The Scarlet Pimpernel

1999
7.4| 0h30m| en
Synopsis

A series of television drama programmes loosely based on Baroness Emmuska Orczy's series of novels, set in 1793 during the French Revolution. It stars Richard E. Grant as the hero, Sir Percy Blakeney, and his eponymous alter ego. The first series also starred Elizabeth McGovern as his wife Marguerite and Martin Shaw as the Pimpernel's archrival, Paul Chauvelin. Robespierre was played by Ronan Vibert. It was filmed in the Czech Republic and scored by a Czech composer, Michal Pavlíček.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped
Pluskylang Great Film overall
Bergorks If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.
Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.
munchkin4880 I swear I saw more additions then the three that I see. I love these stories and I remember watching more on TV then what I have been able to fine. We have the 1st one, where his wife finds out who he really is. Then we have the 2nd one where Percy and his wife go to Paris to rescue the french girl who is in hiding. And then we have the 3rd one where they rescue the heir to the French throne. I have looked for them online, but don't see them anywhere. I know there are at least more. One where his wife dies in child birth, and I think there are more. Does anyone else know what I am talking about? And if they do, can they help me find them? please email me at munchkin4880@msn.com
Liza-19 I'll confess, I've never read the books. I have however seen several productions of the play onstage and I prefer this beautiful miniseries by far. All of the productions I've seen before cast elderly men with cute lines but no charisma. The choice of Richard E. Grant for the Scarlet Pimpernel surprised me, but he did a wonderful job with it. I was very surprised by his performance, as I'd only ever known him as a supporting/character actor (like Twelfth Night and Gosford Park). As a life-long Elizabeth McGovern fan, I can't help but love her. She's a fantastic actress, but whoever did her hair should be guillotined. For a really beautiful woman, they hid it well under ten pounds of brown wig. It sadly resulted in her looking much older than she actually is, but fortunately this isn't the case for the entire movie (at least at the end she gets a haircut!) But her striking features still shine through and her beautiful performance far outweighs that hairstyle. She also manages her accent very well (she's originally from Illinois) But, well, I watched the whole miniseries just for her, so I can't help but think she's the real star. Ronan Vibert is another actor I've liked for a long time, and he did a fantastic job as Robespierre. Martin Shaw's Chauvelin got on my nerves a bit, but he's fine. The big surprise was sweet little Emilia Fox in the role of Minette. I'd never seen her play a villain before, and was pretty impressed by it. All in all, I really enjoyed this miniseries, and highly recommend it.
suessis ... this film would be a turkey. Whoever cast Elizabeth McGovern as Lady Blakeney in this film needs to have their eyes, ears, and brain checked by a competent physician. She is TERRIBLE. Also the studio needs to withhold whatever they paid the hair, makeup, and costuming people from their next paychecks because they only made the situation worse. She LOOKS as bad as she ACTS. McGovern is not the only problem here, but she is a major one as her bad performance detracts from the overall film. It doesn't help that the the script is boring and slow in some places and some of the extras look like they have no clue. Only really good supporting player in this film is Emilia Fox.The only thing that makes this thing watchable at all is the performances of Richard E. Grant and Martin Shaw (ALTHOUGH the British HAVE to start using REAL French people to play French people!). Both are fantastic in this. Especially Grant who gives new depth to the Pimpernel character. Something of a rough edge. I would still go rent the classic with Leslie Howard anyway.
ynque This is by far the most repulsive and atrocious version of The Scarlet Pimpernel ever to be devised. As a Pimpernel fan, I was sincerely offended by what they did to the characters--but this atrocity is not worth watching, even if you aren't familiar with the story.Percy Blakeney, for example, would never stab people in the back just to get down a hallway. Chauvelin would never have a string of women in his bed. Marguerite never had an affair with Chauvelin, nor Armand with Minette, whoever the heck she is. Chauvelin would not randomly shoot Tony in the head. Chauvelin's name is not, nor has it ever been, Paul. They have completely eradicated any reference to the Pimpernel's disguises, replacing them instead with James Bond-esque gadgets and gizmos.As to the film itself... The makeup is horrifying. The women look like clowns. Elizabeth McGovern's beauty mark wanders around her face at random. The poor, pitiable actors have no script to work with, so it's not really their fault that their characters are as thin as wet tissue paper. The dialogue... oh, the dialogue. The dialogue is unbearable. And whoever is responsible for all those little captions at the bottom of the screen should be forced to watch this movie as penance. (I counted 13 location captions in the first half-hour before I gave up. As if we can't figure out that the body of water between England and France is the English Channel.)The film--if I can bring myself to call it that, since it's really just videotape with a filter--is absolutely without redeeming value. Do not waste your time and brain cells on this rancid drivel--instead, go watch the 1982 Anthony Andrews/Jane Seymour version, or the 1934 Leslie Howard film, or indeed ANYTHING but this one.