ThiefHott Too much of everything

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

denis888 La Révolution française is an outstanding piece of cinema. Made with high budget and awesome cast of world-level stars, this is an incredible depiction of deeply tragic events of French Revolution of the 18th Century. Some critics pointed, however, that the film suffered from its neutrality, which resulted in a lack of point of view and in some incoherence. The first part, which dealt with a rather complex historical subject, was also criticized for its disjointed pacing. The second part was considered more gripping and dramatic. Jean-François Balmer received great praise for his portrayal of a rather sympathetic Louis XVI, and Andrzej Seweryn was considered very convincing as Robespierre. I can only add that this is a Must see and a real severe warning to all of all - revolution is evel, with a Capital E, and it leads only to deaths, suffering, blood, tears, pain, loss, desperation and tragedy.

neilgalligan I found this film disappointing. I hoped it would bring to life the French Revolution in an educational yet entertaining way. The film was successful in outlining key characters in the history and told the story in a straightforward manner, if rather focused on key individuals, rather than wider society. However, I feel it really failed to convey a real sense of the excitement, exhilaration, hope and horror that make the French Revolution a key moment in the history of the world. The film had all the hallmarks of having been made for TV: unimaginative camera angles, bad lighting, predictable slow pace etc. For a film which centers around an epic historical event it isn't a patch on Cromwell, The Passion of Christ or The Great Escape for example. It just dragged on, and at six hours long this isn't surprising. Having said all that, it is worth watching as a brief introduction to the events of the time.

ymatusevich This is absolutely the best film on French revolution, and maybe on any revolution. Unfortunately, it is very hard to find, very very hard. I have been trying for years. A must. Brandauer is absolutely believable and stunning. He is my favorite actor anyway and he is, by far, the best Danton, although I do love Depardieu's performance. I saw this film ten years ago in France and still cannot forget it. Since then I have been trying to purchase it for my classes and for my students and have been unsuccessful so far. They keep it like a big secret. I never understood why. Maybe because the revolution was shown in its true colors? Even in France this film is not shown very often, hard to find and not known enough. The dialogs are fantastic, all acting fabulous. Highly recommended.

dbdumonteil This very long saga (5 hours +) was divided into two parts "les Années Lumières "(1789-1792) and "les Années Terribles " (1792-1794)It was the most ambitious work dealing with the FRench Revolution since Jean Renoir's "la Marseillaise" (1937).Renoir's work ended with the storming of the Tuileries and the fall of the royalty,like part one directed by Robert Enrico does.Renoir's work was filmed in the gleeful days of the front populaire ,thanks to a fund raised by the CGT (an union).It was a commissioned film.So was "la Revolution Française" , made in 1989,to commemorate the bicentennial.Leftist critics panned the movie,mainly because of the collaboration of right-wing historian Jean Tulard-who is one of the best specialists of the French cinema though-Ah!politics!"La Revolution française " is no masterpiece:it looks like a huge illustrated history book peppered with famous quotations by Louis XVI,Mirabeau,Danton,et al.It's a succession of tableaux ,a la Sacha Guitry (but without humor,except for one scene I will come back to later),quite entertaining.A minor quibble would be complaining about the use of foreign actors:why English actors for Marie-Antoinette (who was Austrian!the French told her so a lot!)and Mirabeau?A German one for Danton?An American for La Fayette?On the other hand,Axel Fersen,who was Swedish is played by a Frenchie.Only commercial reasons (to give the production the aura of an international Hollywood epic?)could have led the producers to such a dubious move.One must notice that Sacha Guitry was more honest when he cast in "si Versailles m'était conté" Orson Welles as Franklin.Best performance,without being a chauvinist,comes from a French:Jean-François Balmer is the best Louis XVI I've ever seen.He manages to portray the king without falling into a caricature ;a brilliant mixture of mediocrity and dignity,he's the king modern historians could recognize(even the detractors gave Balmer's rendition thumbs up).Epic scenes are generally good:the storming of the Bastille is quite successful.The reading of "la Declaration Des Droits de l'Homme" is the most moving sequence ,as the movie-camera goes from a group of people to another one,beginning with little children.People familiar with the French national anthem will find some tune changes in the version which the soldiers sing en route to Paris.A very funny sequence which Sacha Guitry would not disown:Dr Guillotin shows Louis the King his latest invention:the then-unknown guillotine ."It can be improved ,says Louis,a round blade will not be effective ,why not use a blade in the shape of a knife ,of a saw,triangular?".How apt! Part two begins with the royal family's incarceration and ends with Robespierre's fall in the Summer of 1794.Since Balmer (Louis XVI) disappears ,and for a good reason, in the first half-hour,it's Klaus Maria Brandauer who walks away with the honors in this second episode.His Danton is a Bon Vivant,nice ,adored by the crowds,in a nutshell,the hero whom we're supposed to side with.Robespierre ,on the other hand ,is a hard-line persona,he's obviously the perfect villain .And if this is not enough ,their respective sidekicks (Camille Desmoulins and Saint-Just) follow suit.A ridiculous slow-motion sequence shows the people on the way to happiness after Max was guillotined.And the last lines of the movie are simply words which Danton utters earlier.That is to say this history lesson is one-sided.Danton/Robespierre are both more than the good and the bad ,they are actually (and mainly the latter) complex personalities the movie cannot grasp.Because the movie ,although very appealing,tries too hard ,they are too many things which occur on the screen,and the writers wanted to put everything.And we get everything:from "les Tricoteuses " (the knitters who used to work near the guillotine" to Danton's "show my head to the crowd,it's worth the trouble" ,from Marie-Antoinette's "I appeal to all the mothers..." to the rarely filmed "Fete de l'Etre Supreme" ,a Robespierre's attempt to restore a "secular" religion,from the horrible September massacres (where nothing is spared the audience -especially Princesse de Lamballe's terrible fate) to the romantic tragic Camille and Lucile Desmoulins love story.And if it's not enough,they lay it on sick:Marie -Antoinette could not see her husband leave for the scaffold...but in the movie,behind her bars ,she could.By the way,it's Jane Seymour's real son (Sean Flynn)who plays the Dauphin!A vital scene is botched :the king's trial ;his own COUSIN(!) ,the notorious Philippe-Egalité sentenced Louis to death,and he's nowhere to be seen on the screen ;the movie only shows the "death" votes and passes over in silence the fact that only a small majority led the king to the guillotine.This second part is more spirited than the first.But anyway the guillotine scenes with Christopher Lee as the emcee(!)have on everyone an unhealthy but real fascination.Brr!