MovieChat Forums > Coco avant Chanel (2009) Discussion > Some nitpicks

Some nitpicks

posted 15 years ago by hugh1971
10 replies | jump to latest

For a film which focused heavily on clothing, it was annoying that the costumes of the two male leads were consistently wrong. No man, especially not a gentleman, would be seen outside hatless during that period, yet both Boy and the French chateau bloke never wore hats in any of their exterior scenes. They would have been as unlikely to do that as they would have been to go without trousers.

I also found the last scene confusing. We see Coco in her workshop, and judging by the clothes of the staff, it was presumably around 1912. Yet the scene then cuts to a procession of models in what looked like 1960s clothing, walking down into a fashion show where the audience were clearly wearing short 1960s skirts. Yet Coco looked exactly the same as she had in 1912!

[–] badgerking10 15 years ago

I assumed the last scene was sort of an arty appendix - the spirit of Coco looking over her life's work... Something like that.

[–] hugh1971 15 years ago

Yes, I think you're right - but it was a little confusing as the passage of time in the rest of the film wasn't quite clear, in part because Mme Chanel's hairstyle and clothing were so advanced for the time it was difficult to tell what year it was.

[–] cubesquared 15 years ago

Saw the movie earlier tonight. My biggest gripe is that the pace was so slow!

Regarding the hatless gents, it was probably a broader statement in terms of Mlle Chanel's approach to fashion - an illustration of the effect it had on people around her. As evidenced by the actress dressing up as an orphan.

The last scene also confused me at first, it was a flash forward to the height of her success in the 60's. She did look very young still, but with striking makeup and wearing her signature Chanel suit - so not quite her 1912 look. If you Google pictures of her as an older woman you'll see she retained a youthful yet highly sophisticated look so I think the movie was accurate.

What a woman, I'm glad this movie was made. I just wish they picked up the pace a little!

My calendar is cluttered with days that are numbered.

[–] Zero_70 15 years ago

I loved the last scene. Her designs were so beautiful!

I agree about the slow pace. I loved parts of it but I think I would of preferred to see a film that was more about her whole life and work, not just her love life.

[–] mojcek 15 years ago

I liked the last scene and even got the time passage bit - but what confused me were the skinny models. Did she really use such 'modern' size 00 models? I thought that at that time models were ... fuller.

[–] velcronewsletter 9 years ago

she used very slim models with dark hair usually, because her designs were based on her and her personal style. it doesn't surprise me that they were too slim in the film

[–] milliedil 15 years ago

If you imagine that your style of commenting on various threads via patois featuring atrocious spelling and questionable intellect is either interesting or compelling, "dat's stoopid."

"Thank you, thank you--you're most kind. In fact you're every kind."

[–] interlingua_usa 15 years ago

Did gentlemen at this time in rural France wear hats when they were out of doors on their own grounds? I don't recall seeing, in art or photographs of the period, many hats on men's heads in places of leisure: cafés, cabarets, beaches, parks on estates, etc.

[–] Noir-It-All 14 years ago

To the list of nitpicks, I'll add the omission of WWI. The impending war is mentioned in conversation but not again. I don't think Boy died until after the war.

Other than that, I enjoyed the pace. I just wanted to soak up the dying days of the Belle Epoque. The castle was beautiful and watching the servants put on the events was interesting.

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]