Listonixio
Fresh and Exciting
Gutsycurene
Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.
Plustown
A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.
jglass1
The film's production value is in league with the best sci-fi films; yet it was a legit piece about European Court in the 17th Century and the impact of the monarchical system of government on love, money, culture and politics. If you've ever experienced an unrequited or forbidden (not illicit) love, you'll empathize with the plight of François Vatel, played by Gérard Depardieu, whose performance is characteristically excellent. The movie's historical elements offer a surprising look at the available technology, even if the applications were anticipated. The love story is not original (stations interfere with true, but conflicted, love), but the context and visual surroundings -- and the fact that it is historically based -- add an unexpected dimension to the viewing, which is best appreciated on a large screen.
rosscinema
This film is considered a major flop and the French absolutely abhor it in every sense. I decided to view it and remain neutral and just let the film play out without having read the bad reviews beforehand. Story is set in Chantilly, France in 1671 and a broke nobleman named Prince de Conde (Julian Glover) has decided to throw a 3 day feast for Louis XIV (Julian Sands) and all of his royal friends with the hope that if he is impressed enough he will commission the Prince to General as war looms with Holland. Conde has put the 3 day feast and all of the entertainment in the hands of Francois Vatel (Gerard Depardieu) who can work magic when it comes to preparing feasts even though he may not have enough food. Vatel is a patient man full of loyalty and honor and ethics. At times he is forced to tell some of the royal guests "No" to certain extravagances and this has caught the eye of Anne de Montausier (Uma Thurman) who has become the Kings new mistress and also has to repel the advances of the Marquis de Lauzun (Tim Roth).
*****SPOILER ALERT*****While the King is playing cards he asks Conde to put up Vatel as part of a bet and Conde reluctantly agree's. Conde loses and Vatel is given the news that he must pack his bags and get ready to head to Versailles. Vatel is so crushed by his loyalty being ignored that he kills himself. This film was directed by Roland Joffe who had given everyone a truly horrible adaptation of "The Scarlett Letter" and I don't think this film is anywhere near as bad as that although several critics will say otherwise. The look of the film is very impressive and the Art Design was nominated for an Oscar. Good cinematography make this a visual delight but the story seems to be another story. I do recommend this film and I'll first tell what I liked about it. First, I though Depardieu gave a convincing performance and his loyalty was very evident in his characterization. He convincingly played a man sworn to do the best he can and asks of nothing in return. Secondly, even though a romance between Thurman and Depardieu seems very unlikely I did understand why she would admire him. How can anyone not be touched by his tenderness and morals. But I have to admit that the story could have been a lot better if more had been explained about Vatel. We watch Vatel in this film spend too much time poking his fingers in pots and tasting the food. Of course all of royalty is portrayed as spoiled snobs and it's now become cliche to show them in this light. This film caused a ruckus when it opened at Cannes because the script was rewritten by an Englishman from a French story and it was filmed in English. The bad reviews were all aimed at Joffe and I'm not sure if his career will ever be the same. This film does have some glaring flaws but I suggest to people that if they view it to do so with a fair and open mind. I do think Depardieu is good in this film and Thurman isn't bad either. I think it's worth a look.
tedg
Spoilers herein.A terrific script, one which appears to be concerned with class imprisonment but is far more clever. The key notion here is self-reference.Vatel is a producer of lush entertainments, presented to us by -- a producer of lush entertainments. Though only the translation is by Stoppard, this is the most Stoppardian of notions: to amuse us with a story about people just as greedy as ourselves for luxurious entertainment -- and to please while condemning.The story goes farther into the truth: all entertainers are slaves, prostitutes. The game for an artist is one of drawing lines between that slavery and the noble joys of creation. Vatel does what he does because his obnoxious sponsors provide him the means to do what he desires. That's all, or not all because he needs the applause.Also in Stoppardian fashion, we have Roth (Guildenstern , Mitchel, Vincent) there to tell us the terrible truth about ourselves. The plot involves competing attentions to Uma's character -- essentially a sweet whore with canaries -- and Vatel, the grand coordinator of revels. He is pulled by the King and his present employer as well as sexually by the King's brother. He wins the admiration (and protection) of that brother in refusing his advances by noting their common perversion in the quest for perfection.How perfect for this film to be lacking the salt of engaging drama, that excuse we normally give for watching. How perfect that we collectively reject it because it is merely beautiful.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching
dbdumonteil
This is a movie made for His Majesty Gérard Depardieu,with an absurd supporting cast and lots and lots of wasted money. Depardieu is everywhere in the movie and reduces the others characters to walk-ons.Roland Joffé films everything he can,and tries to impress the audience with fireworks,audacious camera tricks,Fellini-inspired settings but he does not create anything.The Sun King is featured but he pales into insignificance ,which is a shame all the same!His brother is first shown as a wicked perverse man (in the French tradition:for that matter,take a look at the "Angélique "series)when the historians describe him as an admittedly gay man but a human being who was courageous,generous with the vanquished at war,and finally gentle(see "Monsieur,frère du roi" by Philippe Erlanger).At least his last line shows his real nature but it's too little too late.But the biggest bomb is Tim Roth's Lauzun!The duc de Lauzun was a Gascon ,who was always cracking jokes ,a bon vivant,fond of women ,so insolent that he was finally sent to the Pignerol jail where he met again Vatel's former master,Nicolas Fouquet -the movie briefly hints at him-.Tim Roth's sullen face is by no means duc de Lauzun,this joker who would marry the king 's cousin ,la grande Mademoiselle,a spinster,for her dough:oddly this colorful dowager does not appear at all.Montespan,La Vallière do,but they do walk-on parts.(Only one line each:Montespan:"I'm coming up" Vallière:'I'm coming down",the only touch of humor in the whole movie) Queen Marie-Therèse is not well portrayed either:she was rather ugly,gauche and self-effacing.Here she seems to outshine Montespan,which is rather odd!
