauties of the natural world - flowers, trees, springs, brooks - and these aspects of the natural world are an influential part of Constance's sexual awakening. Yes, there are scenes of complete nudity and love making but they are photographed so well by Julian Hirsch that they become an integral part of the story. The musical score by Béatrice Thiriet finds the right quality of elegance and sensuality. If there is a problem with this nearly three-hour film it is in the editing by Yann Dedet and Mathilde Muyard that takes liberties with scene transitions that prove disruptive.

But it would be hard to imagine two actors who could match the subtlety and sexual tension that Marina Hands and Jean-Louis Coullo'ch to this film. It is breathtakingly beautiful to experience DH Lawrence's story in the hands of the French crew and cast. Grady Harp

As you enter the cinema, I think there are several instructions certain viewers must first take heed of, as regards this film.

Firstly, face facts, it's French, so don't be surprised if there are hardly four lines of dialogue in the first thirty minutes. This works marvellously as an introduction into the repressed yet sensual world of the characters, but if you know you're likely to get bored without having everything immediately explained, then please save yourself the bother.

Secondly, it ain't all about the sex. If you're seeking XXXX thrills, again, don't bother.

Finally, Lady Chatterley is based upon the second (earlier) version of the book, NOT the famously explicit and more widely published rewrite Lawrence ultimately settled on. Don't be expecting the clunky politics that isn't very relevant in the 2000's, instead enjoy a tale of love and freedom, of hope that two very different people can become a reason for one another's happiness within this overbearing world we're all inevitably a part of.

As for the film itself, acting honours go to Marina Hands for an exquisite portrayal of Constance, truly from her performance every emotion can be felt without a hint of exaggeration. It's delightful stuff. Jean-Louis Coullo'ch's Parkin/gamekeeper is a good fit, for what really is the less starry role, and he handles everything, including a touching confessional scene, with an admirable strength and gentleness.

Underpinning everything is the lavish production, sound and photography to make an audience feel as part of the forest setting, a tranquillity that intimates so much of what the story is trying to say.

This is superb stuff.

Considering the giant steps taken by cinema since the sixties, it's been a long wait for the real Lady C on her way to the big screen. Prurient or bland have been the previous attempts: Japan and Italy have had goes, Sylvia "Emmanuelle" Kristel starred predictably enough in a strictly 'B' version, and Ken Russell, who had had success with 'Women In Love', directed an out-of-character watered-down serial for television.

As it's a woman's story, it makes sense for a woman to direct it, and even more, to make a success of it. Ferran has taken an unknown, or forgotten earlier version of the novel, "John Thomas and Lady Jane" as the basis of her film.

It has been described as being less polemical than the final version, but it works well, in emphasising how active Constance Chatterley was in her striving for a better life, and in showing how she came to identify herself with the socialist struggle. In 1959, during the Penguin Books/Chatterley obscenity trial, it was infamously asked if this was the kind of book one would wish one's wife or servants to read. That has always been good for a laugh, if it was only about sex - but it was political. Sex and politics: a combination we now take for granted, but despite the few years since female emancipation, the combination was yet unthinkably hairy for the Fifties.

The novel itself was excessively wordy, often risibly so, with Lawrence's male-oriented phallus-worshipping view of the world to the fore. When the gamekeeper Parkin (Jean-Louis Coilloc'h, bearing a remarkable resemblance to Brando in 'Streetcar') reveals to Lady C, his worries about being too sensitive and perhaps too womanly, we hear the author's voice. By adding capitals to every part of the story, the director has made a film that could easily be followed as a silent: 'The House', The Forest', The Cabin', The Miners'…But replacing words with action, especially in the sex scenes, allows the intimacy and passion to live on, without the anachronistic wordplay and modes of speech which now distance us from the lovers. Plenty of time, too, is given to watching a girlishly clumsy Constance (Marina Hands) explore the forests and streams surrounding the House; also to the contrast with her bucolic little paradise when she is driven into town and sits in her car, her gaze lingering on more 'real men' as they emerge, begrimed, from the mine. Such a contrast, made in such visual terms, remains in the air when Sir Clifford (Hippolyte Girardot) jokes about the miners striking every winter, and Connie doesn't laugh. It's important to remember that the airs and graces put on by upper-class married couples were partly to avoid losing face in front of the servants; Sir Clifford is not the only stiff and distant husband in his world, and the supporting of attitudes and beliefs by corsets and tweeds was aped by the aspiring middle classes (as in 'Brief Encounter') until wars, jazz, rock 'n' roll, 'certain books' and the satire boom moved the concentration of gravity to The Whitehouse, Saudi Arabia and the Taliban's favourite cave.

