Charlotte Gray (2001)

Charlotte Gray

I loved this movie! It has war time romance and adventure of a young, bright woman, who was willing to risk her life by parachuting into Nazi occupied France. Her fluency in French, coupled with her keen intellect, made her an instant choice for this mission -- all quite believeable. The varied associations along the way made it so much more interesting. The scenery was so gorgeously filmed and inspiring, that I took a trip to SW France to see it for myself and was not disappointed! I truly admire Cate Blanchett, and her acting in this film was wonderful. The supporting roles were also quite well done. I found the movie very entertaining and would guarantee the same for nearly anyone. Terry(silverwings442002@yahoo.com) November 29, 2008

A great Cate Blanchette film

I purchased this movie to see Rupert Penry-Jones who I really like as an actor. I thought he was very good but could understand why he has stated that he will no longer play the guy who doesn't get the girl.

Cate was great and it really is her film. Billy Crudit (misspelled I am sure) really did a great job as the hero. Michael Gambon is a great favorite of mine also. This movie is done in the same way that Gambon did the Magret series for the BBC and PBS.

Really recommend this film for all ages. My grandaughter and daughter enjoyed watching it as well as I did. September 6, 2008

I watch it all the time...

I guess I'm one of a few, but I love this movie. I watch it over and over. Cate Blanchett is one of my favorite actresses and to me, the story line is moving and very powerfully acted. I love Billy in this movie too...the first movie I have actually watched with him in it (that I know of) and I fell in love with him. August 12, 2007

A Lighter Shade of Gray...

Let me state the obvious. Charlotte Rampling is phenomenal in anything that she does.

With that out of the way, I can go so far as to say that Cate Blanchett ranks well into the second place position with her strong body of work and amazing ability to evoke the strongest of emotions. It doesn't matter if you are watching her in the phenomenal "Elizabeth" or the slightly obtuse film "The Shipping News" or even the hysterical Armstrong pic, "Life Aquatic", she is worth every moment of screen minute. Blanchett ranks up there with my philosophy of Gene Hackman. The man may not make the greatest of films, but he is always worth watching. The same can be said for Cate. She may not make the greatest film choices possible, but she does keep you eye focused on the screen. This was my thought as I watched the disappointing biopic entitled, "Charlotte Gray". I was actually looking forward to this film with such amazing actors taking the helm as Blanchett, the amazing Michael Gambon, and the quieted Billy Crudup, but even with such power players behind the words, one could not cover up the mush-mouthed film that director Gillian Armstrong attempted to create.

I don't mean to be harsh, but there were some serious flaws in this film that even director Armstrong addresses in the audio commentary. The first which was obvious as the film began its downward stroll, was the issue of language. This was an Australian film, beginning in Scotland, going to England, and ending up in France. So, what language would be best to be used? Anderson took the southern approach and decided to not use the native tongue, and instead throw at us a very weak French accent for all occasions. Gambon, obviously, chose not to do any of these options and went with his own accent. Crudup seemed the least apt to handle this non-American accent, while Blanchett ... well ... she did what she could, constantly fluctuating between her Scottish accent and that of something that could only be called "French". It was not a strong way to lure the historical cinema guy into the picture. While I realize that it would have been tough to "sell" this as a foreign language film, I do believe that it would have pulled me deeper into the story and into the trenches of what these women had to do for their country. Instead, it just felt cheap and extremely Hollywood-"ized", though it wasn't.

The story followed suite. It was supposed to be this grandiose story of a woman's plight for her country. It was supposed to be this story of independence and self-discovery, but alas, it transformed into this mushy story about love with no cohesiveness. We begin this adventure with a woman who is afraid to smoke around others, afraid to drink in public, and suddenly falls head over feet with a man whom she is willing to do anything for. While Armstrong did address the quick courtship in this film, I just felt like we needed more explanation. We needed to see her independence further before making the rash jump into bed, so to speak. Then, quickly, we are placed into training, lies, and finally dropped over France. All before we can really see who this woman really is. I wanted, needed, desperately desired, to know who Charlotte Gray was before getting deep behind enemy lines. I don't mind a two hour film, but two hours in France not quite understanding our main character is not a way for a film to just be thrown in our faces. Who was Charlotte? Who was Gambon? Who was Crudup? I needed this, but alas, Armstrong was too busy focusing on love, random acts of children, and a family torn between two generations. Haven't we heard this all before?

So, we have this weak message, sent by mediocre voices, through a war that gets more and more random as the minutes progress. Can anyone answer to me what the true mission was of Gray during her tour? Why would she fight so much with so less reward near the end? Did those we viewed through the film just disappear by the end? Too many questions for what should have been just a straight forward film. I wanted concise direction and a focus towards our main character, Gray, but instead we were handed a hodgepodge of stories that never quite connected. Armstrong attempts to answer those nay-saying critics through the audio commentary with feeble responses and dramatic "I was the director" cards. It becomes difficult for foreign directors to try to capture the feel and truthfulness of another country's hero. Armstrong failed in this case. She even second-guessed a couple of her scenes in the final film, a sure-fire sign that it wasn't the film that you wanted to finish with. The only director that can successfully critic his own films, and that is Uwe Boll, and that goes without saying.

I can't say that I was happy with the overall finale of this film. The glue wasn't very tight and instead of honesty, Armstrong seemed to focus on the randomness of love, circumstance, and scenery. I didn't think this was a solid film at all, and have to side with the critics that seemed to think that this was just another biographical fluff film. Blanchett acted her heart out (for no apparent reason), and Scotland was beautiful, but I cannot credit anything else with this film. If you are looking for history, I would find something else. If you are looking for a title that you would find in the "romance" section of your local bookstore, then "Charlotte Gray" is the film for you.

Grade: ** out of ***** (one for Scotland, one for Blanchett - that is all) March 9, 2007

French Occupation Drama

Cate Blanchett is terrific in this film about espionage in France during World War II. Story is well crafted and most of it is believable. One or two of the actors disappoint.
Subtle aspects of this film include betrayal by the French collaborators, and British fear of French resistance fighters with Communist leanings.
Photography of the scenery is splendid, and costumes appear very appropriate for that period.
No matter the color of her hair, Cate Blanchett is a beauty and a marvelous actress.
March 9, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...