Venus imperial

This is not great historical drama. Rather it is a vehicle for very beautiful movie star. Like many films of this era, it focused on selling sex as love, not a great message for young women of the era. That being said, this is Great movie for Stephen Boyd fans. He is just beyond perfect and oh so seductive. If you love, love, love Stephen Boyd, this is a must see film; although sadly, his screen time is limited.

First all l found Lolo miscating for this role if consider a worldwide market, in this case will be more appropiate a native french actress, sounds bad to hear Pauline Bonaparte in a hard italian accent, looks like weird unconscionable at all, therefore the picture was made for italian marketplace, the butcher's sister certanly was more concerned to find a better lover among so many choices, she was frivolous in extreme way putting down Bonaparte's name as already did by Napoleon, an interesting piece of history until now unknown for me, the official release in Brazil needs an upmost restoration to face Lolobrigida's beauty!!!

Resume:

First watch: 2018 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 6.25

The fact that there is no French review for a movie directed by the most famous old wave director speaks volumes of the ill-fated nature of the project ; more than a continous biography ,it's more a succession of little pictures ,almost sketches ;taking the biggest liberties with history (Pauline's fate is anyway just a footnote in her big brother's saga), it is now frivolous ,foot loose and fancy free, now (though seldom) dramatic :it's Delannoy's and his screenwriter Philippe Hériat 's wish,but it' Sacha Guitry's reality!So neither the old cinema de papa buffs (I'm one of them) nor (and anyway they panned everything Delannoy did,which was sometimes quite unfair)the young Turks of the notorious Nouvelle Vague got anything out of it and the amorous adventures of Pauline B are considered a bitter failure in Delannoy's native country.

Most of the precedent reviewers point out that the editing is absurd,the story incoherent , and some actors (Micheline Presles,notably) wasted.It's a lavish picture book ,with a cosmopolitan cast (French ,Italian,German and even Irish -Boyd-), but completely hollow ,with now and then ,a good idea (the statue episode,the jig saw puzzle), which does not make it a 2h15 good movie for all that.

Take the prologue in Corsica ;Pauline's early days are rather obscure;the long stroll across the country ,arm in arm , seems to be straight out from a musical ,and one can imagine Napoleon (Raymond Pellegrin,who had already played the emperor in Guitry's "Napoleon" ,by no means one of this director's best)sing to his siblings about the big plans he has made for them.Incidentally , Napo did not want Pauline to marry Freron because he was not a high born gentleman,but because he had proposed to another lady.

The Santo Domingo (against Toussaint Laverdure's rebellion) episode is a curious jumble : studio exoticism , the earnest playing of Massimo Girotti jars with the erotic swagger of Gina Lollobrigida (who was Delannoy's Esmeralda a few years back);although she played around , Pauline attended her husband till he died of yellow fever .

Except for the scenes with the sculptor (in which Gina strips bare ,but do not expect to get an eyeful ,one only sees her back),the italian vignette is insignificant .

The count (Stephen Boyd ,who was given a thoroughly ridiculous part: his tooth ,his wild ride,his death under an apple tree (!)) represents one of the many lovers of Napo's sister ;besides ,when he is introduced to her in her Paris dwelling , the woman who shows the way looks like her madam who was waiting for another man with a foreign accent.

It's true that all Napo's siblings were incapable and that Paolina (he frenchified her name when he rose to power)was his favorite ;she proved it later on when she visited him on Elbe Island and the gift of the jewels is historically accurate .

Do not get we wrong.I'm not the kind of N.V. afficionados who is anxious to put disparagement over cinema de papa ;most of the reviews I wrote about Delannoy's works are favorable ;but ,frankly,sport, here ,he proves that big budgets do not mean great achievements

Turgid historical saga, a semi-biopic of Napoleon Bonaparte's courtesan sister(!); the overall effect is as improbable as the Hollywood version, DESIREE' (1954), which had focused on the life of the famed French leader's 'girlfriend'.

Gina Lollobrigida is monotonous in the title role (not to mention unconvincing when it comes to the dramatic passages of the plot); incidentally, she had previously worked for the director on THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME (1957). In support of the star are the likes of Stephen Boyd (who would fare much better playing alongside the Italian sex symbol's rival, Sophia Loren, in THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE [1964]), Raymond Pellegrin (making for a pretty good Napoleon) and Massimo Girotti – while Micheline Presle (playing Josephine) and Gabriele Ferzetti put in 'guest appearances'.

At an interminable length of almost 2½ hours, for what amounts to a largely unexciting narrative, the film – which, at least, has the virtue of expansive locations and attractive widescreen photography – understandably adopts an episodic structure throughout. In fact, the heroine is seen being involved with various lovers (including officer Ferzetti and roguish Hussar Boyd) and husbands (General-turned-Viceroy Girotti and a wimpish Italian Prince)…apart from facing such calamities as war, plague, deaths in the family and, finally, the humiliating abdication of Napoleon himself!

I saw VENERE IMPERIALE when it first came out, in its Italian version, in its full-length, glorious cinematography, and I must say that most reviewers have missed the point in evaluating the film. This is a great epic on the life of a woman legendary for her beauty and love affairs. While many scenes are perhaps too static, resembling scenes from an historical frieze, others have adequate tone, pace and atmosphere, do projecting a real feel for the times and people depicted. I never thought the film was overlong when I saw it, but it is obvious it could have used better editing, a faster pace in some places. Nothing wrong with the art direction and the use of location for the external scenes. If anything, I would have entrusted the screenplay to Jacques Prévert and Jean Aurenche, who did such an outstanding job in NOTRE DAME DE Paris, instead of using five writers as Delannoy did. Too many people, perhaps too many hands involved. Delannoy loved Gina Lollobrigida, and directed her well. I never understood the negative criticisms directed at Lollobrigida as an actress. Those who pan her performance in this film should have a good look at Sophia Loren's in MADAME SANS-GÊNE. That's mediocrity for you. Gina at least was beautiful to look at, and possessed true star quality. One regret, though: why use Micheline Presle so sparingly? She was so wonderful a presence and deserved far more screen time than was given here.