Les destinées sentimentales

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.

I just saw this picture and it gave me the impression of Assayas trying to give us a symbolic message on globalization, French versus American markets, and at the end he delivers a movie about the film industry itself.As they say, do it for the French market!

Cinematography is at its best, rhythm of images goes perfectly along character´s feelings at the moment.

Beautiful ball sequence and very good explanation on ceramic and china industry at beginning of 20th century, breath taking swiss sceneries.

I WW sequence is also very well done.

Emmanuelle Beart and Isabelle Huppert are splendorous,La Huppert appears less but is much more intense.

Also got the impression that novel had much more to offer than the 3 hours film version, but this is film, anyway, and script is script.

Beginning and ending with a death scene, love is the only worthy thing in life.

Chardonne's novel is a masterfully written tale about two characters as they spiral through and explore love as life's most essential element. The director captured it beautifully as a tone, a feeling, and as an overall impression of how the characters react to their journey. Unfortunately, he left out the milestones, those transitions a character makes, inwardly, as outward events bear in on them. The audience is asked to make gigantic leaps of logic as the character's trust in and dependence on Love changes, evolves with age. Mind you this is a three hour epic, so it is not for want of time that the production misses the mark, only the screenwriter's discipline, and here, again, the director got involved where he ought not be.

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..

The story of a man (a very good performance by Charles Berling) over a 30 year period, starting at the beginning of the 20th century. It explores what matters to him -- the women in his life, his morality, and later his porcelain factory.

It poses some important questions; how does one balance morality, passion and being an artist? And when is the pursuit of perfection a vice or a virtue?

There are flaws; some interesting plot lines are simply dropped, and other less interesting ones get more time than they need. Isabelle Huppert, while always good is surprisingly a bit one-note, and Emmanuelle Beart can't really pull off being an old lady.

But this ultimately felt like more than the sum of its parts. By the end I felt moved and thoughtful, and it's 3 hour length, while deliberate, was never boring.

Critics were very divided - some coldly dismissed it as dull and seemed angry at Assayas for betraying his earlier hipper, more energetic films (I'm just impressed by his range), while others, like me, were really taken in by the Dickensian sweep.