Sherpa's Wonderin's

Gidget Goes to Versailles

Esperanza asked me to elaborate further on my feelings about Marie Antoinette. I’m still not sure how I really feel about the film; on the one hand its one of the most beautifully filmed movies I’ve seen in a while, and the costuming is fabulous. However, the film is dreadfully uneven and would’ve been a far better film if the last 30 minutes would have been lopped off.
To begin with, I’m not as hostile to Kirsten Dunst as I am to Keanu Reeves. The only role I really hated her in was Spiderman II (which ironically, is one of the few roles Kelli and others like her in) but other than that, she’s tolerable. In this film she’s fine for the first 90 minutes or so (the film is 123 minutes) but once tragedy hits, Kirsten Dunst fades and falters. However, one review said Sophia Coppola (the writer and director) did this deliberately to show that Marie Antoinette was in too deep. Sophia Coppola also hints at Antoinette’s loneliness and naiveté, but I don’t think Dunst expands on this. In the end, I come away thinking that Dunst didn’t do a lot for the role.
I’ve liked Jason Schwartzman (he’s so dreamy*) since Rushmore, he’s laughably bad as King Louis the 16th. However, once again maybe Coppola cast her cousin in this role to show how inept the king was. I’m still chuckling over one scene where King Louis is congratulating soldiers back from the America and uses the word “awesome,” I believe. Schwartzman however says one line “We are too young to rule,” that foreshadows Antoinette’s and his actions as King and Queen.
While I’m on the subject of actors, Jamie Dornan stood out. Not just the fact that he’s incredibly hot but he’s incredibly charismatic, not unlike Heath Ledger in “Ten Things I hate about you.
I’m not a big fan of films like Romeo and Juliet (DiCaprio version), etc. but I didn’t mind the “historical revisionism” in this film. I don’t consider that to be one of the film’s weaknesses. Most of the music in this film rocks and I liked it with the film.
The causes of the French Revolution is fascinating, however this film just glances over why the French Revolution happened. Although they don’t directly affect Antoinette personally, ultimately they cause her demise. I found myself spending most of the film waiting for the “good stuff,” and realized at the end that there wasn’t any real intrigue or drama in this show.
The historical chapter that brought us the Scarlet Pimpernel managed to get a boring treatment in this film—something I thought to be nearly impossible until now.
I agree with Ann Hornaday’s comment that Marie Antoinette will polarize viewers, but I think she’s giving the film too much credit when she says, “With "Marie Antoinette," she has delivered a richly textured, swiftly moving and surprisingly insightful story that resonates far deeper than just the occasional glimpse of a Converse peeking out from the chintz or snippet of a Gang of Four song.”
Lastly, I’d say go see it. Don’t pay full price for it, but wait and see it at the dollar theater. I’d see it at a theater because on DVD, you’ll lose some of the effect of the beauty of the show (the cinematography is spectacular). Keep your expectations low, forget how wonderful “Lost in Translation,” was and go have a good time gawking at the costumes.

*While I really like Schwartzman, he is in no way a "dreamboat." Well, he was kind of hot in Huckabees.