Marie Antoinette (2006): Starring Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwartzman, Marianne Faithful, Rip Torn, Asia Argento, Judy Davis, Danny Huston, Molly Shannon, Shirley Henderson, Mary Nighy, Sebastian Armesto, Jamie Dornan, Steve Coogan. Directed by Sofia Coppola, screenplay by Sofia Coppola.
Released in 2006, Coppola's Marie Antoinette is heavily flawed. Far from faithful to the historical reality of Marie Antoinette - her personality, her life and times - it's really more of an offbeat colorful costume comedy set in Versailles in the late 18th century. This should come as no surprise when you consider the number of comedic actors in leading roles - Kirsten Dunst as Marie Antoinette, Jason Schwartzman as Louis the 16th, even Molly Shannon and Shirley Henderson as Louis' aunts Sophie and Victoire. Adding to the mix is the very accomplished British actress Judy Davis as Comtesse DE Noailles, head supervisor of etiquette at the court of Versailles and Rip Torn as the old King Louis the 15th. This film isn't about the complete life of Marie Antoinette therefore it's not a biopic. The film's strongest focus is on Marie's difficult life at Versailles. Marie finds it challenging to please everyone and she turns heads with her inexperience and her continuous breaking of social customs and protocol. Marie's only role is to mother Louis the 16th's children, the heirs to the throne of France. For years, she is childless, owing to Louis' sexual dysfunction, upsetting the nation who consider her to be uninterested in her husband, in her people and caring only for parties, luxuries and an extravagant lifestyle of jewelry, gowns and pastries. When at last Marie gives birth and becomes Queen, her life becomes increasingly dull. She escapes the growing pressures at court and the disdain of her enemies by spending time at the fake country château of the Petit Trianon where she has established a small farm. She has a brief sexual affair with the Swedish Count Axel Von Fersen (Jamie Dornan), something which might not have occurred at all.
This film omits the Revolution and we hear of it only from word of mouth. The film never loses the perspective of Marie Antoinette. Also missing is the very significant Affair of the Necklace incident involving the thief Jeanne Remy, the Cardinal DE Rohan and a diamond necklace. The scandal ruined the Queen's reputation and made her very unpopular and hated by the people. The film is unnecessarily long and very hollow, highlighting on the stereotypical aspects of Marie Antoinette's life, the parties, the fashions and the excesses; the very things that made her a hated figure by the French. Kirsten Dunst is woefully miscast and delivers an unsatisfying performance. Clearly historical drama is not suited to her abilities as an actress. She never delves into the character's inner suffering and psychology, never gives us enough for us to care and sympathize. She's wooden and never becomes Marie Antoinette, she's just being Kirsten Dunst, modern comedienne in dress up. Jason Schwartzman is worse with the minimalist dialog and lifeless persona. He doesn't do anything with his character. The superior performances are from Judy Davis as the Countess DE Noailles and Marianne Faithful as the Empress Maria Teresa, minor roles and appearing only briefly in early portions of the film. We would benefit from at least one other person's perspective because Marie's life was sheltered from reality and her geography was limited to Versailles. Looking at this movie, we don't truly understand why they hated her in Paris, nor see just how seriously her position as Queen was threatened.
Perhaps the reason this film is terrible lies in the poor screenplay and bad writing. Coppola is better suited as director but not as writer. She might have done better by hiring a good writer. Her direction is generally good. The cinematography is excellent. There are beautiful vistas of the palace of Versailles and it's gardens, including also the Petit Trianon and the Queen's farm. The costumes may be over the top and far too colorful to be realistic and authentic but they are beautiful to look at. The cast and crew were allowed to film at the actual palace of Versailles. Only a few films have done this and it's good to know that it's not a fake set. This is a lovely movie visually but it's an insubstantial film with unimpressive writing. and acting. It also suffers from the fact that it wants to take itself seriously as a historical drama but it's far from it. On the plus side, Coppola did her homework and the details of Marie's frustration at Versailles is accurate. Everything is generally faithful to the real events of Marie's time in Versailles such as her correspondence with her mother Empress Maria Teresa and the visit by the concerned brother Josef. But in many ways, this film falls into the genre of experiment because Coppola lost track of the more personal tragedy and human side of Marie Antoinette. We never see her being a good mother and wife, both of which she truly was. Another downside is the modern music for the soundtrack. Although Coppola has a few excerpts of Baroque and late 18th century classical music as well as opera, she also varies it with modern pop which is unnecessary and freakishly anachronistic. Coppola seems to want us to relate to Marie with the heavy emphasis on modern attitudes by Kirsten's performance, but she fails miserably because it just doesn't suit a period film which should be restricted to the milieu and the attitudes of the people of that long ago period, which has no immediate connection with our modern society. This film could have been better if Coppola had opted to make a serious drama about the life and death of Marie Antoinette and the events of the French Revolution. Only the cinematography and lavish costumes are worth watching.
