Rating: 
Summary: Interesting (and not in a bad way)
Review: Okay. This is NOT a run-of-the-mill romantic comedy (which I happen to be a fan of), but it is still interesting and worth seeing. If you remember that it IS a Merchant-Ivory production, you will not be so surprised that it is not fluffy and light. (Nothing wrong with that; "light" and "heavy" movies each have their time and place.) The thing that I think of most fondly about this movie is the actors themselves. I would never have thought to cast a movie with Sam Waterston and Stockard Channing playing parents to Kate Hudson and Naomi Watts (although Stockard is Naomi's step-mother, in the movie, I think). Seeing the four of them, in addition to the impressive actor who plays Kate & Naomi's brother (who co-starred with Kate in HOW TO LOSE A GUY IN TEN DAYS), interact was a great pleasure. I also really enjoyed Kate & Naomi's one-on-one scenes, although I wish Kate's character (Isabel) had been more emotionally supportive of Naomi's character (Roxanne) and less focused on her affair with Edgar. But, I guess it is more realistic that sometimes people let themselves get overwhelmed with their own dramas and forget to keep up with their loved ones' emotional crises. The contrasting of American and French perspectives on life, divorce, infidelity, and "good taste" in general is interesting, although it can be annoying when one realizes how snobbish one culture tends to be about another culture. Such is life. One last point I want to make, which I think is being missed by some other reviewers here, is that Roxanne (and to a slightly lesser extent, Isabel) had a great EMOTIONAL attachment to the painting, not just an interest in the money it was worth. If most of us think back on our childhoods (or look at old photographs or home movies), we can remember the reassuring, constant presence of certain furnishings in the home we grew up in. One person may fondly remember a sofa or love seat that they sat on with their first boyfriend/girlfriend, etc. Another person might remember the wallpaper in the kitchen that was so distinctive to that time and place, and the happy memories it evoked. And another might remember a chiming clock that you got so used to hearing in your home that you almost didn't even notice it, but yet you felt safe and contented knowing it was always there. So, I think Naomi's character had a nostalgic, emotional attachment to that painting (especially since it was of the saint who watches over young girls). I wanted to make sure that this was pointed out, in case a viewer wasn't watching closely enough to see how crushed Roxanne was when the painting was being wrapped up and taken away. She seems to only really reconcile herself to the loss of it in her life when they decide to honor it in a way that benefits others. I recommend this movie to people who are interested in the differences between American and French cultures, as well as those interested in movies about love and the loss of it.
Rating: 
Summary: In Defense of Le Divorce
Review: The joy of this film is not the comedy (though one cannot help but laugh at the interactions of the vividly drawn characters in this film); this film's redemption comes in the sharp eye it takes to the relationships and the differences in the French and American people. In the film, Americans are as comicly cheap, gauche ("It's so perfectly convenient, why wouldn't I want to carry it everywhere?", Kate Hudson says of a ten thousand dollar bag), and laidback, as the French are hysterically haughty ("Sugar grains? How original!", the French Mother insults the American daughter-in-law), frivolous, and decadent. I think that many went into this movie looking for the wrong thing. This is not the typical Kate Hudson romantic comedy, this is not some crass slapstick routine about an American fumbling around in Europe, this is a sophisticated look at a head-butting of American attitudes and French ideals. Visually, the film delights with quick peekings into not only French cuisine, landscape, architecture, and art, but also with disturbing images of sadness and pain. In one scene, Kate Hudson walks into her sister's apartment to find her slumped over a couch bleeding to death. Sure, the movie does jump around, but it had a lot of ground to cover: for those interested in a quick, brainless, formulaic presentation of boy-meets-girl plotting, this movie will disappoint; but for those who are interested in a well thought out, yet charming, juxtaposition of the modern French and today's American, this film will go down as a contemporary screen gem. (And of the title, Le Divorce: while much of the movie does thematically circle around the idea of divorce, it's actually quite ironic the rigidity of the French idea of divorce and the American. While the French still exhibit the legendary Flaubertian attitudes toward infidelity, their ideas about divorce aren't as capricious as the American. And in many ways this movie details not only the literal divorce of the sister and her husband, but of a divorce,a separation, an end to the romantic notion Americans have about the French. While Kate may indulge herself with a French lover thoughtlessly, she finds that she too must divorce herself from that ideal. The family must divorce itself of its prized French heirloom. Even the French have to divorce themselves of the idea of the victimless affair. This film operates on so many human levels, it's surprising that so few actually "got it.")
Rating: 
Summary: C'est Terrible!
Review: For once the reviewers are right- this is a really poorly structured film with drops of melodrama and an occasional poem here and there. 1st of all- I like movies about poets and f-ed up artists- I think they're funny. But this one was not in the least bit funny, or entertaining, or even so bad it was funny. The characters were pretentious and underdeveloped. Pretense is fine if you are trying to make fun of these types of people, but the characters weren't even over the top enough to be funny. Naomi Watts slits her wrists while she's pregnant, and then her hubby falls off the Eiffel Tower. We never really know why they're devorcing, nor do we care. And we spend a lot of the time marveling with the characters over this painting, where they all ooh and ahh, but nothing is really said. And then there is Matthew Modine, screaming and stealing umbrellas and making a scene at a poetry reading. I was so bored during this film that I did laundry, folded it all and put it all away in the other room while the movie was still playing. And I don't think I missed a thing. Also, the advertising is deceptive- by the cover you think it's going to be a romantic comedy, but it's not romantic and it's not funny. The characters aren't real enough to be a drama, nor are they over the top enough to be a melodrama. I don't know what this film is, or what it was trying to be. All I can say regarding it is Le Pew!
Rating: 
Summary: Have you been cheated by this film?
Review: First of all, I don't know if what I'm going to tell is the same in all countries, especially in the USA, but being in Spain I had never seen such a lie with this film. Last year watching the trailers of movies coming soon, I watch the spot of "Le Divorce" and I was absolutely convinced it should be a comedy. Even the comments of the off-voice was sort-of-a-joke: "Le Divorce: if you say it in French, it sounds more sexy". When watching this film at home, I found it very suprising that dialogs didn't have any point of joke, and that the plot was only around who should be owning a picture, not a divorce in its own sense. But, at least, I finished watching it and my sensation was not bad. I thought it was a decent film (3-stars or so) and somewhat recommendable. But some hours later, I discovered it was a real lie. I was sold a comedy film but it was only a melodrama or so. I was feeling bad like being cheated! Therefore, I will say it's a great deception, and even both actresses do not carry on with their work properly. It's "watchable" but not very "hearable".
Rating:
Summary: Unfocused
Review: The film didn't know whether it wanted to be a soap-opera drama (e.g., "Fatal Attraction"), a broad comedy poking fun at cultural stereotypes (e.g., "A Fish Called Wanda") or a celebration of Paris (e.g., "Amelie"). Instead it was a boring, mishmash, mismatched waste of fine acting and wonderful scenery.
