Ah! les belles bacchantes....

Robert Dhéry (as he did again later on Theatre with "En sourdine, les sardines", a reference title to his movie "Vos gueules, les mouettes") offers a spoof on a revue in rehearsal with behind the stage problems of many kind, from undelivered costumes (what lead the movie to be restrained to minors of 16)as with a plumber. After a short introduction showing the police (Louis de Funès) eager to check if decency is respected, the rehearsal is shown in real time through the movie, and the fact it is a rehearsal allows unexpected auditions (and bad ones) as imposed by relations. Amateur (Colette Brosset) ruins a number, but there are also classic typical quality numbers with good rhythm as the "bath cabins on the beach" with the game of doors (un)expectedly showing or not the girl inside (what follows works by chronometer as Dhéry was found of all-visual number), another well-staged classic number is "the monks at dawn". A specific audition, where Dhéry plays on stage a silent musician along with Michel Serrault and others from movies "Branquignols" or "Bertrand Coeur de lion", (number re-used with new actors in "Vos Gueules les mouettes") comes from his play "La Plume de ma Tante" interpreted for months in London. Princess Anne of England came five times to see them then invited them to play that act at a private evening in front of Queen Elizabeth.(from Dhéry biography) Her Majesty expected a boring classical music act but understood quickly what she was offered. She promised to come see the play. Dhéry thought the play would be ended shortly, but more than five months later had to ask English spectators to offer their seats for the Royal visit. They accepted if they could stay aside and watch her entrance. During that "royal" show, (from TV interview of Robert Dhéry) another "by the chronometer" act around a "pissotière" (typical french - of the time - place for an "urgent need" for men)was apprehended as in the theater a fat laugh from someone unspotted was arriving regularly. Just before the act Dhéry was told no one could do anything to prevent it, as it was.. Prince Philip. Later "La Plume de ma Tante" was asked for Broadway, and received a Tony award for "Best musical of the year", in the same category than "My Fair Lady" and "West Side Story". Dhéry all surprised said "But we're not Americans.." and was answered on stage "Now you are !". After a long time in New-York (visited in theater by Harold Lloyd - Colette Brosset 's idol -, the Marx Brothers, Danny Kaye and lots of others, invited home by Harpo) with many appearances on TV talk-shows, Dhéry and his wife Colette Brosset decided not to stay in America as he had promised before to film "La Belle Américaine", so they came back to France. As a critic didn't like the previous directing of Robert Dhéry, he let Jean Loubignac direct "Ah! Les Belles Bacchantes". The same critic all-smiling asked him after release "But what not direct it ?". Robert tried to remind him it was because of him what was offered superb denial "I cannot have said that !". So Robert Dhéry directed his next movies (some along with Pierre Tchernia). Robert Dhéry died on December 3, 2004. The only time he didn't me laugh. Look at "Ah! Les Belles Bacchantes" with the flavor of its time. JcBernardo

As a lifelong Louis de Funès fan, I went into Ah! The Beautiful Priestesses of Bacchus expecting the same comedic brilliance that defines much of his work. Unfortunately, this film fell far short of those expectations.

The plot or lack thereof is one of the main issues. The movie meanders without much direction, leaving the viewer wondering what it's trying to achieve. There's very little action or humor to keep things interesting, and even de Funès himself seems underutilized, with none of the sharp wit or frantic energy that usually makes his performances so entertaining.

Despite trying my hardest to appreciate the film for what it is, I found myself increasingly disengaged as it dragged on. Eventually, I couldn't even finish it, which is rare for me with anything involving de Funès. Unless you're a die-hard completist for his filmography, this one is safe to skip.

This film appears to be aplauded by its own countrymen and derided by everyone else. I can only say, as an Englishman that I agree with my French counterparts! This film for me was a delightful surprise! It has to be viewed within the context in which it was made and anyone who thinks that the musical numbers are poor has really missed the point! The film captures in scenes of wonderfully absurd comedy, a rehearsal for a french revue in a second rate variety theatre. It was great fun to see Loius de Funes in an early supporting role, but I particularly like the whole feel of the film. At its most realistic, it really captures the feeling of being there in the theatre while chaos rules the rehearsal.

Many of the pieces are hilariously funny, not least the bathing hut scene on the beach and the monks finale piece. For anyone who cringes at the nudity, I was delighted to find it all left in, realistically and is it should be! Also nice to see Agfacolour, though I have to confess that the print I saw was a slightly faded Eastman colour print form my own archive. Never-the-less, a delight and one to be accepted for what it is. It is a delightful time capsule period piece and I loved it!

You got to be such a snob, with a very limited horizont and a shallow mind to make a bad review on this movie.

I feel sorry for those who can't enjoy a film from another world, from 70 years ago, when things were simpler, the laughs were more honestly and even the nudity were more intriguing.

You just have to enjoy it, a rare experience you will remember.

Ouch! What were they thinking? This movie is so bad, it's scary. It's strictly a showcase for beautiful women. In fact, its only originality is probably the amount of nudity for the time.

Louis De Funès' talent is wasted. He's reduce to imitate a chicken. Which is funny, but to carry it on for the entire film is absurd and stupid. Oh! and by the way... the musical numbers are awful. Skip this one, by all mean.

Out of 100, I give it 51. That's good for 0 star out of 4.

Seen at home, in Toronto, on November 5th, 2002.