There are two major problems with this film.
First, it basically ignores all the reasons why the original story was so strong.
Secondly, it has to compete with the original film version (La Vie Devant Soi - called Madam Rosa in the English title) - starring Simone Signoret.
The first big error is in changing the focus of the story. Yes, it is still told from Momo's point of view (sort of) - but it has suddenly made Momo a "problem child" and incipient hoodlum - which was not part of the original story I don't believe - and instead of simply a kid who had been left with Madame Rosa, he is suddenly a thief who improbably has to be put in her care in the most unbelievable way.
These changes mean that the story is no longer about a kid learning from the life around him but rather a fight between good and evil within him - which was not at all part of the original. All is angst - where as the original story is humorous and philosophical and filled with the lessons of discovery. Instead of true understanding and growth, this film depends more on stock clichés. Madame Rosa's children are of all backgrounds and religions, and in the original story she insists on making sure that each child remains true to his own religion and culture. This is done out of respect for the individual children, but is not at all made clear in the new version. Yes, Mme Rosa has a tattoo on her arm and mentions Auschwitz, but we get absolutely no sense of her being attached at all to her Jewishness. The audience is supposed to understand what all this means, but she doesn't explain any of it to Momo -and this is the real problem with the film. There are no convincing diaologues between them that don't simply sound preachy. Everything is surface - nothing seems to be deeply rooted in anything except facile melodrama.
Finally, there is Sophia Loren, who I have always liked in the past, but who somehow seems to be sleepwalking through most of this part. Everything is underplayed, as if she is counting on her reputation rather than her talent to pull this one off. She is supposed to be an aging , physically exhausted older prostitute, but we get no indication of age or pain in her body. Anyone remembering Simone Signoret's Madame Rosa (for which she won an Oscar) realizes how much more Signoret inhabited the character - making us feel like every movement and every breath was an effort. She was far more believable than Loren, who still gives the impression for most of it of being in far too good shape physically. Even the script is illogical about this; she excuses herself and two minutes later the two others go looking for her. She is eventually found in an orchard which is so vast that she would have had to be a marathon runner to have reached the point where they find her in the time allotted... yet she is supposed to be barely able to walk. Yes, she keeps lapsing into catatonia - but we get the impression she is going into Alzheimer's instead of being physically enfeebled by a bad heart. In the end, the IDEA of this story is better than the execution. A huge disappointment - much of which should be placed at the feet of Loren's son, who directed and co-wrote the script - making unnecessary changes which allowed for simplification instead of depth. All those who have been raving about how touching this film and Loren's acting are have obviously not seen the original film or read the book it was based on. If they had, they too would be less enthralled. This version would almost certainly never have gotten off the ground without the Loren/Ponti names behind it.
The first big error is in changing the focus of the story. Yes, it is still told from Momo's point of view (sort of) - but it has suddenly made Momo a "problem child" and incipient hoodlum - which was not part of the original story I don't believe - and instead of simply a kid who had been left with Madame Rosa, he is suddenly a thief who improbably has to be put in her care in the most unbelievable way.
These changes mean that the story is no longer about a kid learning from the life around him but rather a fight between good and evil within him - which was not at all part of the original. All is angst - where as the original story is humorous and philosophical and filled with the lessons of discovery. Instead of true understanding and growth, this film depends more on stock clichés. Madame Rosa's children are of all backgrounds and religions, and in the original story she insists on making sure that each child remains true to his own religion and culture. This is done out of respect for the individual children, but is not at all made clear in the new version. Yes, Mme Rosa has a tattoo on her arm and mentions Auschwitz, but we get absolutely no sense of her being attached at all to her Jewishness. The audience is supposed to understand what all this means, but she doesn't explain any of it to Momo -and this is the real problem with the film. There are no convincing diaologues between them that don't simply sound preachy. Everything is surface - nothing seems to be deeply rooted in anything except facile melodrama.
Finally, there is Sophia Loren, who I have always liked in the past, but who somehow seems to be sleepwalking through most of this part. Everything is underplayed, as if she is counting on her reputation rather than her talent to pull this one off. She is supposed to be an aging , physically exhausted older prostitute, but we get no indication of age or pain in her body. Anyone remembering Simone Signoret's Madame Rosa (for which she won an Oscar) realizes how much more Signoret inhabited the character - making us feel like every movement and every breath was an effort. She was far more believable than Loren, who still gives the impression for most of it of being in far too good shape physically. Even the script is illogical about this; she excuses herself and two minutes later the two others go looking for her. She is eventually found in an orchard which is so vast that she would have had to be a marathon runner to have reached the point where they find her in the time allotted... yet she is supposed to be barely able to walk. Yes, she keeps lapsing into catatonia - but we get the impression she is going into Alzheimer's instead of being physically enfeebled by a bad heart. In the end, the IDEA of this story is better than the execution. A huge disappointment - much of which should be placed at the feet of Loren's son, who directed and co-wrote the script - making unnecessary changes which allowed for simplification instead of depth. All those who have been raving about how touching this film and Loren's acting are have obviously not seen the original film or read the book it was based on. If they had, they too would be less enthralled. This version would almost certainly never have gotten off the ground without the Loren/Ponti names behind it.