Belle du Seigneur

Anyone writing a bad review for this movie is either fenced in by there own misconceptions of the intricacies of human behavior, only reach as far as their own eyes will take them and do not have the ability to understand the story behind the actual novel itself which is complex, intense and utterly revealing of twisted emotions that day to day minds wouldn't stretch to, or would blindly chose to avoid thinking about.

This film got 100% less acknowledgment than it deserved, perhaps because people are more interested in shallow, fast-paced movies that keep them occupied for a couple of hours without having to delve into anything with depth because it uses too much brainpower and 'scares' them.

Look beyond what you know, expand your mind, thats what a film is meant to do.

This movie is not made for people in the "progressive" and "modern" world mindset , in this movie you'll see what unconditional love looks like and what it doesn't look like , you can watch this movie over and over again and each time learn something new about the two main characters, A true seducers story.

There's no point to this movie.

Terribly thin plot, with barely anything remembering.

I don't want to spoil anything, but what is there to spoil? Watch the trailer. That's the film.

The characters have something closer to a backstory than a story arc. The events are closer to anecdotes than plot points.

Jonathan Rhys Meyers plays another version of Henry Tudor. Vodianova plays a pretty girl. They have an affair. That's the film right there.

Not a spoiler: either the affair ends or the film ends before it does. There's only two possible outcomes. One of these two is the ending. Probably.

There you go. That's about it.

This is also known as "A Grand Affair ".

The movie did nothing for me, though I enjoyed the glorious settings in Europe (especially Italy) and the stunning architecture. The era is WWII, the story portraying miserable, dislikable characters. We have the Don Juan scenario of Jonathan Rhys-Myers' character, Solal (a high level exec at the then League of Nations in Geneva) seducing his subordinate Adrien's wife Ariane (Natalia Vodianova). Ariane succumbs willingly after a couple of meetings, Adrien is kicked into professional obscurity and the other two embark on their journey of passion.

Then follows scene after scene of sex, fighting, self-introspection, more fighting, more sex. Solal, who - despite his self-assurance as an experienced seducer - seems unsure of himself, fixating on Ariane's past lovers and getting violent; she walks away, comes back (to more sex and introspection). And thus it goes.

Other viewers will no doubt find deeper meaning here, but really how much sex does one need to get it across? The backdrops, costumes, buildings are lovely to behold but ultimately cannot carry the story on their own. One has to be invested in the characters, and I wasn't.

Outstanding scenery in Italy and Switzerland, international struggle during WWII, human fragility, human struggle, conflict on issues and the directives from the League of Nations from a Jewish point of view. This is also the first time Natalia Vodianova has combined her modeling career with acting, which is promising. I particularly enjoyed seeing European hotels and houses and the architecture of the settings. Solal portrays a troubled individual who appears to be looking for a way out, believing in his position he cannot change the rigidity of the LON. There is also the issue of the role of women during that time-frame and some of Ariana's struggles. Adapted from a book of the same name from a respected French novelist. I would certainly watch this again, you get the feeling there's pieces of the story that you're missing the first time watching