Une chronique romancée de la vie intérieure de Marilyn Monroe.Une chronique romancée de la vie intérieure de Marilyn Monroe.Une chronique romancée de la vie intérieure de Marilyn Monroe.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Nommé pour 1 oscar
- 12 victoires et 36 nominations au total
Avis en vedette
Ana de armas gave an inspiring performance and she really acted her heart out. The story and it's execution was a masterpiece at places and the cinematography and aesthetics were on a new level. As I don't know that much about marlyn I don't actually care how they portrayed her. The main accomplishment of the film is that it shows the horrors of Hollywood masterfully and how sometimes famous people or actors lose themselves as a person underneath the limelight and become somewhat of a lost soul. In some respects they failed to make it feel impactful and it seemed disjointed sometimes. But to see ana de armas act her heart out and netflix do something new is truly refreshing. And it's such a long film but surprisingly didn't seem dragged.
What a truly disappointing film this is. It offers us a really slow, sterile and disjointed - almost episodic - depiction of just how Marilyn Monroe's life might have panned out. For a start, I couldn't decide whether Ana de Armas was really Lady Gaga or Scarlett Johansson (both of whom would have acquitted themselves better, I'd say) as she offers an admittedly intense, but remarkably uninvolved performance. We move along from chapter to chapter in her life hindered by some fairly weak and uninspiring dialogue and seriously intrusive scoring in what becomes an increasingly shallow and lacklustre fashion. The photography does try hard - it does offer us a sense of intimacy, but the whole thing is presented in such a stylised and un-natural manner that it is frequently difficult to tell whether she is/was a "real" woman. Her marriages are treated in an almost scant manner - and her relationship with JFK is reduced to something rather implausibly one-sided and sordid showing nothing of how their relationship might have come to be. It has no soul, this film. Aside from her glamour - which was, even then, hardly unique we are not really introduced to any of the nuances of her character, we are left guessing a lot of the time as to just how she did become such a superstar, and how she spiralled so inevitably into a maelstrom of booze and pills. It relies to a considerable extent on the viewer's existing knowledge of, and affection for, this flawed lady. Adrien Brody and Bobby Cannavale don't really have much chance to add anything as her husbands and the highly speculative relationship between her and Charlie Chaplin Jnr (Xavier Samuel) and his sexually ambiguous partner-in-crime Edward G Robinson Jr (Scoot McNairy) does suggest something of the rather profligate and debauched existence that some lived in Hollywood, but again their characters are also largely undercooked and again, we are largely left to use our own imagination. It is far, far too long and in a packed cinema, I could see people looking at the ceiling just once too often. Watchable, certainly, but a real missed opportunity to offer us something scintillating and tantalising about this most of iconic of women.
If you're going to fictionalize the life of one of the movie icons of the 20th century why go there, to the darkest dark. There are some "invented" moments that are, quite frankly, unforgivable. What kept me glued to the screen was Ana de Armas. A tremendous show of talent and fearlessness. I was wondering what the experience would have been to watch it in a theater with other people? I don't know because in the privacy of my own home I was free to stand up and walk away to pour myself a drink and shout at the screen. The awful Kennedy episode for instance. Why? That episode in particular made me question the intention of the filmmakers. So, yes, I can say now that I've seen it. Loved some it and detested some it.
So first off, the movie made the news when it was said to have a NC-17 rating. We were never really told why. It seems like it was given that rating just to drawn attention to the movie because the movie was had about much language, nudity...etc as a R rated movie.
As for the movie itself.... overhyped trash. This is based on a fictional book and not her true story. It's sad that she can't even get a legit story but instead gets a fake version. All that aside the movie is almost 3 hours long. And its very slow moving. There are some disturbing scenes of course, but nothing really shocking compared to other movies.
You still get the feeling she was abused by everyone of course. But that's about it. Again, since its not her actual story, it feels like your watching some tabloid version of her life. What a waste of time and such overblown hype. But I know it will win Oscars because "critics" will probably love it for some reason.
Only reason I even gave it a three was the actress nailed her voice and how she acted.
As for the movie itself.... overhyped trash. This is based on a fictional book and not her true story. It's sad that she can't even get a legit story but instead gets a fake version. All that aside the movie is almost 3 hours long. And its very slow moving. There are some disturbing scenes of course, but nothing really shocking compared to other movies.
You still get the feeling she was abused by everyone of course. But that's about it. Again, since its not her actual story, it feels like your watching some tabloid version of her life. What a waste of time and such overblown hype. But I know it will win Oscars because "critics" will probably love it for some reason.
Only reason I even gave it a three was the actress nailed her voice and how she acted.
Three hours of sheer boredom with the whole focus of the film being on Norma Jean's father who abandoned her mother before she was born. Nothing new on offer. A lot of nude shots, Marilyn calling her husbands "Daddy" the babies she couldn't have, her intelligence got short shrift and her drug taking a huge focus, fed by her handlers.
John F. Kennedy, the womanizer, is depicted in a particularly revolting scene.
Shock value ruled the day and nothing new was added.
Totally disappointing and the words that comes to mind are crude and vulgar. Good imitative performance from Ana.
But not worth a re-watch or an award of any kind.
2/10.
John F. Kennedy, the womanizer, is depicted in a particularly revolting scene.
Shock value ruled the day and nothing new was added.
Totally disappointing and the words that comes to mind are crude and vulgar. Good imitative performance from Ana.
But not worth a re-watch or an award of any kind.
2/10.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThis film is based on the 2000 novel "Blonde" by Joyce Carol Oates, which is a fictionalized account inspired by the life of Marilyn Monroe, not an actual biography. Oates insisted that the novel is a work of fiction that should not be regarded as a biography. Oates said that she didn't have anything to do with the making of this film, though once in a while, director Andrew Dominik would get in contact with her, and that she was given an almost-final cut in 2020 and she has praised the film ever since. The novel had been previously adapted into a two-part miniseries: Marilyn Monroe (2001), starring Poppy Montgomery as Monroe.
- GaffesMarilyn greets the Secret Service agents at her door with: "You were expecting maybe Mother Teresa?" Mother Teresa had not gained international recognition in 1962. It's highly doubtful Marilyn would have known who she was.
- Citations
Norma Jeane: Marilyn doesn't exist. When I come out of my dressing room, I'm Norma Jeane. I'm still her when the camera is rolling. Marilyn Monroe only exists on the screen.
- ConnexionsFeatured in How Fight Scene Props Are Made for Movies & TV (2022)
- Bandes originalesEv'ry Baby Needs a Da-Da-Daddy
Written by Lester Lee and Allan Roberts
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Blonde?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Rubia
- Lieux de tournage
- Los Angeles Theatre - 615 S. Broadway, Downtown, Los Angeles, Californie, États-Unis("Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" premiere)
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 22 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Durée2 heures 47 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.33 : 1
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant