Own the rights?
13 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :- One of the greatest historical movie., 27 January 2002 Author: Patrick from Montreal
This is one of my all time favorite movie and probably the best historical movie ever. One of the few movies featuring 3 of the best french actors (in leading roles): Philippe Noiret, Jean Richefort and Jean-Pierre Marielle. This movie is about how cynical France was ruled after the death of Louis XIV and while the new (Louis XV) was just a child. Don't expect a spectacular movie with great action and bloody violence (like Gladiator or Brave Heart). The pleasure with this movie is somewhere else: dialogs (brilliant), description of cynicism of the nobility and the actors performances (Jean Rochefort, playing L'Abbé Dubois, stoled the show).
11 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :- Very accurate historical movie, 8 January 2004 Author: jos-destrooper from Belgium
It is unbelievable how the director Tavernier could recapture the mentality of this beginning of the 18th century which would lead to the French revolution. The wars of Louis XIV had ruined the country and the best thing the regent (an excellent Philippe Noiret but all the actors are excellent) could do was to avoid war, so they spend their time with feasts, manipulation, fraud and speculation. The mentality of the Noble of France is well described. There is (among others) an interesting dialogue between the regent and his nephew about the way the comte de Horn should be executed: it had never happened before (in this way: rouer) in France, and he only killed a speculator!. All those pretty details and the funny but accurate dialogues make of -this movie an unique historical document and at the same time it is a pleasure to see the movie again and again.
10 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :- amazing historical and psychological drama, 4 May 2005 Author: kalala from Washington DC
This is a film that has haunted me for thirty years. I just re-viewed it on DVD and it was every bit as good as I remembered. I don't know why it doesn't show up in festivals and best-of-all-times list; it is on mine. It is satisfyingly densely textured and the acting is flawless. It is rich in every way-- historically fascinating as it shows the tugging at the fibers of France that would eventually (but not quite yet) culminate in revolution, the many nuances of class resentment from the top down -- tension between royalty and nobility, generals and (would-be) clergy, and provincial gentry and their peasantry. Luxurious scenes and costumes and cinematography. Psychologically rich, terrific dialog, in the closely twined relationship between jaded nobility and ambitious bourgeois that plays out in a tug-of-war over the fate of Bretons. Philippe Noiret as the jaded regent is the ambiguous moral center, stoic yet decadent, embodying la patrie yet carving a private erotic niche apart from a world where his decision can tip the balance of European powers.
6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :- Correct historical account, 14 January 2004 Author: jos-destrooper from Belgium
This majestic movie reveals everything of that contrasting period after the reign of the "Roi Soleil". France was empty-blooded by the wars and de best thing the Régent of that moment could was to make peace with England. A Breton upraising supported by Spain was the worst case scenario. L'abbé Dubois is eager to become archbishop and everything he does, even the national politics is supported by his dream. We see the speculations about Missisipi and the first bank notes by the state. The Régent, Philippe Noiret, is a person who enjoys life and tries to avoid all problems. Against this, l'abbé Dubois and the nephew of the Régent seem to be the human beasts fueled by their ambition. The church is all powerful and the High Nobility without scruples. The state tries to populate la Louisiane by embarking prostitutes. The Régent seem to be the only good person of his time. This movie is a joy to watch again because of the sharp dialogue and the historical details.
4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :- Victims of history, 1 July 2007 Author: TrevorAclea from London, England
Bertrand Tavernier's second film as director, the lavish but almost completely forgotten Que la Fete Commence… aka Let Joy Reign Supreme, is much more unusual than the standard period piece, as you might expect from a film that begins with a priest threatening field mice with excommunication on the cliffs of Breton and constantly manages to marry the absurd with the humane against a vividly realised historical backdrop in a remarkable feat of cinematic juggling. Set during the controversial regency of the much-despised Philippe d'Orleans, who managed to antagonise both the aristocracy with his plans for land and tax reform and the peasants with his failure to improve their increasingly miserable lot, there's poison in its pen, but there's also real humanity too: Tavernier and co-writer Jean Aurenche are as interested in the people as politics, and most are treated as all too recognisably flawed rather than cartoonish stereotypes. The dialogue is at once witty and revealing, both on a historical and human level, conjuring up a wide-reaching portrait of an almost comically dangerous moment in history that takes in all strata of society but with an understanding of human nature constantly running through it that elevates it beyond the usual costume drama where costume and décor overwhelm everything.As the enlightened libertine whose attempt to rule a corrupt kingdom is at odds with his debauched nature, Philippe Noiret gives one of his very best performances, avoiding the temptation to slip into ham or caricature in favour of a remarkably controlled and quietly affecting portrait of world-weary wisdom and self-awareness. His grief over the death of his favourite daughter is all too believable, his reaction all-too recognisably human as he buries himself in work because "I still can't feel it, so I'm working while I still can." Even Jean Rochefort's Abbé Dubois, who tries to blow up impoverished Breton noble Jean-Pierre Marielle's farcical plot for independence into a major conspiracy to secure a vacant archbishop's post despite being neither a Catholic nor able to remember how to say Mass, somehow avoids becoming a cartoon, their bitterly comic relationship tinged with real sadness. Like Marielle's doomed revolutionary (a near-master class in comic timing), they are as much victims of history as of their own ambitions.Filmed with real panache and remarkable assurance (including many early examples of the long tracking shots Tavernier is so fond of), it constantly undercuts the picture-book image of the period. The Court of Versailles is so rat-infested that no-one thinks anything of nobles picking up a dead rodent or of police constables walking around with buckets for aristos to pee in, while the streets are filled with royal press gangs forcing indigents and tramps into marriage before ending them to populate France's colonies in Louisiana and Mississippi that are the backbone of the fragile economy even if most nobles can't tell the difference between America and Africa. Michel Blanc, Christian Clavier, Thierry Lhermitte and Gerard Jugnot turn up in bit parts en route, though intriguingly Michael Powell's scenes hit the cutting room floor.It's a film with wit and scope and real humanity: if Ridicule is a pleasant light lunch, this is a profoundly delightful full banquet of a movie.