The problem of getting a whole novel on-screen concurrently with a film in its own right has been solved by the use of intertitles, the director doing a voice-over; and the Lady's trip to France has been slotted in as a home movie, while Parkin's misadventures back home are covered in a letter from Sir Clifford's nurse (Anne Benoit), who tells it straight to camera. These changes in texture help to keep the pace up in this quite long film, just as earlier cuts are often a tranquil old-fashioned 'fade to black', to denote the passing of time.

Again; the scenes of intimacy are well told: they are acted and filmed in a manner which fools us into believing we are flies on the wall. There is no concentration on the 'plumbing' as there is with too much on-screen sex, and just a few fully-clothed scenes, a few words and minimal choreography are all it needs to put over the spirit of the novel, the return to the garden and the grace and honest beauty of making love.

First we may talk about the general atmosphere of this remarkable movie. All sceneries are very beautiful, accurate and full of meaning: the landscapes, the interiors and the characters' clothes like we would expect in a reproduction of events which take place in mid-twenties of last century. In what concerns the plot and story we must keep always in mind that at the time most Victorian moral values still prevail and we must see the movie against this background so what wouldn't be revolutionary nowadays was revolutionary indeed at the time. This is the well told, well acted and well directed story of a woman awakening for the physical side of love life. She is the aristocratic rich wife of a no less aristocratic and rich man who is nevertheless an invalid ridden to a wheelchair for life and sexually impotent of course. This awakening begins when she sees for the first time her husband's gamekeeper naked above his waist and washing himself. She is then overwhelmed by a great psychological trouble and the ensuing uncontrollable need of meeting him again leads her to go to see him once more and finishing by surrender herself to make love with him. The first two love scenes were so quick that she doesn't get to any climax and only during the third scene where she takes a more active part does she reach a full orgasm. It's curious however (but quite in accordance with social patterns of that time) that during the first love scenes between the two the relation master-servant maintains itself before and after sex and only later does it gain a more personal and intimate nature. After the third love scene she even thanks him for it like if it had been a service rendered by him which offends him a lot. This adaptation of the second version of the literary masterpiece novel by the British writer D. H. Lawrence is a great success indeed. This novel was banned as pornographic when it was published first time and only in the sixties of last century a court declared it not pornographic according to he real difference between pornography and eroticism which exists though many people still don't know it but it's out of the scope of this review to explain. Sex is a force of nature and indeed a part of human relations and the literary or artistic works based on it can be object of aesthetic (in the broad sense) evaluation notwithstanding any possible moral evaluations which are not within the scope of a literary or a film essay.

Constance Chatterley, a higher class Englishwoman, had the misfortune of marrying an impotent man. She has never known what sexual bliss is really like and there is no hope her husband will ever satisfy her because of a war injury that has rendered him unable to have sex with her. Constance, who is first seen as a dedicated wife, suddenly awakes to a life of fulfillment when she finds in Parkin, the estate's game warden, a soul mate and a man who can bring her to taste the pleasures that has been denied to her.

D. H. Lawrence, the author of the novel in which the film is based on, was a man who was aware of the class struggles in his native land. He had a connection with the miners that he saw as more interesting than the moneyed rulers who employed them, and to a certain degree, exploited them. The struggle is not emphasized in this version of the novel by French director Pascale Ferran, who also contributed to its adaptation. Ms. Ferran brings out the sexual aspect to the front burner in a film that is a bit long, and a bit repetitive, at times.

"Lady Chatterley" main asset is the wonderful portrayal Marina Hands gives to Constance. She is a new face that seems to be a natural, as she clearly demonstrates here. Ms. Hands is equally matched by the fierce take of Jean-Louis Coullo'ch, who brings an animal quality to his interpretation of Parkin. These two actors carry the film and make it much better than it should have been.

This film is greatly enhanced by Julien Hirsch's cinematography. His take of the countryside gives a serene quality to all that one sees in the film. Also, the musical score created by Beatrice Thiret is heard in the background. One can expect interesting things from Ms. Ferran in the future, as she is a new voice to be reckoned with in the French cinema.

