Marie Antoinette

Marie Antoinette

Marie Antoinette

Marie Antoinette

Fairly accurate Historical Drama of the life of Marie Antoinette from when she left Austria (age 15 in 1770) to marry the Dauphin of France through her demise via guillotine (1793) in the chaos of the French Revolution. The beautiful Arch Dutchess, Princess of the house of Hapsburg, daughter of Empress Marie Theresa, Queen of Austria and Hungry & Francis 1, Holy Roman Emperor, foresees a glorious future with her marriage to the dauphin of France. Marie envisions palaces, magnificent jewels, breathing taking gowns & servants. All she dreams of comes true only for it to be swept away during the Reign of Terror. Norma Shearer brings her graceful elegance to the role of the Queen in this epic production, which is as vast & luxurious as the era it portrays. Thousands of yards of satin & lace, a then gigantic 1.8 dollar million budget plus hundreds of extras made this movie one of the most opulent epic's of the 30's & shall forever shine as one of the most glamorous ever made. Norma Shearer's nomination for an Academy Award was well deserved but, unfortunately she was up against another actress in equally powerful role & the award went to Bette Davis in Jezebel & though I love the movie Jezebel I wished Norma Shearer had won. Shearer's very powerful role was a great challenge which she met with great skill. Her delightful performance makes this a film to be cherished as we see her as a giddy youth while she enjoys being the dauphine, flirtatious nature with Count Fersen, loving queen to Louis XVI, anxious escapee during Flight to Varennes, horrified spouse when she learns of her husbands fate, terrified parent when her child is taken from her & dignified condemned prisoner as she rides in the cart & up the stairs to die are all moments is this wonderful movie than begin when the movie begins & wont ever end in your mind. Truly a magnificent actress in her most glorious role which she brought to life as if she herself lived the part, and who knows, perhaps she did. It's interesting to note that the leading actors/actresses within this movie bear a strong resemblance to the people they portray. In reality Fersen was fair haired, but the facial resemblance is uncanny to say the least. No doubt MGM's way of making the movie more realistic. Definitely among my 10 favorite movies of all time.

I first saw this excellent and powerful story on television sometime in the late 50's or early 60's, and had not seen it since until I caught it on television more than 40 years later. The powerful impression the story made on me had not dimmed with the passage of time. Norma Shearer, who here was toward the end of her career, puts in a topnotch performance as the doomed, conflicted dauphine and queen, which serves as the core of the film. Robert Morley gives us a superb portrayal of the dim and well-meaning but hopelessly incompetent Louis XVI. Joseph Schildkraut's portrayal of d'Orleans is a classic study in unctuous treachery. John Barrymore shines in his short appearances as the dauphin's father. The weakest major part, for my money, is Tyrone Power, whose box office appeal as far as I can see seems to have been rooted more in sex appeal than in acting ability. Not being sufficiently versed in the actual history I suspect the relation between Marie and Powers' Count Axel was blown up or perhaps even invented for drawing power, and indeed I find the film's weakest parts the rather purple moments between the two which do seem to encroach into the realm of melodrama. However, the powerful closing scene of Marie - prematurely old and broken - ascending the gibbet with memories of her girlish fancies ("Think of it! I shall be Queen of France!") is one of the great moments of cinema. Altogether a rich, sumptuous and multifacted portrayal of a tragic story which does pretty well by the historical reality.