4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :- Let's Party, 11 June 2007 Author: writers_reign from London, England
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
Tavernier hit one out of the park with this, his second At-Bat. With the not inconsiderable help of Jean Aurenche, his co-writer, he offers one of the most accurate and dazzling evocations of French History ever put on film. The trio of heavy-hitters, Philippe Noiret, Jean-Paul Marielle and Jean Rochefort are outstanding as Regent, Rebel and Abbe respectively and it's interesting to find Thierry Lhermitte making an early appearance as a Nobleman which is more or less casting against type. The Sun King is dead but the intrigues with which his Court was riddled lives on and it is the nuances which delight rather than any set-pieces. This is definitely one to savour and will surely stand up to repeat viewings.
4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :- On the way to the Revolution, 20 May 2005 Author: tils4 from United States
This banquet, unlike one of foodstuffs, can be savored again and again to discover its parts. A political tale, a moral tale, an aesthetic breadth that rewards repeated viewing. The casual brutality of the palace: children playing darts against a painting; nobles and servants tossing around a dead rat; and, of course, the walking latrine! As above, so below: brutish soldiers, "shanghai-ers" for the colonies, provincial nobles who live in squalid houses barely above hovels. Noiret, Rochefort, Marielle so perfectly embody their characters; wise yet inconstant Orleans, conscienceless striver Dubois, impetuous, foolish yet gentlemanly Pontcallac. It would be rewarding to view this en suite with Etore Scola's brilliant "La Nuit de Varennes" to bracket the themes.
0 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :- like teacher like student, 14 April 2007 Author: didiermustntdie
well, the film directed by auteur Bertrand Tavernier did win 3 awards at cesar, Tavernier who a former assistant to french crime master Jean Pierre Melville who died 2 years before the cesar award came out(1975)(so obviously unable to make his name into the cesar history) now could be touched in his grave since his prestigious student did it for him or in his namewell, the man who directed this decent film----Bertrand Tavernier, suddenly became a director after his master's death in 1973 and who I admit is a good director all the way , deserves his wins , but that doesn't mean the film is superior to those films made before 1975 when there were no awards to honor them. after all from today's point of view, 1975 is sorta the weakest year in all time french cinema, so we hope if cesar could have been launched much earlier than 1975I also noticed that some people,Michel Blanc ,Christian Clavier,Thierry Lhermitte,Gérard Jugnot who later became very famous here were all under the direction of tavernier who i actually didn't consider a star maker at all before this timecould have won more cesars if Tavernier was a better student
3 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :- only mildly interesting, 29 April 2006 Author: planktonrules from Bradenton, Florida
Considering that there have been very few films made about the regency period of the rule of Louis XV, this is an important film. However, as nothing of any particular significance takes place, the film itself seems to have very little to say. Yes, it makes clear that the Regent was a sexually obsessed guy and the courtiers were all pretty worthless. As a result, there is a lot of nudity in the film. It's rare to see a historical drama with so many small-breasted nymphs running about the sets. And, it implies that the young Louis is a depraved little kid--but it never follows through with this most interesting aspect of the film. I really think they should have either tried to make the movie MORE significant and involving or just thrown in the towel, so to speak, and made it a porno film. I half expected to see Sylvia Kristel as one of the extras. As it was, the movie just didn't seem to have much of an audience.
Add another comment
