1. It wasn't so long (2 hr. 20 min.)
2 U.S. audiences, myself included, were more familiar with Leduc's writings.
3. Her life wasn't so miserable.
4. She was shown aging in the film. She always looked the same from start to finish!
5. Included more background on her childhood. Had to read Wikipedia to fill-in the facts.
6. Often too choppy, esp. when it jumps from one chapter coverage of her relationship w/ various people in her life.
[deleted]
One short, brilliant shot was Guerlain at the end listening to de Beauvoir explain on the radio the significance of Leduc's work. Even if she explained it to him personally earlier he was hearing it for the first time and knew he had missed all of it.
shareanaheim,
agreed! the movie was TOO long and her life was "miserable," but as an adult that was her OWN fault.
She seemed to feel sorry for herself too much & allowed her self-esteem to be based strictly on her appearance.
LOTS of UNATTRACTIVE people are successful.
They're NOT crying because they weren't born beautiful.
Beauty ONLY accounts for so much & the rest is pure talent.
Look @ Hollywood for inspiration. There's LOTS of UNATTRACTIVE celebrities that are ULTRA RICH. They're NOT ALL Julia Roberts, etc.
Talent and hardwork go hand and in hand & looks only account for so little, in contrast.
Happy Valentine's Day!