This review is from the perspective of a guy who watched this movie with a girl. As far as chick flicks go, this one isn't bad. As far as Lifetime movies go, I think it's excellent. Of course it takes the low road with the whole "men are a bunch of useless, testicle scratching morons that will leave you the first chance they get" thing, but hey. Lifetime, right? I think the movie does a good job of chronicling the professional and personal life of a pretty amazing person- A business woman in France (sometimes occupied France) getting established and making her mark in a pretty interesting industry. I'm sure it's not dead-on accurate, but it's pretty entertaining. I thought Shirley McClaine was a bit out-of-place and the acting in general doesn't make for what I'd call a great drama, but it's watchable.

COCO CHANEL is a well-made film whose few flaws unfortunately detract from the enjoyment of what seems to be a rather firm biography of one of the great inventive minds of the 20th century. Though all publicity (and nominations for awards) focused on Shirley MacLaine who appears only periodically and for very brief amounts of time, the starts of the cast are a number of European actors, some strong, others, only medium strong. And while the real contribution Coco Chanel made to the world was her instatement of the equality of women, changing the manner in which they dressed (read fashionable) from corseted and plumaged mannequins to comfortably mobile and real personas, the writers of this version her life (Carla Giulia Casalini and James Carrington) elected to stress the women whose ability to adjust to being repeatedly deserted/used by men and turn this movie into a romance decorated by fashion. And even that idea, valid though it may be, is fairly well buried by a musical score that is so loud as to cover the dialogue - and the dialogue is in some nearly indecipherable language, a mixture of accents and lack of projection on the part of the actors who play more to the sets and costumes than to the audience. Christian Duguay directs, electing to begin his story with the unhappy childhood of Gabrielle/Coco and Adrienne Chanel, orphans laced in a Catholic sweatshop to make clothes. These episodes of childhood to old age are well transitioned by a black and white, old movie film transfer that does add to the feeling of history. The girls grow into young women, Coco (Barbora Bobulova) goes to live with Etienne Balsan (Sagamore Stévenin), falls in love, faces the fact that her time with Etienne will be transitory, moves on to Paris where she struggles to make a living making hats until Boy Capel (Olivier Sitruk) becomes her benefactor and lover. But Boy leaves for the Front as a soldier for the French army, leaving Coco in Deauville to set up shop with the aid of her sister Adrienne (Valentina Lodovin). The back and forth aspects of the story show Coco in the 1950s (as Shirley MacLaine) making her comeback with the aid of her faithful manager Marc Bouchier (Malcolm MacDowell) and the film ends in a standing ovation for the woman who not only survived but who changed the world of fashion and feminism forever. There are many other characters in the film who play important parts but they all look alike and have such heavy accents that keeping track of them is almost impossible. No subtitles are supplied: subtitles would enhance this film immeasurably! Fabrizio Lucci does wonders with the cinematic adaptation of the times frames of the piece, but composer Andrea Guerra (in a slushy replay of Tchaikovsky symphony themes) buries the lines of the actors and nearly destroys what is in essence a very good film. Grady Harp

Apparently Coco Chanel was an unbridled egotist who gave no credit where credit was due and whose sympathy was reserved for herself.Since this was a production of Lifetime, a network not known for its steely-eyed looks at real life, I must assume that was not the impression viewers were meant to carry away with them. Presumably, had there been more sympathetic moments to be portrayed, they would have been included.On the other hand, this production passed over some rather interesting material, such as her cohabitation with a Nazi while Paris was occupied during WWII. I guess there was no way to give *that* the Lifetime treatment.There are other interesting myth-busters in the NY Times review (link under the external reviews)...but I had watched and disliked this movie before I read it. I found the woman who played the young Chanel rather bland, and not even Shirley MacLaine's performance was any fun. Watching Chanel bully her employees and ignore their loyalty isn't my idea of entertainment.

I liked this television series overall, especially the fine period costumes, romance, and interesting storyline, but they really should have toned-down the feminism. I know this series was made for a women's television network and therefore I guess the producers felt obligated to include "politically correct" messages of female empowerment, but some of it bordered on misandry and all of it was disingenuine. Especially as Coco got older, the older version seemed to be a ungrateful man-hater who forgot that it was men who helped her throughout her life and made possible most of her success. Perhaps though, this was the bitterness of a woman scorned and left with a broken heart.Nonetheless, it was men who rescued Coco several times throughout the story when she was nearly destitute. First, it was Etienne, later it was Boy, and finally it was Marc. Coco initially had no business-sense or financial resources; without Boy's help she would have been thrown into a debtor's prison or starved to death on the street. There certainly would have been no hat shop. But instead, on the verge of bankruptcy, it was men who always came to her aid. Thus, it is somewhat offensive when later she seems to think that she was soley responsible for her success and arrogantly mouths feminist comments. Even her line that "Women don't dress for men" is false. In truth, most women do in fact dress to impress men and capture their attention. If it wasn't for Coco's beauty and attractiveness, she wouldn't have captured the hearts of so many powerful men and benefited from their favors. Instead of living in a mansion and enjoying the finest that life had to offer, she would have been scraping by in a slum somewhere. They taught her how to ride a horse, how to drive a car, inspired her to find her own passion in life, funded her business ambitions, and helped her at every turn. So although the story was interesting and showed her rise, I think they could have done it without the male-bashing comments and been more truthful in acknowledging the profound importance that men played in her life and helping to nurture her success.I did enjoy the romantic themes, the costumes, and the beautiful settings. These type of romantic, period-piece settings whisk the viewer away to a forgotten time. They are needed and its unfortunate that we don't see many of them on TV anymore. The long love affair with Boy and the self-denial of true happiness made for a compelling theme. Barbora Bobulova is beautiful and a good actress, and I think she deserved more recognition than she got. Overall, the series was an enjoyable and heart-wrenching story. Worth watching.