Rating:
Summary: Tedious waste of time and money
Review: My Gosh. What a horrible excuse for a movie. I had been really looking forward to seeing this one. I thought the movie was going to be a romance-comedy following a naive girl's romantic adventures in Paris. Instead the movie was a confusing jumble of sub-stories, trivial details, poor character development, and missing pieces. The movie tries to be too many things at one time; funny, dramatic, romantic, poignant, whimsical, and artsy... it's busy and confusing. The film also includes constant doses of French culture, just in case you forget where the movie is set. Apparently the French are prone to saying "Of course" when others might feel surprised. Every minute left me wondering why I didn't turn the movie off. You're misled from the opening scene when Isabel (Hudson) says she's visiting Paris because her sister is having a baby. Instead the sister is 3 months pregnant, and we're not really sure *why* Isabel has virtually moved herself to Paris. The first of many "missing time" moments comes when Isabel is introduced to a bedraggled looking young man, and in literally the next scene she is snuggling with him in bed as if this was a romantic scene the audience was supposed to care about. Out of nowhere, Isabel's affections are transferred inexplicably to an older man who just happens to be her sister's estranged husband's uncle. Yeah... I know... Soon the seemingly down-to-earth Roxy trades in her long curly locks for a haircut that can only be described as a really bad wig. Isabel calls the "uncle" and a lunch date is set for the very next scene, "of course". Within minutes they're flirting and the "uncle" has proposed that Isabel be his mistress. This very affair is what I thought the movie was about, yet it really took up very little actual screen time. More screen time was given over to the messy divorce of Isabel's sister, and a painting of ambiguous origin which the in-laws would like to claim in the divorce settlement. Also there is the mysterious stranger who keeps appearing and hassling Isabel and her sister. And, speaking of Isabel's sister, Roxy (played by Naomi Watts), I don't know what was more aggravating-- the lackluster performance by Watts (which made me grit my teeth at times) or the non-chalant attitude with which her pre-natal suicide attempt was treated. You'd think she'd cut herself by accident while chopping onions, the way everyone brushed it off. The hospital scene where we see Isabel knitting by Roxy's side, and with bandaged wrists Roxy is smelling flowers sent by concerned family and friends. So happy and carefree, you'd think she was there to have her baby... not because she almost killed herself *and* her baby. The final intolerable blow in this movie came in the form of a half-hearted suspenseful scene atop the Eiffel tower. I *so* didn't care about any of the characters or about what was happening at that point, so the entire concept of the scene was lost on me. When the end credits rolled I was just relieved it was over, yet still contemplating things like out of place screen wipes and two sudden bursts of narration at the end. Unless you have seen this movie and know you like it, I would definitely not recommend buying it or spending money to see it. If you must, wait until you can see it for free on cable. That way you won't feel bad when you change the channel.
Rating:
Summary: Le Bored!
Review: This movie was boring not to mention stupid, don't waste your money on it. In my opinion it is not worth the time or effort.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible ! Worst I've ever seen.
Review: For those of you who thought, like me, that Hollywood had reached a peak of stupidity that could never be surpassed with "practical magic"... Here comes "le divorce"...
Clichés all the way through the movie, bad acting, the absolute WORST dialogues I've ever heard (the script writer must not ever have had any contact with other human beings), the worst beginning, the worst middle and the worst ending I've ever seen in a movie. You know, usually, when I realize I bought or rented a bad movie, I always switch to second-degree and have a good laugh anyway -take any movie starring Christopher Lambert (Fortress... What a delight), Kris Kristofferson or Lou Diamond Phillips for incredible second-degree movies-. But no, not this one. Nothing to laugh about. It is not a comedy. It is not romantic. It is not good. It is not only bad, It should never have made it to the screen ! 2 hours watching this will make you mad at the whole world, take my word for it... To give you a final idea of how bad this movie is : it even renders Kate Hudson unattractive !
Rating:
Summary: No!
Review: I only watched it because a female friend liked it. This was not a romantic comedy. It was not art. It was not entertainment. It was just a dull movie!!! The actors were good, but the plot was simply silly, as in dumb, not funny. Contrived, but not imaginative - stupid instead. Both the French characters and the Americans were extremely cliched - in a way geared towards the American eye, mind you. Very tasteless. Feel free to read the other reviews. I will not go into details because the whole affair is just so bland...
Rating:
Summary: Ugh
Review: I was looking for a "funny romp though Europe" flick, so I rented Le Divorce. I was let down, to say the least. The script was dull, the actors flat, and all in all, even the shots of beautiful Roma were uninspired. I don't recommend wasting your money on this one.
|
