Set in post World War 1 England, Connie Chatterley, (MARINA HANDS), is married to the aristocratic Clifford, (HYPPOLYTE GIRARDOT). Look, this is this woman's journey from a very repressed situation into an area of liberation - both sexual liberation and emotional liberation. I wouldn't want it to move any faster than it does. The Connie actress is extremely evocatiave and sensitive, not to mention intelligent.
His wounds from the war make him a less than satisfactory husband. The drama - moments of drama are - there are inter-titles on the screen saying "Oh, the aunt arrived and she got all frustrated because she..."DAVID: No, Margaret, you're being extremely unfair. Relationships between characters had depth, not just Hollywood same old.
The French film Lady Chatterley is the latest screen adaptation from the penultimate version John Thomas and Lady Jane. I think she's wonderful and I think it's one of the best examinations of a kind of a sensual relationship I've seen for a long time on the screen. MARGARET: I think she is so mentally bland it's almost like, "Oh, yeah. DAVID: I think it's interesting to pick a version that we're not so familiar with and the whole point of this is that journey from this woman who has nothing really in her private life to a woman who is very fulfilled, I think it's a wonderful journey. : The sexiest, most enrapturing movie I have seen in a long time, far better than the English version, where initially, the naked gamekeeper is a thrill but looks like he could be in Playgirl.
Lawrence wrote three versions of his famous, banned, masterpiece Lady Chatterleys Lover. Oh, and yeah, I'd like a child and this is the way to get it."DAVID: Margaret! You know, the ultimate is such a wonderful, tragic story. MARGARET: And there's no sense of that in this and I think, well, why pick the inferior version to make a film about?
The now super-posh Connie Chatterley (in the book, she marries up) had become an unlikely proto-feminist who always took the lead, in the boudoir and everywhere else.
(Was it, I wonder, thanks to this new-found confidence, or in spite of it, that she consistently managed to reach orgasm in five seconds flat?
(You can read her brilliant essay “Lorenzo the Closet-Queen” in , her collected journalism, the latest edition of which comes with an introduction by yours truly.) Whatever his standing, however problematic (that is, misogynistic) his work continues to be, if you’re going to adapt it for television, you might as well have a stab at doing it properly. Unfortunately, do this and you inevitably ditch the novel’s complexities and nuances.Change it too much and you’re left with something so crude – yes, even cruder than Lawrence! In particular, you lose its underlying preoccupation with social class, a system that its author sensed was in flux, the trenches having thrown up all sorts of in-betweeners (the novel was published in 1928).In Mercurio’s hands, the narrative was – quite a rare feat, this – at once clichéd and anachronistic.The problem for me is that its not only turgidly directed by Pascale Ferran and yes, Im very glad a woman has had a go at it, but as depicted by MARINA HANDS, Connie is terminally boring. In stark contrast the masterful directing of Ang Lee never once made the onlooker aware of the directing process.She might have a great body, but she not only hides her intelligence from her husband shes pretty good at keeping it from the audience too. Pascale Ferran is shown up in this film as a rather clumsy director.