It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

One of the last big films that Alan Rickman was involved in before his untimely death, A LITTLE CHAOS was also directed by the famous British actor, although his direction is middling at best. This is a low key romance set in the court at Versailles under Louis XIV, the Sun King, played by Rickman himself in support. The main thrust of the story is a romance between gardener Kate Winslet and a landscape artist in the king's employ. I found the whole thing hard to swallow. The romantic scenes feel cheesy and overblown and Winslet walks around with a funny expression on her face the whole time, like she's just smelt something terrible. The film's setting is sufficiently opulent and the supporting cast isn't bad, although I wish more had been made of strong actors like Jennifer Ehle and Danny Webb who are little more than window dressing.

It's worth it just for one last glimpse of Alan Rickman in full uncomfortable sneer, the pained uncle, so wounded and so wise... And it's worth it for some other stuff too, including a Winslet somehow more mature, and some truly beautiful images from Rickman as director.But there's a sense that - like its late lamented director - the script of A Little Chaos could have given us so much more. Having decided for dramatic purposes to get so chaotic with the truth - in reality Le Notre the head gardener was decades older than the King, not t'other way round, and Winslet's radical female gardener simply didn't exist - the writers don't take much creative advantage.Perhaps lacking confidence in any of the strands, they try to throw in too much that remains undeveloped: the back-story of Winslet's family is worthily sad, but neither necessary nor developed into any explanation of her relationship to natural forces; supplanted mistress Jennifer Ehle's semi-secret court of wounded women is a surprising, haunting and beautiful moment, but basically a digression; Stanley Tucci is wasted; a couple of pat metaphors aside, the tension between order and chaos doesn't go anywhere.Structurally, Rickman the writer-director has made Rickman the actor part of the problem. Because from the opening scene we see the fragile warmth behind the monarchical mask - and because it's Alan Rickman and everyone knows that Professor Snape always secretly cares - he can't carry the kind of threat required of the capricious absolute ruler. If the King was still a distant authority, his scene with Winslet and the pear tree would be a moment of revelation and transformation; instead it's just pleasant and a bit poignant. And by then, there's no chance that he's going to be anything other than indulgent of the apparent hiccough of the waterlogged garden.There's a similar lost opportunity around Schoenaerts. His Le Notre doesn't develop at all. He's a bit snooty in his first scene, but after that he's just sort of romantically moody. The potential conflict and tension between a (much more) austere, order-obsessed Le Notre and a (more) wild and wilful Winslet is never realized. Because Madame Le Notre is such a horror, and promiscuous, and already signed up to an open relationship, there's no practical or moral obstacle to Schoenaerts and Winslet leaping into the shrubbery. There's no tension, and no sense of achievement.(And they don't even leap into the shrubbery. All that mud, and all that luscious fruit, and they finally get it on indoors, which seems rather a waste - as well as a defusing of the little passion there was.)Pruned (sorry) and chopped around a bit, the script would have more energy and grip. If Schoenaerts was really uncomfortable about Winslet's garden planning, and about the idea of betraying his wife, Winslet and the story would have something to aim at and work on. If Rickman seemed capable of ruining lives by banishment from employment in his Eden, the risks and tensions would have consequences and impact. Say Schoenaerts is still uncertain, about the funky horticulture and about Winslet, when the more perceptive Mrs Le Notre ruins the garden to forestall the threat of losing her husband; Schoenaerts and Winslet then have their moment of near-death near-passion in the tempest; Jennifer Ehle's boudoir then becomes a place of real refuge, from a very grumpy King and from the unknown result of the passion; the nicely-staged Mexican stand-off between the wounded ladies and the King's posse can then be a moment of real resolution - what if that's the moment when she realizes that the King who could be about to ruin her is the same mysterious figure she met under the pear tree? - when Winslet's spirit and argument must convince the King, and when Schoenaerts must decide to follow his heart and speak up for her. Instead Rickman denies himself a fitting farewell, and we're left wanting what might have been.https://thescripthack.wordpress.com

André Le Nôtre (Matthias Schoenaerts) is a respected landscaping working for King Louis XIV of France (Alan Rickman) after his mother Queen's death. He interviews Sabine de Barra (Kate Winslet) to create an outdoor ballroom at Versailles. She lost her husband and daughter. Her vision clashes with his need for order. The interview goes badly but he accepts advise from his father. She gains notice at the Royal court and by the King. She gets closer to André raising the ire of his wife.The Royal court intrigue is muddled. The characters and their relationships are given little time or effort. That limits any dramatic ability from that element. Matthias Schoenaerts is quiet in his acting to the point of inert. There is one shinning star that this story revolves around and that is Kate Winslet. She is powerfully reserved and emotionally expansive. She never fails to deliver. There are some unexpected turns while the main relationship has limited drama. This is all about Winslet and her ability to carry this movie.

I really expected something quite different, but what I got was a beautifully crafted fantasy that pitched each and every moment just right. The thematic weave is extremely subtle and every single moment very carefully placed with an incredible sense of sensitivity for the human condition. The movie is delightful and deals with such an enormous amount of delicately sensitive human themes that I am awestruck at the director's ability to treat them with such a light hand that you never get the feeling that you are working to get through the story. A Little Chaos struck my nerves and my heart with quite a few story lines that I recognized from everyday life in the 21st century and managed to tell a story of our day to day lives, lived in a period knows for it's decadent overindulgence and careless waste. Very much like today but not with the political baggage of libertarianism, capitalism and human rights that has come to burden out every decision just like form and pompous did back in the good old days, when times were bad...Thus they place themes what many of us chew on, in a time that, even though it seems so far away, we can relate to. And within this they succeed in touching your heart as an viewer without striking a painful blow. The cinematography is brilliantly simple and exceptionally effective for a complex story made watchable, easy and fresh.