Lady Chatterley - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Lady Chatterley Reviews

Page 2 of 18
½ March 21, 2011
A beautiful young lady from the earlier years of 20th century discovers true love and passion of life with a man who lives in nature and only speak to trees and birds. Troubled and afraid at first, he takes initiative and that's please to her. Love is simple natural and the body follows the mind. Love is enveloping all the person. She also discovers her body the pleasure to run nude in the rain as Hedy Lamarr in "Ecstasy" the delicate feeling of loosing her clothes path by path the joy of physical love she needs to thank her lover at the first time. "for what ?" he says she does not answer but she thinks to make me discover the air of pure love unknown before.
When she goes to holidays in France for two months she is weeping. AT the end she will offers money to her lover who is caught by his past. She gives him all her money her body her beauty her mind her soul.
That's we call really pure true love.
March 2, 2011
Not worth the hype :-(
November 30, 2010
It feels a little strange watching this classic English romance in French, but the same could be said of watching any French writer's film in English. This adaption is long but worthy.
dietmountaindew
Super Reviewer
½ November 5, 2010
"lady chatterley's lover" was once the most notorious novel by d h lawrence in british literature history and its title was once named after the genitals of two protagonists. now it's adapted by french the first time in cinematic history, and surprisingly how soft-core the french presents the story despite the bold audacity french cinema often impresses the audience on the subject matter of erotica. certainly there's a purpose to re-modify the name "lady chatterley's lover" into concise "lady chatterley": to utilize it as a feministic vehicle to assert the notion of woman's sexual awakening and her determination to be her own master. lawrence's novel's is about lady chatterley's LOVER, the proteriat macho man who stands for the vigor of life, the laborous blue-collar stud who is the object of desire for the upper-class dame who cannot get satisfactory laids from the men in the same social level as her. the book even manifests a voyeuristic scene of the lady drooling over the luscious junitor's nude during bath. the movie only reveals the lady bumps into the topless janitor wiping his own sweat. besides the casting choice of male protagonist is quite unusual to select a middle-aged uncle with thinning hair as the supposedly younger man of rags who elopes with an attractive mature woman of better upbringing.

briefly, the scenario of "lady chatterley's lover" is about a sexually ungratified bourgeois dame whose husband's been handicapped by the war from the waist beneath, so this loaded woman hooks with the janitor who guardes the backyard forest. the woman abandons the bondage of status gap and moral constraint to unite with this wild man who considers sex as the sacred primitive ritual within the nature. so they gallope toward their instinctual drives of life which, of course, includes sex. the novel majorly announces lawrence's revolt against puritanical sexual suppression by middle class.

so how about the movie? what's the difference? as the popular french wave of feminism which has prospered since the 80s have two tendencies: the difference of gender attributes has been a subject matter rejoiced by helen cixious and julia kristieva, as well as the supreme esteem toward the uterus. so these two elements shall be the central spirit of the movie which is only about lady chatterley herself, her discovery of sexual pleasure and her assertative choice of individuality.

firstly, the movie is made more puritanical than the novel could ever be. from the numerous sex scenes, lady chatterley appears like an adult virgin who never witnesses a male frontal before. (but in the novel, lady chatterley has cheated her husband with his friend before she meets the janitor, but experienced enough to recognize he ain't considerate partner who cares about her part of pleasure) more than half of the love scenes are fully clothed with only the genitals out to put the activity into function until later she requests to see how his "stock" looks like by curiosity. basically the french lady chatterley is more like a timid woman with electra complex, who never knows what sex is like rather than the sensual woman in full bloom as the novel describes.

secondly, the male protagonist isn't exactly that virile as lawrence's depiction, more like a paternal figure with an apparent soft center, who declares himself has some sensitive feminine sides which prefers to be enclosed by the breeze of mother nature (a surrender to the grandeur form of uterus) instead of the volcanic phallic man who is a semi-misogynist repulsing over lesbianism and cursing feminine frigidity. the french LOVER seems even more frigid than lady chatterley who drags the palm of his hand over her one breast to encourage him into having sex with her. could i call the sex scenes lame? i suppose they're just NORMAL and highly conventional even they still preserve some crucial sequences of the novel like scurrying naked in the pouring rain within the forest and embellishing your sex organs with flowers that are the naughtiest and funniest parts in the story. but the movie expresses them with more childlikeness instead of frivolous humor.

thirdly, the cinematic ending is lady chatterley finances her janitor lover to purchase a ranch of his own. he refuses it gently but she persuades him into it anyway so she could occasionally sneak into his ranch to date him behind her husband like a kept male mistress despite he still views himself big man of machismo. (while he confides her his "feminine" side of character)...so it's like, hail to the all-mighty woman who manages to stay in the marriage with an impotent puppet and still harbor a secretive love interest for her own private amusement as she suggests to him that she needs his "talent to live" to feel alive. does it make sense to you? (it's an open ending anyway) on the contrary, the novel ends with the couple's glorious triumph to shed off the confinement of classes and revolutionalize over the banal system of hypocritical civilization to have a baby and build a home of their own.

