Coppola's History Epic Crappola.

Rating: 1/10 (8 September 2008)

How about SOME historical accuracy, dearie? If this film had been limited to those portions possessing Marie Antoinette's character & events in her life, the repetitive sequences reduce to 2 occurrences, its time length would be 45 minutes max. At the length and the material Coppola bestows, it would be tragic showing this to students saying it provides a better understanding of the French Revolution. Heck no it doesn't! What was she & the scriptwriters of this rubbish thinking??? Sofia's warping history is inexcusable as all she had to do was access the Internet or open a book about her subject for longer than a second.
The largest chunk of historical accuracy takes place prior to her meeting her husband. Beyond thatOther than those time-gulping levees, more significant events in her life & aspects of her character crops up here & there, more often than not their durations so fleeting, this French Revolution aficionado was outraged. Just ONE scene she's mocking older peopleDauphine & Queen, she antagonized Versallies' old guard with this behavior. A brief scene she attends a masked ball. Instead after the soon grating levee, I'm treated to overly long sequences of gambling, shopping, gulping down pastries--& where did Coppola learn Marie Antoinette ate that much food & Poligiac (sp) snorted coke? Perhaps the coke snorter was Lamballe; really couldn't distinguish one from the other.
All this divinely packaged fluff Sofia throws in is at the expense of the feather-brained, tragic queen's true story. Having primary filming done at the real Versallies does not an authentic Marie Antoinette film make. The Dauphine vs. Du Barry portion arrives suddenly & in the wrong portion of her time-lineIt's one of Marie Antoinette's first slip-ups after marrying Louis. Lambelle & Poligac (sp) are cameos. There's a scene lasting two minute tops mentioning those pamphlets running down her reputation--The fluff over those scandal stirring hand-outs that were a major contributor in pulling down the monarchy. There's 2 long scenes of Louis discussing the American Revolution with advisers but its never emphasized the cost the Monarchy paid for offering aid to the Americans. 4 me, this 2006 version's worst deviation IS Louis XVICould NOT get past the manner Coppola packages him. Throughout the film there's no powdered wig, remains tanned & relatively club med trimWhat in the name of God??? There's not the slightest effort taken to align his appearance with 18th century paintings or coins. The bulky actor playing Fersen or the one playing her brother given make up to appear youthful would make slightly better choices.
Kirsten Dunst in the title role is goodbut enjoying her acting is sidelined by the gross historical inaccuracies and even grosser soundtrack. Only modern song I liked is "I Love Candy." Modern Marie Antoinette's soundtrack puts me in mind of a Knight's Tale. BTW, Knight's Tale appeals to me now as that's obviously a satire.
Compared 1938's Shearer vehicle, 2006's tackling the Diamond necklace affair is horrendously minuscule. The earlier film's changing of Rohan from a priest reflects how priests were held in higher regard in the 1930sbut it's also the major change the earlier movie makes in detailing that turning point in Marie Antoinette' fortunes. New film, hm, recall 3 short scenes but don't recall the lines uttered by anyone in their being lackluster. From what is publicly known of her relations with Fersen, Marie Antoinette 2006's treatment was nothing less than jaw-dropping improbable. She would not risk everything sleeping with the man as debates would arise over the legitimacy of her children. A great mother, Marie Antoinette would not endure seeing her children harmed.
The approaching revolution, like the Du Barry incident, is treated with little substance. The disgruntled peasants at last show up to storm Versallies. Where were the poor heretofore in this junk? But for all the inaccurate Louis, the protracted levee, the lavishness trappings is that incomplete,silly ending! Okay Sofia, you don't want to go into Marie's sufferings but... There should have been an epilogue prior to the credits detailing what happened to her. And some one tell me why else Sofia stopped the movie where she did other than running over movie's budget due to paying rent to film in Versailles, clothes, cake