Gripping, to say the very least.
Why is it that biographies often tell the bad ending before unfolding the story that led to it? Is it because it is often wellknown and can't be used as a plot-device?
I agree that pretending the ending is "new" isn't the point. Taking the viewer by the hand and making him believe and feel the story, is. Impregnating him with the doom to come adds extra tension? Sure, but it feels a bit forced, because it is so commonly used.
"La vie en rose" differs slightly from this by showing Edith Piaf's end "often" inbetween scenes of her youth and past. It becomes a bit more functional.
It did in no way defer me from the real story or the brilliant acting of Marion Cotillard. She's a diamond in every portrait of la môme piaf.
Harsh story, in which the crying is often drunken revelry, making it all the more painful.
What to do with the singing. A film about one of the greatest voices of mankind cannot be dubbed. So she has to playback. What about singing of which no recording has been made? Scrap it from the script?