I had a great pleasure to see the movie by Pascale Ferran. Several years ago I read the book by D. H. Lawrence, I discover that Lawrence wrote three times his book. Pascale Ferran chose the second one "Jess Thomas and Lady Jane", with an explicit title! The end is not very happy and gives not very much hope to the heroes. I find the adaptation very faithful to the book. The movie won 5 prizes at the French Cesars on the 24 of February 2007 : best movie, best actress (Marina Hands, who has an English father), best adaptation, best costumes, best photo. In spite of its length, the movie is never boring. It shows that it is still possible to make movies of high quality. Marina Hands is gorgeous as Constance Chatterley and radiates happiness in love. For me she is really English.

Guy

I suppose I should begin by stating that I've never read the novel nor seen any of the previous adaptations; a girl I know in Paris has been recommending it since it was released long before it picked up Cesars for Best Actress, Film and Writing this year. Though I haven't read or seen it previously I knew, or thought I did, the main thrust - sorry about that - i.e. rough sex between a macho ill-educated man and a sexually frustrated aristocrat saddled with an impotent husband> How wrong can you be; what we get here is a romantic and, dare I say it, Tender love story which may account why the audience with whom I saw it comprised twelve assorted and unaccompanied females between 20 and 60 and one couple. If you asked me to nominate an actress alive or dead who can do both aristocrat and sensual I'd think in terms of Ava Gardener, Sophia Loren, Fanny Ardant, Ingrid Bergman, etc and not, say, Audrey Hepburn, but I'd be wrong because Marina Hands is outstanding in the eponymous role and looks younger than her thirty years. Of course she IS the daughter of Ludmila Mikael which explains a lot; the female director has followed convention inasmuch as the first time Constance sees her lover to be she is wearing a skirt that stops just short of her ankles, a coat, scarf, gloves and a hat in other words the only naked flesh on display is her face and true to form her first reaction to a man naked from the waist up, is to recoil in embarrassment though she soon gets over it. With two hours forty minutes to play with the director takes her time getting to the nitty gritty so that it's just short of the hour when they first make love. There's lots of detail, atmosphere as we get to know Constance who comes across as virginal and we suspect that if the marriage WAS consummated before her husband received the wound that rendered him impotent it was not very satisfactory. Another surprise is the gamekeeper - now given a name other than the Mellors of the novel, who, far from being a crude, macho love em and leave em macho type is actually sensitive and comes to love Constance. There IS sex, of course, but strange as it may seem it is almost chaste and would almost, but not quite, be at home in a Doris Day movie from the fifties. As I write Marina Hands has accepted an invitation to join the elite Comedy Francaise, an honour she fully deserves.

I have never read the book, but have always been fascinated by the story, which is, of course, famously known.

Having never seen the other movie adaptations, I can't compare. However, I thought this version was terrific. Maybe it is more of a "woman's movie" but I could put myself into their shoes throughout the story. The initial love scenes were so much more sensual than in today's US movies where nothing is left to the the imagination. My favorite scene is of them unabashedly dancing in the rain, naked, happy, free and all with their boots on!!! It might be too "fairytale-ish" for some, but I say "Bravo!" and thank you Pascale Feran for creating this visual and sensual masterpiece.

This version of the often-shot story of Lady Chatterley is in French with English subtitles, and I found the "look" of many of the actors to be decidedly French (big surprise) rather than English. The plot development was decidedly leisurely in the first half of the film, but this was not a game-breaker as far as my enjoyment of the movie. However, compared to all the other versions on this story that I've seen, I found this French effort to bring an element of earthy realism (best way I can describe it) to the story that the others lacked. The scene where the gamekeeper and Lady Chatterley "decorate" each other with flowers and subsequently disport themselves outside in the field and woods is a particularly interesting and memorable sequence. One minor quibble: the film seemed to both begin and end rather abruptly...you'll know what I mean when you watch it.

This latest, French version of the well known story starts right away with a distinct flavour of its own – screen captions as those used in the silent era. But that signature is only superficial. The real difference is in the treatment of the subject matter: sex.