A legend in France tells that Julien Duvivier was involved in this film;if he really did something,it was probably minimal;an educated man like him would have been scared by the numerous historical errors of the film. Here are some of them: -Never Louis XV spoke of sending the dauphine back to where she once belonged,in Austria.The quarrel with Madame du Barry is pure fiction:M.A. spoke once to the favorite ,she said " There are many people here today in Versailles."She never addressed her afterward. -Louis XVI was not the moron we see in the film.He was actually an educated man.When he was in jail,he would teach his son maths,history ,geography and other subjects.He was not made to be king,that's true ,and all that follows Louis XV 's death is accurate .He reportedly said to his distraught wife :"What a misfortune,we're too young to reign!".He used to go hunting (his favorite pastime) but he was not the half-wit depicted in Van Dyke's film. -The Royal family was not imprisoned in Le Temple just after the night of Varennes.That escape took place on the 20th of June 1791.The storming of the Tuileries (not included in the movie for a good reason)happened on August ,the 10th 1792;the fall of the monarchy and the Republic followed in September the same year. -But the queen's last night takes the biscuit!Fersen in her dungeon,no less! Forget history,and you have a wonderful show,a novel based on M.A.'s life.There are many remarkable things all along the viewing: M.A. in the corridors of her palace,in Vienna ,where her mother tells her "You shall be queen of France" . The sentence will come back ,quite rightly so,in the last pictures. The affair of the necklace,told in admirable succinct style;the scene when the queen learns that the cardinal de Rohan is free ,while arriving at the opera theater,is a great dramatic idea. The longest night of June,which tragically ended in Varenne is given an adequate dark treatment where only the torches lighten the forest or the village. The scene which climaxes the movie is the Royal family's last supper.Here Robert Morley transcends the limitation he is working under ,and makes Louis XVI a clever sensitive man :the rapport he has with his child was obvious in real life and all rings true.The broken soldier's story will intensely move you.Besides ,it was a good idea to film M.A.'s and the dauphin's separation just after the king's death (actually ,the king died on the 21th of January 1793,and M.A. was separated from her child in the following Summer) cause it increases tenfold the queen's tragedy.This scene lasted one hour!one hour! When she left LE Temple for la Conciergerie (where you can visit her dungeon today),the queen said:"Nothing can hurt me now."

I was delighted to see this at the rental store because I absolutely adore Norma Shearer and had yet to see this piece of work. Overall it was very nice, with extravagant costumes (This must have been high up on Liberace's top 100 list), good acting, and fantastic directing. The only thing I have a major problem with is the fact that the director tried to cram in too much of her life into the span of only 2 and a half hours. You first start the movie with Marie Antoinette finding out she is to be married to Louis the XVI, then during the film so much goes on that you sort of have a hard time keeping up with how much time has past in her life, until finally you get to the crucial part in the film where her and her husband are to be executed. I don't know much about her life so I honestly have no idea how much they left out, but as a regular film watcher, I found this piece to be just wonderful. Norma Shearer did such a great job near the end, when she was about to be beheaded. When Count Axel de Fersen comes down the stairs into her dungeon to bid her a final fairwell, you really get the feeling that she is just completely drained with all emotion by the simple look in her eyes. I must admit to shedding some tears during that scene. Another highly recommended film. 8/10

One hundred and fifty-seven minutes of lavish romance, intrigue, and politics, dished up by MGM's superb spectacle factory. There's an "entre act" and everything. The problem, for me anyway, is that the thing is so exquisitely dull. The first half -- before the entre act, that is -- is a kind of late 18th-century soap opera. Norma Shearer is the young Austrian bride of the future king of France, Louis XVI, played by Robert Morley as impotent and inept but not unkind. When Shearer learns of this arranged marriage, she positively kvells. "Oh, just think of it! I'll be the Queen of France!" Things don't turn out all that well for her, though. (Do they ever, in these genre movies?) She's resented as a foreigner and barbarian at the French court, especially by the waspish Madame DuBarry, the consort of Morley's grandfather, the current king. Such gossip you never heard. And then there's Morley's apparent indifference to her. ("I like to be alone.") What's a girl to do? She drowns her sorrows in wine and flings with lovers in seriatim. This is nice work, if you can get it. You get to indulge yourself in every sensory modality known to man or beast -- AND you get the sympathy of the audience too, because they know you're just being flighty out of a desperate loneliness. The second half turns a little darker, but then, as they say, it's always darkest just before it turns completely black. By this time Morley has come around enough to give Shearer two children, from whom she is of course eventually separated, giving the audience a reason for still more tears. Let's see. I checked the spoiler box so I guess I can give away the ending: Marie Antoinette gets her head lopped off. Kids, I hope I didn't ruin it for you but, see, this is the French Revolution and revolutionaries tend not to be very kind. All through history, it seems that some merciless dictator, like a king, mistreats his subjects until they depose him. Then they show that, unlike him, they are full of New-Testatment-mercy by slaughtering the deposed ruler, his family, and anybody who was ever associated with him. (Fidel Castro worked his way down to mailmen.) At that, the peasants are treated in this movie with the contempt the writers think they deserve. What an uncouth bunch! Shearer explains the unrest to her children this way: We didn't do anything, but they're ignorant and unhappy and must take it out on somebody. In this movie, nobody ever says "Let 'em eat cake." Most of the cast overact, but this is understandable because it's common to the period. I don't know what "charisma" is supposed to mean these days. It was originally used to describe the quality of someone who was blessed by God and exuded a magnetism that was religious in its properties. Now, the word is slung around loosely to describe rock stars. Whatever it is, and however it's measured, I don't think Norma Shearer has any. Joseph Schildkraut, effete and painted like a mannequin, gives the best performance. Robert Morley seems to have only one note on his instrument. In a relatively minor role as Shearer's one true love, Tyrone Power has a part that is familiar to devotees of these kinds of movies. The woman is haunted by demons, surrounded by knaves, impostors, ninnies, and exploiters -- and this is the only man who will return from time to time to rescue her from some folly or to reassure her with his understanding and candor. (Cf., Paul Newman in "I'll Cry Tomorrow" or Sam Shepherd in "Frances".) This must have been an eye opener in 1938. Today it seems stale and bound by conventions common to genre films. Anyone who wants a more balanced and adult point of view should see Ronald Coleman in "A Tale of Two Cities." It would be a far, far better thing to do. It will jerk almost as many tears but it will challenge you too.

