Mr. Amiel Guiteng The film was sensitive, but disappointing. It was over-extended and in spite of the elements to a period flick being present -- set in a small village, a devoutly Protestant porcelain empire in Limoges, the Swiss Alps, and World War I -- it lacked the period movie breadth like how the Italian's would do it. Not even the beauty of Béart nor the shaky camera technique used throughout the movie could hold our attention for such a long time.Oh well, this was Olivier Assayas' first period film, a departure from his contemporary works. That's a valid excuse for the film, I guess.

lhhung_himself Without any sugar coating - this is a just a very poor and poorly made film in spite of the high production values and fine cast. The 3 hours seem like an eternity. Yet, with all that time, the main characters and their motivations are not well developed, and too many minor characters were introduced without allowing us time to learn much more than their names. Also, especially at the beginning of the movie, the jerky camera-work was overused and used poorly making me dizzy more than anything else. It ruined an otherwise nice ballroom scene.Let me add that I *do* like slow paced films without linear plot that take their time to meander with interesting characters that come and go and nice eye-candy cinematography. Maybe with some better editing, a tighter screenplay and some better camera-work this would have worked. As it was, I kept wanting the protagonist to die so that the film would finally end.

noralee "Les Destinees sentimentales" feels like it's bringing to life selected scenes from some beloved French family saga that it helps to have read, which is hard for non-Francophones as the 1936 novel by Jacques Chardonne isn't available in English. The look is delicate and beautiful (and it soothed my headache) with gorgeous costumes, settings and Impressionistic cinematography as it traces the intertwining lives, families, and businesses of wine growers and porcelain makers in Limoges in the first half of the 20th century. But as a family saga, I just kept thinking over and over how much better is "The Godfather" or even "Sunshine."The three sections, each about an hour long, are divided to indicate the changing interests of the central character -- to wife #1, then wife #2, then to running the family business (yes he almost says: "They keep bringing me back in!"). But whether it's the writing (as adapted by director Olivier Assayas) or the acting of Charles Berling, he just isn't commanding of our attention. As one gossipy cousin complains towards the end, first he was with one wife, then for no particular reason the second, then somehow he was obsessively running the family factory -- so what does he want? And her mind didn't even wander past the subtitles a few times like mine did, missing some plot points here and there.(originally written 4/20/2002)

thegreifs after eagerly seeking out this film, i found myself totally bored..it was too long,had no movement..although very beautiful..but the beauty wore thin after 40 minutes..performances ok...but in the end dull,dull, dull..lots of pottery but not much else..