Those who go far back enough will remember the first publishing in the 1970s of "The joy of sex", which is not unlike the "Field Guide" in "The Spiderwick Chronicles" (2008) except for the subject matter. That book which unreservedly hailed sex as a natural, joyous experience was rather courageous at the time. This movie follows very much on the same spirit. The plot is simple – the story of Lady Chatterley's affair with the gamekeeper when her husband Lord Clifford is wheelchair bound, being a war casualty.

Unlike Hollywood movies that take the audience in a split second fast cut from initial encounter to hot steaming sex in bed, Lady Chatterley takes its good time. The first 45 minutes, looking more like National Geographic or Discovery Channel, takes the audience through long-range and close-up shots of flowers, plants, squirrels, chicken, rustling leaves – all part of an idyllic setting centered in the gamekeeper Parkin's humble hut far away from his master's mansion. There Lady Chatterley goes daily, initially following the doctor's instructions that the serene outdoors is the best prescription for her failing health. What follows is something "that is bound to happen" as Parkin puts it, to which the Lady completely agrees.

The remarkable thing about this movie is the innocence that embraces the protagonists. It is not quite like Mrs Robinson and Benjamin Braddock "shaking hands" in "The graduate" (1967), if you remember that movie. While it started more as physical attraction than anything else, the relationship between Lady C. and Parkin evolves, through deepening affection, into genuine love. But even at the very beginning, there is something quite remarkable. The proliferation of sex scenes in movies today needs no exaggeration, but I don't think I've ever seen anything like the look of the quiet pleasure on Lady C's face right after their first love-making. She did not reach orgasm this first time; that is quite clear (that came later in another encounter, under a tree in the forest). But there is such a simple, grateful satisfaction on her face that she almost glows – and that look of childlike innocence. Marina Hands is perfect for the role.

The story of Lady Chatterley became famous (or infamous) in the hands of D.H. Lawrence as a tale of insatiable lust. In this winner of five Cesars (France's Oscar) including best film and best actress, the French movie makers have rendered it into a gentle, tender love story of sheer beauty and joy. Even the unhappy ending elicits only a sigh rather than a sob. This is a delightfully refreshing cinematic experience one least expects from the title.

Wow. I really dislike slow moving romances, but the amount of artistry that was injected into this production, and the rendered result is just pure art in every sense of the word.

Every shot is an oil painting. I don't know what it is about the French and their history with art that makes them such masters, but not a single strip of film was wasted here. The lighting, the costumes, the camera angles, and composition of the frame and music, really were just given such care that it's a wonder this film hasn't gained more notoriety among D.H. Lawrence enthusiasts.

Then there are the sex scenes. Yes ladies and gentlemen, there is sex in this film, though it's rendered with a very gentle brush stroke by a master painter of film. There is nothing tawdry in the nature of the sex other than the fact that the couple is bucking societal convention. To find out what I mean, you have to watch the film.

This is a story about a woman's wants and needs. Whom she married because modern convention pushed her in that direction, and what she really wanted because her innate nature and the man in question succumbed to proper instincts.

One man has societal power and wealth, but cannot care for himself without the assistance that his wealth affords. Another can withstand adversity after adversity, and like so many men, prefers, prospers, and even thrives when he's alone. One is the master of men. Another is the master of himself, and cares for no other. Ladies, which do you prefer? Which do you say you want, and which one fires your heart, body and soul? That's what this movie is all about. On an even more intellectual level both males have a kind of female inner psyche working for them. One gains the world, the other gains something else.

I have two regrets about this film. Firstly that there are a couple of pans (and one awful zoom) that come lose to derailing the flow of the movie. But as visually jarring as they are, they pass quickly. Like a B-movie producer/director once told me, America makes the best dollies and tripods for professional movie cameras, and that is an unchallenged truth. If you look at any foreign film, and compare the camera moves with American movies, you'll note that American films have very smooth dolly shots, Steadicam shots, and the now occasional rare pan. Foreign films are still playing catchup, even for this film which was shot only ten years ago! Secondly; I streamed this film off of Amazon, and it is not a high definition transfer with muted colors. The colors I'm thinking were a creative choice of the director and cinematographer, and they may have even used a soft lens or a soft filter in front of the lens to add that bit of visual texture to give this film an even softer touch and intimate feel. Even so, I wanted to see more information on the screen, but whether it was the creative team being artistic or the limitations of the technology, I'll never know until I see this thing on bluray.