This is an incredibly long and tedious film that looks good. It's obvious that MGM pulled out all the stops and put the full might of the studio into producing a glossy and spectacular bio-pic about the life of Marie Antoinette. It's just too bad that they didn't spend more money on the writing or considered making a shorter movie. Instead, it is a bloated and ponderous film that just seems to go on forever! It truly was an endurance contest trying to watch all this film! Much of the problem was the result of spending so much time focused on her life post 1789. In real life, she lived about two years before ultimately being executed but this time was spend mostly in prison and isn't exactly interesting. Also, although in some ways she may be considered a victim, the royals of France were so disconnected from the people and so indifferent to their lives that I had no sympathy for the character and would have gladly chopped off her head myself if it could have somehow shortened the movie! Avoid it--there are much better costume dramas!

MARIE ANTOINETTE is an amazingly lush production. The details on screen is at times staggering. The production team is to be credited for such an eye filling spectacle. With that said, the film doesn't really work. The script is badly conceived and its main star is as dull as a star can be. First the script: it spends a lot of time on Marie Antoinette and very little time on why or how the revolution started. Little histrionic moments are blown up to gargantuan proportions and yet important events about her or the French Revolution are all but forgotten. The script is totally ill-conceived and no amount of great direction or production values can overcome this major weakness. Three quarters of the film revolves around MA and then suddenly, there's a revolution is in full swing. There's no smooth transition between the main storyline from MA to the French Revolution, which just happens almost out of nowhere. The switch in storyline is abrupt and jarring. The second major liability is its star: Norma Shearer. Shearer is an actress of limited range and after watching her for almost three hours, her limited range became increasingly obvious with each passing minute. Whether she's getting married or when she falls in love with handsome Tyrone Power or when the peasants storm the Château, Shearer's expression hardly changes. As Marie Antoinette and her family try to escape the tumult, the stagecoach they're escaping in is eventually stopped by an angry crowd. The crowd is overwhelming and the situation is wrought with tension. So how does Norma react when the stage coach is stopped? She bites her lip. But even actors of limited range can get away with this problem when they have star power or screen presence. Sadly, Norma has little or no star power. This is my first film with Norma Shearer and it's probably going to be my last. Shearer has zero star quality. She is as bland as can be. It also doesn't help that she's way too old to play the part. But again, this wouldn't have been a problem if she had some sort of screen presence. The odd part of this spectacular film is that it's a feast for the eyes and in the middle of all of it is this bland, boring presence we have to watch for nearly three hours. Watching Norma Shearer in MARIE ANTOINETTE is like being handed a plate of tofu amidst a table filled with every conceivable meal imaginable. Everything, and I mean everything, including Robert Morley, outshines her. I give 10 stars for the production values and excellent supporting cast. If you watch MARIE ANTOINETTE for the sets and costumes, you won't be disappointed. Just don't expect some compelling performance from its star.