the comparisons i've made above just bare the feministic resort this movie applies. whether you would be entertained or not depends on your preference and acceptance over the issue of matrix celebration. but un-deniably, the movie shoots the nature in such a pleasant scale to saturate you into an idyllic land of oblivion and temporal naivete, for that merit i deem it highly watchable. as for lawrence's novel, in the course of reading it, i do detect the preachy undertone filled with a sort of male-centered angst which catapults this novel into the classic niche of literature. the book has a message which is political and judgemental; the movie's reluctant to convey any message but indulge in constant haltings over the smell of morning dew and the scent of floral blossoms. which is better, it various from individuals. the book is more spunky and provocative; the movie is more lyrical and freewheeling. "lady chatterley" is NOT a faithful cinematic adaption of a mighty literature classic, but i certainly wouldn't dismiss it as a lackluster flop.

(ps) marlon brando came into my mind as the blueprint of d h lawrence's original stud who enlightens the path of un-bridled sexualities for this desperate dame who just awaits him to conquer. don't you find brando fit, considering his perfomances in "last tango in paris"?
jimbotender
Super Reviewer
½ November 5, 2010
Sublime foundation by Ferran,like a patient worker observing the everyday signs and wonders of Nature.The peasant's poetry could be an alternative title and despite a few interior frustrating paces,Hinds is more than enough.The overall achievement of this movie is to upgrade the classical novel adaptation and provide to Lawrence the best picture about Lady Chatterley.
½ October 3, 2010
Beautiful, believable and nothing short of a wonderful sexy surprise made in France and this runs for almost 3 hours. It's getting more interested than I last watched 1981's Lady Chatterley's Lover.
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.
Marina Hands is gorgeous as the title role and radiates happiness in love. For me she is really English.
deano
Super Reviewer
½ September 30, 2010
Beautiful, believable and nothing short of a wonderful sexy surprise made in France and this runs for almost 3 hours. It's getting more interested than I last watched 1981's Lady Chatterley's Lover.
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.
Marina Hands is gorgeous as the title role and radiates happiness in love. For me she is really English.
August 22, 2010
Beautiful photography. Subtle, yet very modern for a period piece. I saw the Extended European Edition tho (3 hrs 21 mins).
August 13, 2010
Complicated but graphic
May 14, 2010
Le livre est peut-être bien écrit, mais ce film exprime un érotisme ennuyeux et le propos se perd dans les bois...
April 12, 2010
I did not like the book, but this got good reviews and, like D.H. Lawrence, I am pro-sex. ;)
February 22, 2010
If you think that by watching this film, it is a shortcut to reading the DH Lawrence book, you will get what you deserve for your idleness.
January 31, 2010
Oh come on. Lady Chatterley in French is like Schindler's List in English: worthless.
If you're making a movie based on a British classic novel located in the English countryside let your actors speak English. If you make a movie about Nazi Germany let your Nazi characters speak German. It's as simple as that.
The French, English & German people should start reading subtitles.
As a result I cannot recommend this version to anyone. Not only I have a problem with the language, I also have a problem with the slow way the story is told. It's almost like a documentary of nature. It took the characters 45 minutes before they touched each other for the first time!!!
No really, watch the 1982 version of Lady Chatterley directed by Just Jaeckin. It's faster and more sensual and - very important - the main characters are physically attractive, something that can't be said about those in the French version.
Super Reviewer
January 6, 2010
LF WATCH NOW

Recommended by Gor
November 12, 2009
Another adaptation of the D.H. Lawrence novel may not seem like the most relevant of projects, but for someone like me who hasn't read the book (I was forced to read Sons And Lovers in high school and it put me off the author for life) and never seen a version on film, I thought I'd give this a go.
You wouldn't want to be in a hurry watching this, at nearly 3 hours, its a liesurely stroll through the English countryside and class system. But when a film looks this good and with so much pent up emotion simmering under the surface, its no chore to sit through it.
Both leads are good, Marina Hands having just the right mixture of refinement, intelligence and sexuality, and Coulloc'h reminding me of Brando around 1975, when he was definitely past his prime but still with a certain burly virility about him.
Lots of prolonged (but fully clothed) scenes of passion, becoming more unbridled (and naked) as the story develops.
Exceedingly well photographed and imaginatively adapted, this was a pleasant surprise.
½ November 10, 2009
Kauniisti kuvattu, liian pitkä.
½ October 2, 2009
Lady Chatterley is based on the second version of DH Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover. There are some differences between the book and the film, but the spirit of the book was there, and the idea that life without love is life without life in it.
½ September 30, 2009
Like a tv movie - book MUCH better
September 2, 2009
i've seen it on tv - now i don't know if it didn't made such an impression on me because i expected more or because it wa just not so good. i didn't read the book and i don't like lawrence and the movie was so much about loving scenes and nothing more.... yeah it's good enough to be on list of summer watching/ romance for old ladies? (i didn't ment to be rude - just a joke...)
½ August 18, 2009
I like Ken Russel's version much better.
Page 2 of 18