Here's the thing; I was forced to read D.H. Lawrence in high school, and hated his writing. It was slow, lethargic, seemed to cater to over emotionalism, and just downright boring as hell when compared to some of the sci-fi authors or military fiction authors I used to read (and get more out of), but this film (and the French really do love Lawrence) very much delivers a film maker's film. And, as usual from French cinema, gives us a character study of the gentler side of human nature. What is, what we'd like, and what ought to be.

I don't recommend this film to anyone who is not a cinema aficionado. If you like heavy psychology and films about how a trist can be mistaken or evolve into love, then this film is for you.

Otherwise, maybe give it a shot and see what you think.

Enjoy.

"Lady Chatterley" is a tale of repression, lust and sexual liberation set in post-World War I France. Despite its title, the movie isn't an adaptation of "Lady Chatterley's Lover," the taboo-shattering D.H. Lawrence novel that scandalized the world when it was published in 1928. The film is actually based on a Lawrence work entitled "John Thomas and Lady Jane" that came out the previous year. But the theme and storyline are just about as erotic and provocative as what we find in its more famous successor.

This version features Marina Hands as the beautiful young wife of an aristocratic mine owner who's been rendered wheelchair-bound and impotent by injuries he sustained on the battlefield. Deprived of sex, Constance begins to fantasize about the husky gamekeeper who lives in the woods on the estate, and it's not long before the two of them have consummated their relationship. Jean Louis Coulloc'h is a particularly interesting casting choice as Parkin, for his scrappy features, thinning hair, linebacker's build and non-matinée-idol looks remove the story from the realm of dime-novel romance and into the arena of sheer physical attraction and lust. At least for awhile, that is, until the almost inevitable rush of feelings begins to overtake the couple, and the harsh realities of sexual mores, marital bonds and class distinctions that so define the era in which they live begin to make themselves felt.

Co-written by Roger Bohbot and director Pascale Ferran, the movie is long (two-hours-and-forty-one minutes, to be exact!), episodic and deliberately paced, but the lush setting, understated human drama and moving performances keep us riveted for the duration.

Totally captivated by this film - so much so that stayed up til 4 a.m. to watch it on a satellite channel. The leading actress was magnificent. Read the book many years ago and this version is so faithful to the intent of D.H. Lawrence. In fact makes the whole scenario utterly believable. Disagree with one reviewer who implies that the film makes Sir Clifford sympathetic by not referring to industrial unrest with miners when in fact it is specifically mentioned on more than one occasions - there is mention of a strike and Sir Clifford actually says to Connie that he will break the strike and even if that means loss of business for him that won't matter as he has plenty of other means of income. The beauty of this film is that the characters are multi dimensional and thus thoroughly believable.

Do not go to see this movie if you are in the mood for a heaving piece of pornography. It is an easy mistake to make, as the "Lady Chatterley's Lover" story (or in this case the "John Thomas And Lady Jane" story, which was D. H. Lawrence's second attempt at telling the tale), lends itself rather well to cinematic smut. (A young woman, unsatisfied by her crippled, rich husband, begins a sexual relationship with the rough, uncivilized gamekeeper. Ooooh... Great stuff. Pass me my Kleenex.)

"Lady Chatterley" is not that film. Despite all of the nudity and the brief close up, at one point, of an erect male organ, what "Lady Chatterley" really is, is a beautiful, erotic and tender love story with fine photography and great internalised acting. I think that Marina Hands and Jean-Louis Coullo'ch give truly wonderful performances as the lovers.

For me there was one slightly jarring note in that the film is set in England, but being a French film, of course everybody is speaking in French. But is that the little Englander in me talking? If the situation were reversed and I were talking about British actors playing French characters in a French setting but speaking English, would I even give it a second thought? No. Of course I wouldn't. Not at all.

It is a long film (nearly 3 hours, although there is a television version that runs - eeek! - nearly 4 hours), and not exactly plot driven, but don't let that put you off. If you fancy an interesting mood piece, that looks absolutely gorgeous, give it a go. I think that it is one of the best films of the year.

