Le libertin

This movie does not really tell what Diderot was for. Everything what it contains is about the primal reactions what his ideas engineered for and how the current morals, which were supervised by the Church, did not fit into them. The real Diderot was a part of some much larger picture than just sexual morals of the French upper class. The knowledge what the 18th century philosophers wanted to represent was equally against the Upper Class as it was against over-dominant Church.

'Le Libertin' has a good pick of French top actors, but those who want to see this only for Audrey Tautou's famous part may find that thing indifferent. The movie is full of various sexual matters but anyway it is all how it was back in the 18th century, and so every idea that is about sex in the film is also historically very accurate and well crafted indeed.

The film starts with a bawdy song unmistakably naughty and then follows ever so much suggestive but clever dialogue. There is wicked and mischievous goings-on in and around a beautiful home on the road between Paris and Avignon. This is where Denis Diderot (Vincent Perez) is compiling and printing his banned multi-volume encyclopaedia. My goodness! I had no idea that a 17th Century philosopher could have so much fun putting into print some of his thoughts and experiences. "If it's natural" he says "It must be good for you". He not only says it, but practises it, and no woman seems safe from his ardent approaches.

Amongst all the farcical nonsense, there is some heavy satire on the church's attitude to sex. exotic foods such as chocolate and caviare, musical scores (the pig organ is a delight) and banned literature. Vincent Perez as Diderot plays the character superbly wearing a delightful smile though not much else when he poses for his portrait by the beautiful Madame Therbouche, a so-called painter from Berlin though actually a spy arranged by the Cardinal. Her mission is to locate the clandestine printing presses.

There is plenty of action in the film (and never a dull moment) as Diderot prances naked around the surrounding gardens much to the disgust of the Cardinal. Much of the action is around the Cardinal who must be prevented from finding the printing presses. This is easily arranged by recruiting as many ladies as possible to seek confession of their sins before the Cardinal. Besides attending to his clerical duties, he seems not uninterested in their wickedness.

Finally Diderot falls in love with Madame Therbouche as he seeks her assistance in the preparation of Volume X111. She agrees of course and why not? The last volume is to be all about sensuality, a subject in which both of them are so well versed.

An absolute delight!

Played as farce, this quasi-realist setup of Diderot and friends running a semi-secret printing press for his "scandalous" encyclopaedia is great fun.

One could really see this as a french equivalent to a "Carry On.." film, as it relies more on the ensemble casting than on one major player and, for the most part, everyone does their bit. Absurdist fans will love the "pig organ" and the general puncturing of pomposity all round.

Perez himself seems admirably unfazed by long sequences of full-frontal nudity and is supported more briefly by some of the female cast (notably Vahina Giocante) although it's a long way from being a "sex comedy" - just rude.

It is quite important to remember when watching comedies that humor is a very personal thing.

If you are offended by vulgarity; if you hate Benny Hill, and can't see the fun of Barbara Windsor's bikini popping off; and think that concept that breasts have nipples is outrageous; if you think broad humor is a pointless waste of time then this really is not the film for you.

If you thought that France = sophistication, therefore this must be high-brow: then I simply suggest that you get out a bit more.

But if you had read the packet before you watched it you would already know this.

This film is a 'diversion'. A farce. An enjoyment. Treat it as such and you'll be rewarded.

In France, a group of free thinkers, led by the philosopher and writer Denis Diderot have been working to produce the first ever encyclopedia and bring enlightenment and knowledge to their fellow Frenchmen. With the authorities placing an order to stop the spread of this evil work, Diderot is forced to hide the printing presses underground at his mansion as he tries to finish his work. It is a wonder though, that he can write at all, as his freedom brings him a spread of women wanting 'liberation'. He is fine with promoting this way of thinking until his own daughter starts to explore her sexuality with feelings towards an older man. A visit by the Cardinal causes some delay but Baroness d'Holbach tries to keep him busy throughout his visit while the work continues to get the book out.

Without any knowledge of this film I sat to watch it and immediately realized that this was a typically bawdry™ French comedy that does what that description suggests by being colourful, full of raucous dialogue, sexual innuendo and nudity. Unfortunately this takes what could have been an interesting historical film with a comic tone and makes it a sort of unfunny Carry On film full of gratuitous nudity, unfunny comedy and drama/characters that totally fail to keep the audience involved in these comic japes that really lack heart. The story is so spoilt by crude excess that it is never interesting or involving and gradually turns into a very boring series of sexual japes. There is a serious side in there somewhere but it is badly treated and badly handled and it just doesn't work when placed in the middle of so much crude innuendo. If it were funny then it would be at least a bit better but it isn't funny and it doesn't have the 'Gallic sexual energy' that it clearly wants to have.

The cast all gallop around with the necessary amount of bawdry behaviour and 'huh-huh-huh' French energy but none of them can do more than just mess around in the same manner as Sid James and Barbara Windsor were doing decades ago. Perez is nice to look at but without a character he does just play the sort of lead character in Carry On movies – attempts to deal with issues around his daughter are poor since the film is more interested in getting her naked in a bath than anything else. Of course there will be those who find the sight of Audrey Tautou and Vahina Giocante naked in a bath of milk to be a pleasing one, but a bit more actual acting would have been nice too. Balasko is the worst example of Carry On hamming and her whole performance was poor. Ardant was interesting as she was more serious but her nice touches are lost in the material. Overall the whole cast is poor, although I don't blame them so much as the misjudged tone of crude humour running throughout the whole film.

Overall this is a poor film that will only appeal to those who like their French films to just be a load of sexual innuendo and cliché bawdry™ behaviour in period clothes. Historical interests and conflicts within the characters are all there but lost below a load of nudity and Carry On style japes. Sid James must be looking down from smut heaven with pleasure but for me I would have liked a bit more structure, drama or laughs (even one of the three would have done. But maybe I'm just missing the point of this film.