L'Empereur de Paris

It was quite hard to watch it till the end. All decorations, costumes, details are magnificent. But that's all. Characters are dull, acting is lifeless. Better watch Vidocq (2001) one more time.

Most people won't get bored watching L'Empereur de Paris. The performances are good, the Parisian settings are fantastic ... the film looks a million dollars. The action sequences are exciting.The prologue was really intriguing, especially considering the movie's claims about it being a "true story". I was keen to find out more about Francois Vidocq (Vincent Cassel), of whom I'd never previously heard anything about whatsoever. This former criminal apparently became the founder and first director of the crime-detection Sûreté Nationale as well as the head of the first known private detective agency. Vidocq is considered to be the father of modern criminology and of the French police department. He is also regarded as the first private detective. Sounds like the basis for a hell of a story. Unfortunately The Emperor ... doesn't really come close to telling it.

Instead, after the above-mentioned introduction it decides to tell a tale of Vidocq, officially a wanted man, but unofficially obstinately attempting to seek an amnesty from authorities. To this end, he becomes like a free-lance vigilante contractor for police, using his past experience with underworld figures, to bring villains to justice, or execute them in the process. Regrettably we see virtually none of the skills that were going to set him apart as a criminalist. We do see some finely-choreographed action set-pieces and we do see Vidocq being aided and abetted on occasions, by both police and some of his former associates.But the story-line continually obfuscates, when it should be clarifying events. Allies become enemies and enemies become allies with little exposition. Vidocq gains an ill-fated companion in Annette and has a confusingly, enigmatic relationship, that I still can't figure out, with a baroness played by Olga Kurylenko. The conclusion infers that he is going to lead the Surete.

Indeed this film almost seems like a Gallic attempt at a franchise - starter, which I doubt will occur. I think director Jean-François Richet would have been better advised to concentrate on telling a broader, more factual story about Vidocq, whose historical exploits give much credence to the oft-repeated statement, regarding truth, being stranger than fiction.

Jean-François Richet's THE EMPEROR OF PARIS is a highly fictionalised and highly romanticised retelling of the early life of one Eugène François Vidocq- the notorious real life career criminal who survived the infamous "Reign of Terror" of the early 1790s to become the virtual "founding father" of France's first National Police Force.

The film's cast is excellent, with many of the heavyweights of modern European cinema (Vincent Cassel, August Diehl, Olga Kurylenko etc...) joining together with a younger generation of rising European stars (Freya Mavor, Némo Schiffman etc...) to breath real life into their characters with fiery, passionate performances. The characters themselves are mostly excellent: Vincent Cassel's Jean ValBond, August Diehl's sinister Nathanaël de Wenger (a role with clear shades of Diehl's scene-stealing turn in 2009's INGLORIOUS Bs as the monstrous SS Major Hellstrom) and James Thiérrée's Duc de Neufchâteau- swaggering into (and promptly stealing) each scene he's in whilst cutting a bloody path throughout the film with his hussar's sabre! The attention to set detail (though a large portion of the film's background environment is sadly digitally-mastered) and action choreography both make THE EMPEROR OF PARIS one heck of an entertaining ride! The film's only major problems are its pacing and its script.

You're never really allowed to get bored during this film, as Cassel's morally ambidextrous Vidocq grabs you by the scruff of the neck and drags you down into a murky Parisian underworld of thieves, burglars, cutthroats, killers and renegades. However, any significant character development is promptly sacrificed in the process and when several leading characters are killed off during the film's final act, it produces no real emotional reaction from the viewer. A shame really, especially considering the acting talent on display.

This film's other main problem is its script. The trailer portrayed a very different kind of film to the one we actually got: a former chain gang member-turned detective hunting a killer through the backstreets of Napoleonic Paris and dipping his toes into a ruthless criminal underworld. That's sort of what we got... but on a much smaller, simpler scale. The anti-hero (who very quickly becomes just an ordinary "good guy") goes straight from A to B and despite having a few genuinely thrilling twists and turns, the film has him arrive at his destination with very little deviation.

To me, it just feels like the film could've explored the world it was trying to create in a much deeper, broader way: prioritising the role of Maillard's underworld and Vidocq's hunt for a killer. What we got instead was a bog-standard action-adventure romp... which was perfectly fine! But (in my opinion) the film settles for far less than the story was actually capable of achieving.

A missed opportunity, if you know Vidocq's 'real' story (itself probably half-fiction), his skill at disguises and undercover work for instance. As it is, we end up with a period action drama which gleefully ignores how long it took to load period pistols to allow a number of Western style shoot-outs and various hand to hand combat, as well as at least two beautiful women to add romance. The result is somewhere between "The Count of Monte Christo" and "Cartouche", with hints of early nineteenth century political intrigue scattered all through it. There are felicities - the opening promises an earthy brutality which quickly disappears, and the views of period Paris seem well-researched. It's also a surprise to discover Olga Kurylenko, whom many Bond fans will know, but whom I last saw playing a beautiful Cuban dancer in "Magic City" as a sulphorous baronne (speaking perfect French). I hadn't seen Lucchini for decades, so was taken aback by his age. A fun film in many ways, but not really a film I would have watched had I known it was going to so blithely ignore the source material.

It has many virtues. Vincent Cassel is the first. It has a huge potential , not real used in fair manner. And that reduced all to the clothes, fights and locations. The story is the lead victim because it is a too long film and, in same measure, all is reduced at sketches. But it works in decent way and, in essence , this is the important thing. A not awful kick to discover the real story of Vidocq. And that is all. .