I really love this film. I'd never read Lawrence's novel but feel absolutely compelled to now after watching this film. The director, Pascal Ferran, has created a work of art, putting this beautiful story into film and the leads, Marina Hands and Jean-Louis Coulloch, are perfect as Constance and Parkin. It is a slow moving film and it last for more than two and a half hours, but it is quiet and fresh has an adult innocence about it. The last scene where Parkin tells Constance that he can live anywhere, in anyplace, in any house because they are not home, she is his home, and how she swells up in tears and tells him that she doesn't mind if he sees other women,"if your heart remains gentle, you'll always be with me." That last scene really touched me. I'm glad it garnered so many awards. Marina Hands was absolutely stunning in her portrayal of Lady Chatterley, Bravo!!

This film has a great deal going for it - it looks lovely and contains some wonderfully tender scenes. However, I must confess that I was somewhat disappointed in the portrayal of Lady C. I found her to be weak rather than vulnerable, sometimes silly rather than girlish and sorry to say - less interesting than the male characters. All of this is surprising considering a woman directed the film. It was clear what was intended but ultimately the sensuous awakening in Lawrence's writing did not quite make it off the page.

I so wanted to embrace this film fully. It does have some marvellous moments and the commitment to the essence of the novel was evident - something clearly lacking in many other film versions. It is certainly worth seeing this film but don't expect the same intensity as you find in the novel - it is more of a tribute than a true representation of the original.

"Lady Chatterley" is one of the few recent films that steps gracefully away from exorbitantly expensive computer-generated images of,say,giant robots that deal with battling armies or trigger happy pirates on the high seas or for that manner the all around average horror flick. Instead of using big-budget special effects,French director Pascale Ferran does something antiquated and perhaps forgotten by the American audience-she uses old fashioned cimematopgraphy and relies on the talents of her actors to tell the story. The reason of why this works so very well is because the movie is straightforward in going by the novel by D.H. Lawrence. And the results paid off becoming the highest grossing picture in its native France-winning five Cesars including Best Picture. And this is far better version then other movies based on the title character.

Morina Hands stars as Lady Constance Chatterley,the wife of an affluent nobleman,Clifford Chatterley(Hippolyte Girardot)in post World War I England. Together,the two portray perfectly the standard stuffy marriage between two members of the English upper class. Girardot conveys the sort of distance and arrogance one might expect for a rich industrialist,while Hands brings to life the stifled and quiet misery of Lady Chatterley. Things change when Constance embarks on a journey of self-discovery by opening both her mind-and her body-to her husband's gamekeeper,Parkin(Jean-Louis Coullo'ch). As her first hesitant trysts with Parkin develop into a torrid love affair,the audiences witnesses a prim aristocrat,estranged from a sense of wonder and vitality,reawaken and rediscover what it really means to be a woman.

This deliberate ans sensuous movie is not for the impatient. Its value comes from absorbing ever shot,mild or vibrant,from people engaging in menial domestic tasks to passionate love scenes amidst the lush countryside of Chatterley's estate. Those who looking for the fast-paced action and over-the-top explosions of Hollywood blockbusters may find Lady Chatterley to be no more than a three hour-snooze fest that is punctuated by titillating scenes of nudity and some explicit sexual content(there is one scene were a man's private part is aroused during sexual intercourse)since this is a strictly adult picture that has a running time of 169 minutes and it is for mature audiences. For the rest of you who may not had the chance to read Lawrence's classic novel,the film serves as an astoundingly realistic glimpse of a woman's life in a society far removed from our own.

The movie was real as the book. A good book lives on the reader's mind. A good movie does the same. Lady Chatterly was long, not really easy to consume. It was ,however, worth looking in. Except the theme of the movie seemed a little outdated. Female sexual liberation is old as Madonna. The rebellion against male dominance, or the bourgeois society had gone so long, now we do not really see discussing socialism over the dinner table. Except its message (Someone might argue it as if there was nothing new in the story, what was the point of movie making. I totally agree, but it is an enjoyable movie at its own rights.) The camera take an honest look on human & nature. Too real as the flesh in the movie, nothing was altered to exaggerate aesthetically in the movie. All too real. The movie starts slowly as Chatterly's mind and life until it starting to shape (A very slow transition). Then finally she starting to live her own life. It is predictable but consumable. the movie has its own charm as the female leader. Openly naive but innocently guilty. The ending was weak but bearable. If you enjoyed Jane Campion's movies, which were funk, this one is classic, more like a piece of Schuman. Warning you that if you are not going to enjoy D.H Lawrence's lengthy book of female liberation, don't buy a ticket. You would fall a sleep. It goes nearly 3 hours. If you are, however, a fan of Lawrence, then it is an enjoyable piece. Indeed, the charm of the movie, is coming after. Just like a good literature, would lives on your mind. I loved it in a rainy Saturday afternoon.

