Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

A film that fails to ignite much interest. Not for the first time in recent memory Pfeiffer plays the older woman in love with a younger man, in this case one much younger. Scorsese and Pfeiffer covered some of this same territory in The Age of Innocence, and to much better effect. She is a courtesan, he the son of another famous courtesan. He has led an indolent life, spoiled throughout his entire existence. As a result he has grown to manhood completely divorced from any feelings for anyone. Instead he allows himself to be forced into a hastily arranged marriage by his ambitious mother, to a young woman he neither loves nor cares for. He is indifferent to his wife and drifts back and forth between the two women.The script is pretty nondescript in places. Pfeiffer has a few decent lines and still radiates enough screen presence to carry some scenes, and Bates matches her well. Most of the problems with this film are based on the male character Cheri (Friend). He is left with too little too late for us to care about his fate. lnstead he allows himself to have his opinions formed for him by his mother and and Lea who also does much of what passes for thinking on his behalf as well. He is married off to a woman he doesn't love, and then proceeds to drift between her and his lover without ever showing any real sense of commitment to either. Due to the limitations of the script and his character, he comes across as only half formed, and too many scenes end with him staring blankly into the camera, looking quite vacuous, and a penny for his thoughts would be an understatement of inflation. lt is not easy to know which audience this movie is aimed at. It is not quite glamorous enough to be mainstream nor is it memorable enough to be art-house. As a result it meanders along without ever really being anything more than an exercise in self indulgence. That is a pity as l was expecting a fair bit more from those involved.

This story is curiously set in France with two American actors using British accents. So it is in the magic fantasy land of the movies. Set in the late 19th century, a time when becoming a Courtesan, an elite prostitute, was an alternative for young women. Michelle Pfeiffer was about 50 when the filming was done and it appears she is playing a Courtesan about 50, Lea de Lonval. Courtesans, while acknowledged as a legitimate profession, didn't really mix with the rest of society during their non-working hours, and Lea's closest friend was Kathy Bates as Madame Peloux. They didn't really like each other that much, but they shared a bond. Before I saw the movie I assumed the title referred to Pfeiffer's character, but in fact it was Rupert Friend as Chéri, a name Lea gave to him when he was growing up. He was the son of Madame Peloux, and of unknown father, and was 19 as this story begins. While I enjoyed this movie, I find it mostly forgettable. It is a type of movie I am very optional towards.SPOILERS: As Cheri needed some companionship, Lea became to fill that role. She thought they would be together for a few weeks, but that turned into 6 years. They were lovers. But Madame Peloux decided she needed grandchildren and arranged a marriage of her son, Cheri, now 25, to a young woman of 18. But he never really took to her, Lea was always on his mind. As he was on her mind. But in the end she convinced him their love, while real, could not lead to anything.

Even though there are more than two centuries of difference between the characters of Dangerous Liaisons and Chéri, it is impossible to deny the connection between both films, not only because they portrait scandalous romances from the aristocracy, but because they also count with Michelle Pfeiffer's powerful presence and Stephen Frears' precise direction.However, the comparisons become damaging when we compare the emotional impact and sardonic humor from Dangerous Liaisons with the hollow characters and dry romance from Chéri.I found Chéri to be a good film, because it kept me interested and entertained, but the screenplay feels a bit bland and frivolous.Due to novelist Colette's reputation (whose books Chéri and The Last of Chéri inspired this film), Frears' big talent as a director, and the presence of two brilliant actresses such as Pfeiffer and Kathy Bates, I expected to find something more passionate, incisive and ingenious.The biggest fail I found on this movie is that I found the character of Chéri to be underdeveloped and bland.I have the feeling that the screenplay diluted things from that character on its adaptation from the books.Nevertheless, I liked Chéri, specially because of the performances from Pfeiffer and Bates.The verbal encounters between them are perfectly interpreted, and the result is that they are very entertaining.So, Chéri is not totally satisfactory or highly memorable, but it still deserves a recommendation mainly because of its good performances and solid direction.

the elegant and beautiful Michelle Pfeiffer is ageing and her last great romance has faded, leaving her alone and wealthy. Let's put something right here - the ladies in this film were NOT prostitutes, they were courtesans, something totally different, like serial monogamous mistresses if you like. A concept totally accepted in Europe, especially at this time. So taking on the responsibility of her younger 'godson' at the request of his mother, another retiree, she whisks him away to the country and they begin his education, which turns into a relationship and which goes on for several years. His mother becomes twitchy for grandchildren and arranges a marriage for him, and the lovers part, clearly unaware of the pain that this will trigger. And so it goes - their actions and reactions form the rest of the story, which is beautifully drawn, sumptuously dressed and depicted with class and glamour. My only query is why American Actors and British Actors? Otherwise, a beautiful film, well portrayed and I look forward to more.