Bob Taylor
The beginning is great: Violette is living with Maurice Sachs in a Normandy backwater in 1942. With the war on, life is precarious for the budding writer; she is forced to go on the black market to deal in the essentials of life. Sachs obliges her to sit down and write about her childhood and youth, as a way to bring in some extra cash. Soon Sachs is off to Germany as a labourer (he hoped to ingratiate himself with the Nazis by hiding his Jewish past). Sachs dies, and Violette is off to Paris as soon as she can manage it. Soon she meets Simone de Beauvoir, Jean Genet and Jacques Guerin (who becomes her first publisher). She starts to travel, something a girl from a poor family usually doesn't get to do. Finally she becomes a member of the Gallimard stable of writers; fame and some fortune are hers at last.Emmanuelle Devos impressed me very much with her tenacity in bad times and her masochistic devotion to Beauvoir. Sandrine Kiberlain, reed-thin and erect of bearing, looked and sounded very much like Beauvoir. Olivier Py as the sleazy Sachs stole all his scenes.
dipesh parmar
Martin Provost's new film 'Violette' charts the professional life of French writer Violette Leduc (Emmanuelle Devos), who rose to fame in the middle of the 20th century.Leduc caught the attention of publisher Simone de Beauvoir (Sandrine Kiberlain), who published her story. But this was just the beginning of Leduc's long struggle for success, acceptance, and most of all friendship and companionship. She's not an easy person to like, constantly berating herself over her appearance, her writing, and questioning her motives for staying alive. Unwanted as a child, Leduc's insecurity and destructiveness is laid bare for all to see in a time when women had few rights. Her writing is raw, exploring subjects such as abortion and sexuality in ways previously unheard of in French society.Simone de Beauvoir keeps encouraging Leduc to right all her wrongs through writing, and their relationship is the anchor for this film. She introduces her to a distinguished group of intellectuals which include Camus, Sartre, Genet, and the rich benefactor Jacques Guerin (Olivier Gourmet). But regardless of her associations, Leduc eventually shuns them all. De Beauvoir is the only relationship Leduc has managed to sustain, but its ultimately a relationship of intimate rejections.Devos and Kiberlain excel as this most unlikely of pairings. As much as this film is about their relationship, ultimately it is about the torment in Leduc from repeated abuse and rejection. It was through her writing that Leduc finally understood life, where her preoccupation of the perception of others of herself eventually diminishing, replaced by her observations of them and channelled through her writing.
R. Ignacio Litardo
Narrates the psychological journey of Violette, born unloved, but ready to fend for herself by whatever means, to literary Parnassus and then back to her nightmarish self. Also the clash between two classes, upper middle and lower, like when Violette complains for being given Simone's 'leftovers' of her house when moving, or when Simone advices her to 'go somewhere -travel-', V. answers 'people like me don't do tourism'. Which gets one of the brightest replies by Mme De Beauvoir, mentioning her "lack of imagination". Maybe one default of this film and others of the genre is that sometimes dialogues are just too good, too literary and cerebral, too much of "for eternity". Specially Simone's, always bright, never trivial. Violette, on the contrary, is much more real, even when she repeats the same idea, moans, quarrels, just suffers or, occasionally, laughs, her character is much more 'alive' and believable.Simone is like a therapist to poor V., her "life advice" is always right, even if it could be said that she also says it to get rid of V. Photography is superb, specially Paris buildings and the female character's faces. Only perhaps marred by the "postcard images" of rural France. Music is also enthralling, particularly Avro Part's minimalism, obsessive as Violette. Maybe the score being so repetitive helps us focus on her life, that although seems full of episodes or chapters, they all end up in unrequited love. V. strives for recognition, some money to live and "not being alone", and gets probably only the first two. She repeats "Thins will always be the same", a trademark of depressive thought. Psychologically, Violette was the poster child of a perpetual victim, always asking for things her partners cannot or will not give, yet she is also manipulative as with Jacques Guérin and also with Simone d B. Simone treats V. with aloofness yet sometimes looks genuinely friendly with Violette, specially near the end. Yet, Simone speaks disparaging of Violette on at least one occasion, to Jacques: "Violette cannot be friends with anybody, I do it -taking care of her- out of duty". The script is full of contradictions like the aforementioned or how Violette rebounds from her bouts of depression, or the relationship with her mother - another great actress, totally believable even with an erratic plot-. But great films like this are not made to be analyzed, but enjoyed.Much as I am a fan of Emanuelle D., I feel she cannot play a woman that was famous for being ugly. Even the way she moves in the beginning at least, she is too much of a "rather nice woman" to play Violette. Sandrine, on the contrary, LOOKS like Simone d B. so much that, like with all good compositions –Kidman's Virginia Woolf on 'the Hours' comes to my mind- we will have the problem after having watched her performance of "always having the mental image of their performance when thinking about the author". Which is in a way, good proof that their acting is truer than life –Kiberlain and Kidman's-.Martin Provost directed the famous 'Séraphine' but I feel this film is so much better, or at least, so much closer to my heart. Maybe because even if both films deal with artistic genius and rather stubborn woman, both women also with some sort of mental malady, Séraphine seems to struggle in emptiness, whereas Violette has something concrete to fight against, be it the literary establishment that doesn't recognize her, censorship, her long string of bad lovers, her lack of love for herself, her poverty and insecurities. Violette struggles against something, is perpetually in motion, until she cracks.Séraphine is in a world inhabited by one person only: herself. Violette deals with the country as well as the city, another difference with Séraphine –country only-. My favourite character is probably Jean Genet's, a lovable gifted rascal with his husky voice and love of life. Unlike Woody Allen's film 'Midnight in Paris', this film enables us to "live through" the characters's perspective, with all their defaults and contradictions. I wouldn't have thought that there was such misery in Paris or that Violette would live in such shabby apartments. They all look brown, dirty and depressing. As I said décor and wardrobe are just incredible, you wonder how did they come along such wonderful dresses. Sometimes I just looked at Violette and SdB.'s clothing, and I know nothing about fashion. I agree with IMDb reviewer ferdinand1932 about the well crafter structure in layers of the script.This is a film not to be missed if you like French films, Paris and the literary world. A tad long perhaps but beautiful as you will rarely see.
ferdinand1932
The first thing that impresses is that this film is written very well. The structure is quite novelistic, separated into chapters and each part moving the story along in well paced increments. The whole movie starts quite slowly, mysteriously and then opens out, that is a pleasing form as it adds layers to the work.The second thing is that both Kiberlain and Devos are outstanding. Devos takes this role of Violette and makes it completely human. She is a dozen conflicted people and all the time in need of many things but most of all, in need of love. As de Beauvoir, Kiberlain is magisterial. She has de Beauvoir's haughtiness, her brilliance, her perfect sense of her own destiny.The relationship between the women of such different circumstances is told with grace and balance and insight.The photography and choice of locales is good too. The sense of place is considered, from the cold farm in winter, through to freezing Paris and then the Midi in summer at the end. Some shots may linger, because it can look so good on the screen, but that remark apart there is little to fault here.Recommended for all its best virtues.