The directress, Pascale Ferran, made D.H. Lawrence's masterpiece so French that it becomes some kind of sentimentalese fable about some lovemaking in the woods. You can imagine that D.H. Lawrence himself turned three times in the mouth of his grave and burped at least twenty times because he felt a whole flock of French geese strutting and dancing the Carmagnole on his grave. D.H. Lawrence is iconoclastic and as such no one gets through his hands unscratched. No luck, no hope no future for the son of a miner, the wife of a miner or a miner himself because they will only know poverty and repression, including the repression of their passions that will have to become illegal and even criminal if necessary to step over social censorship. But no luck either for the boss of the mine or the aristocrat who has nothing to do except counting his bonds and shares because they are unable to feel and experience any emotion, passion, sentimental adventure. They are British to the core. No sex please. But the film gets rid of all that dark vision and transform one of the tenser and denser tale about social segregation in England into a love affair under the rain in the middle of woods, and I can tell you that these woods are not going to move in any other way. No Lady Macbeth in the wings please. I have nothing against the importation of an English masterpiece into the French vision, but when the French vision is reduced to sentimentalese mishmash and melo-non-dramatic hogwash I regret to be living where I am living. The film is too long and often close to boring and it is not two or three scrutinizing shots of the man's sex by the voyeuristic camera that will make the drug go down, Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, or something like that, is obviously unknown from our directress. No magic, no drama, no tragedy, only a bland tasteless yarn that tends onto a yawn.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Paris Dauphine & University of Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

Ms. Hands is a terrific actress. The movie is beautifully shot. The movie was fine except for one thing....and it's big.

I realize that the story is probably radical at the time it was written regarding women's sexual liberation, but only in the social context (she being the one to sort of start the pursuit of him), but in the bedroom, it's kind of the usual "man not saying much and coming way too early" type of "man's world" gender politics. It's weird to me that people have not noticed that even an updated version still has outdated sexual "servanthood" for the female. I mean that it was still the man's game to come with no thought whatsoever to whether she did, or not.

I realize that people do not always have to orgasm to enjoy the experience (tell THAT to a man), but come on (no pun intended)! It reminds me of the Penthouse letters that the woman just was ready, bang, and then came in 2 minutes - no foreplay hardly at all. That must be a dream for guys, and unfortunately, we women have let you have it for too long. That's only cool maybe once or twice, but after awhile, you look like dweebs and are totally uncool to expect it often.

France may be seen as a more sexually open society, but is this what they mean? That guys have all the freedom, and women are there to service the man's needs first, if not only? Oy.

I went to this solely because of one review by a trusted critic elsewhere and I am very glad that my trust was not misplaced. This 3-hour French adaptation of the D.H. Lawrence novel boasts no stars I'm familiar with, is directed by someone I've never heard of, and is based on a novel I've never read -- so I went into it pretty blind. The majority of people seeing this will almost certainly be more familiar with the story than I was, so I won't go on at length; suffice it to say that the aristrocratic Lady's romance with a grounds-keeper on her crippled husband's lands (I believe he was a stonemason in the novel) starts out somewhat plodding, wrapped up in a 19th-century gauze of courtliness and tentative, unexpressed feelings, but the intensity builds with a smoothness and a sure command of film language that is completely impressive. The principal leads, Marina Hands and Jean-Louis Coullo'ch, are exemplary, the photography and camera movements natural, capturing the beauty and sensuality of both the couple and landscape without seeming over-decorous or sentimental. The extraordinary use of music is perhaps what I'll remember most; the majority of the film does not have background music, but on a few brief occasions a yearning early 20th-century post-Romantic score (reminiscent to me of Delius or Bax) soars outward; the judgment of director Ferran in her use of these rare bars of melody (by Béatrice Thiriet) to express the wordless emotions of her heroine might seem almost Spielbergian if you're just reading about them, but they show a restraint and perfect timing that far exceeds the sentimental uses that most Hollywood directors would put them to. The final moments, the discovery of the erotic, naturalistic and romantic voices all finally fused into one -- are as rapturous as any ending I've seen this year. Theatrical viewing at The Roxy (our one art-house cinema) in Burlington, late 2007.