La Vie En Rose
“Can I borrow ten fraaaaaaaaaaancs?!”
Of all the Oscar wins, Marion Cotillard’s is apparently the one people have taken the most issue with. Joe R hated her performance, and in fact the entire movie, and he’s not alone in that assessment.
La Vie En Rose does occasionally fall into lazy-biopic habits; the script and editing try to avoid letting the story become a Behind The Music with the time-shifting, but it’s less effective than it could be because it’s somewhat confusing. You won’t see any shortage of screeching and twitching onscreen; it’s not what you’d call a quiet performance from Cotillard, although I didn’t have a problem with that, really.
But it’s almost not a movie you can say is good or not good; it’s more a matter of what you’ve experienced in your own life of people with Piaf’s temperament, and what you can tolerate as far as spending time with it on film. In real life, that person is exhausting, wringing you out and then splattering you with herself over and over, and for me, Cotillard did an outstanding job at evoking that woman who can’t decide whether she’s hideous or a great beauty, so she runs back and forth between two ideas of herself and tramples you en route every time. Look at the faces on everyone else in the apartment when she’s dashing around bellowing “Marceeeeellll! Marceeeeeeeellllll!” — she’s not even a person to them anymore, just a string of situations to manage. This is what it’s like to deal with that personality on an ongoing basis, and I can’t call it enjoyable to watch, but it’s hit right on the sweet spot.
It isn’t a great movie, it isn’t fun or subtle, but I think Cotillard earned that statue, because I think this is probably what Piaf was, and I think seeing the movie is probably what knowing her was. And the Achievement In Makeup statue is absolutely earned; in the scenes from the sixties, Cotillard really looks like she’s rotting from the inside, like, actively, in front of you.
Tags: movies
I agree she earned the Oscar and the movie was everything terrible and wonderful a life could have. Piaf’s life was back and forth from one extreme to the other – crushing poverty to fame and wealth, completely in love to insane with grief. It was a spot on performance.
I haven’t seen it. The movie is likely not coming to my podunk state any time soon since it was released some 7 or 8 months ago. No one I know expressed any interest in seeing it. Until she was nominated for a GGlobe, it barely registered on my radar.
I do actually have a fondness for Ms. Piaf’s voice and music, but iPod choices aside, my confusion over her winning had mostly to do with my gut feeling that no one else saw it either.
I continue to be perplexed by this.
But Alyce, millions of people saw the 3rd Pirates installment, and it was the opposite of good. I don’t think a film’s quality is determined by how many people paid to see it.
I was thrilled with the win.
I had never even heard of this movie until I was watching the Oscars. Now I’m dying to see it… just because of the make-up! Those eyebrows are straight out of an episode of Intervention!
Some of the best places to eat are the little hole in the wall restaurants that nobody’s heard of. That same theory applies to movies, at times – the best ones are hardly heard of or not starring some huge star like Brad Pitt. I had never heard of this film until I saw it on the shelf for ten bucks or some such thing (I think it was at Target) – I got it because I love Piaf’s voice and wanted to learn more about who she was. When I saw it mentioned on the Oscars I thought, “Hey, *I* have that movie!”
Thank goodness, Sars. Every time I read Joe R’s hatred of Cotillard’s performance (and between Low Res and TWoP… it’s a lot), I think meekly, “…I liked it.” So now I feel better, and I think your assessment of the whole movie, especially that “Marceeellll!” scene, is darn right. I thought she was very good, and I didn’t see “Away From Her,” so… I was fine with the win. Yay.
I didn’t like it but my (French/Canadian) friend said that she (Edith) was as screehingly ugly and over the top as Marion played her. So, I guess she nailed it. She’s lovely but Julie Christie’s performance was so understated and non-manipulative that I can’t believe she didn’t win … doesn’t Oscar love old people?
@Megan: I only meant that I was surprised that she won because I felt like people who didn’t see the movie couldn’t possibly have judged her performance. I did not intend it as a comment on box office receipts reflecting the quality of work. At all. Sorry for the confusion.
I, too, was not overly impressed with the movie itself. I felt it left huge gaping holes in her life, specifically World War II. I was hopeful when I went to see the movie that it would take some stand on the long speculated notion that Piaf was a member of the French REsistance during the War, but sadly, it acted as though the most cataclysmic event of the 20th century never happened. And furthermore that it had no effect on Ms. Piaf.
But I thought Cotillard’s performance was stunning. I had read a great deal about Piaf, being a huge fan since I heard her for the first time in “Bull Durham” (you may recall, she was the “crazy Mexican singer” that Annie was always listening to). Her addictions to heroin and alcohol, late in life, were notorious. We are meant to hate the addiction and sympathize with the addict. Cotillard nailed it I thought. Most people are either equipped to deal with great tragedy or they self- medicate. Most addicts aren’t addicts for the “fun” of it. Many are dealing with issues they are simply unable to handle on their own. Piaf lived in a time when Psychiatric help was unheard of. SO you just “checked out”. Drugs and alcohol usually fit that bill. And Piaf certainly had a great deal to tune out.
As far as people in the Academy not seeing Cotillard’s performance but voting for it anyway, I find that hard to believe. The voting members of the Academy have special access to EVERY movie that is nominated. They even sometimes have special screenings so that movies and performances may be viewed at Academy member’s leisure. Academy members are not limited by the availability of a film in a particular area.