Released in 2006, Coppola's Marie Antoinette is heavily flawed. Far from faithful to the historical reality of Marie Antoinette - her personality, her life and times - it's really more of an offbeat colorful costume comedy set in Versailles in the late 18th century. This should come as no surprise when you consider the number of comedic actors in leading roles - Kirsten Dunst as Marie Antoinette, Jason Schwartzman as Louis the 16th, even Molly Shannon and Shirley Henderson as Louis' aunts Sophie and Victoire. Adding to the mix is the very accomplished British actress Judy Davis as Comtesse DE Noailles, head supervisor of etiquette at the court of Versailles and Rip Torn as the old King Louis the 15th. This film isn't about the complete life of Marie Antoinette therefore it's not a biopic. The film's strongest focus is on Marie's difficult life at Versailles. Marie finds it challenging to please everyone and she turns heads with her inexperience and her continuous breaking of social customs and protocol. Marie's only role is to mother Louis the 16th's children, the heirs to the throne of France. For years, she is childless, owing to Louis' sexual dysfunction, upsetting the nation who consider her to be uninterested in her husband, in her people and caring only for parties, luxuries and an extravagant lifestyle of jewelry, gowns and pastries. When at last Marie gives birth and becomes Queen, her life becomes increasingly dull. She escapes the growing pressures at court and the disdain of her enemies by spending time at the fake country château of the Petit Trianon where she has established a small farm. She has a brief sexual affair with the Swedish Count Axel Von Fersen (Jamie Dornan), something which might not have occurred at all.
This film omits the Revolution and we hear of it only from word of mouth. The film never loses the perspective of Marie Antoinette. Also missing is the very significant Affair of the Necklace incident involving the thief Jeanne Remy, the Cardinal DE Rohan and a diamond necklace. The scandal ruined the Queen's reputation and made her very unpopular and hated by the people. The film is unnecessarily long and very hollow, highlighting on the stereotypical aspects of Marie Antoinette's life, the parties, the fashions and the excesses; the very things that made her a hated figure by the French. Kirsten Dunst is woefully miscast and delivers an unsatisfying performance. Clearly historical drama is not suited to her abilities as an actress. She never delves into the character's inner suffering and psychology, never gives us enough for us to care and sympathize. She's wooden and never becomes Marie Antoinette, she's just being Kirsten Dunst, modern comedienne in dress up. Jason Schwartzman is worse with the minimalist dialog and lifeless persona. He doesn't do anything with his character. The superior performances are from Judy Davis as the Countess DE Noailles and Marianne Faithful as the Empress Maria Teresa, minor roles and appearing only briefly in early portions of the film. We would benefit from at least one other person's perspective because Marie's life was sheltered from reality and her geography was limited to Versailles. Looking at this movie, we don't truly understand why they hated her in Paris, nor see just how seriously her position as Queen was threatened.
Perhaps the reason this film is terrible lies in the poor screenplay and bad writing. Coppola is better suited as director but not as writer. She might have done better by hiring a good writer. Her direction is generally good. The cinematography is excellent. There are beautiful vistas of the palace of Versailles and it's gardens, including also the Petit Trianon and the Queen's farm. The costumes may be over the top and far too colorful to be realistic and authentic but they are beautiful to look at. The cast and crew were allowed to film at the actual palace of Versailles. Only a few films have done this and it's good to know that it's not a fake set. This is a lovely movie visually but it's an insubstantial film with unimpressive writing. and acting. It also suffers from the fact that it wants to take itself seriously as a historical drama but it's far from it. On the plus side, Coppola did her homework and the details of Marie's frustration at Versailles is accurate. Everything is generally faithful to the real events of Marie's time in Versailles such as her correspondence with her mother Empress Maria Teresa and the visit by the concerned brother Josef. But in many ways, this film falls into the genre of experiment because Coppola lost track of the more personal tragedy and human side of Marie Antoinette. We never see her being a good mother and wife, both of which she truly was. Another downside is the modern music for the soundtrack. Although Coppola has a few excerpts of Baroque and late 18th century classical music as well as opera, she also varies it with modern pop which is unnecessary and freakishly anachronistic. Coppola seems to want us to relate to Marie with the heavy emphasis on modern attitudes by Kirsten's performance, but she fails miserably because it just doesn't suit a period film which should be restricted to the milieu and the attitudes of the people of that long ago period, which has no immediate connection with our modern society. This film could have been better if Coppola had opted to make a serious drama about the life and death of Marie Antoinette and the events of the French Revolution. Only the cinematography and lavish costumes are worth watching.