Bel Ami - Storia di un seduttore

Bel Ami (2012)

*** (out of 4)

This adaptation of the Guy de Maupassant novel isn't a complete success but the attractive cast give some very good performances, which make the film worth watching. Georges Duroy (Robert Pattinson) decides to climb the Paris wall to riches by seducing three of the most influential women (Christina Ricci, Uma Thurman, Kristin Scott Thomas) that he can get his hands on. BEL AMI is a story that I was only vaguely familiar with. I had read pieces of it when I was younger but I wasn't familiar enough with it to say how well or bad the film captured its mood and spirit. With that said, I'm always one that says it's not important for a movie to fully capture the book because they're just different things and I don't mind them not being alike. For the most part I was happy with the film as it does a pretty good job at showing what a rather shallow person can accomplish as long as they have the looks and someone willing to let themselves be walked on. I thought Pattinson did a very good job in the lead role as he could perfectly handle the seduction scenes but I thought he was most effective when it came time for his character to turn into a snake. Pattinson has a certain look that he's constantly got in his eye and I thought it told you everything you needed to know about this character. The supporting women are all in very good form and especially Ricci who plays perhaps the most mature character here. I thought she really brought a lot to the performance and made you feel for her even if you don't agree with what she's doing. Both Thurman, Thomas and Colm Meaney are very good as well. BEL AMI does have a few problems including the final twenty-minutes, which just seem too rushed. I'd also say that the opening isn't nearly as strong as it could have been and I think there were a few dry moments scattered throughout. Still, the performances are so good that they really keep you attention from start to finish and they make the film worth sitting through.

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant!!!…having read the book not only once, in German but also in French, I was impressed by this movie adaptation of the French classic novel by Guy de Maupassant (5 August 1850 – 6 July 1893) .

I must admit however, that the events happen very fast (it is very hard to pack such an intense and complex story into 160minutes) and it's mainly fully understandable to those who have actually read, loved, discussed and grasped the novel. The movie incorporates many swift innuendos and hints at passages taken directly from the novel. It is is very accurate to, and there are even scenes and dialogues straight from, the novel. The relevant essence of 19th century French society rules is obvious. And even though the director skips some of the specific historical and political details, the viewer gets indications and references to catch on. The actors/characters from the book, especially the ladies in question, couldn't be cast more perfectly Uma Thurman, the immaculate representation of Madeleine int he novel, Kristin Scott- Thomas, ditto as Virginie with her age, looks and temperament and Christina Ricci, down-to- earth, less intellectual but utterly sensual (maybe with a little exception of Ricci who played Clotilde's character perfectly, but should have been more voluptuous physically).

Robert Pattinson impersonated the poor protagonist George Duroy, without name nor heritage, however street-smart and snobbish, yet still sensitive and compassionate arriviste George Duroy, just as I imagined so many years ago upon reading the book. You might despise or pity, but you will always love him in the meantime. Beautiful authentic settings, costumes and props and the soundtrack just gets under your the skin, courtesy of . If you still question Robert Pattison as an actor (which I did, but do no more) then at least you may praise the direction of Declan Donnellan & Nick Ormerod…. for … the movie is simply…very good, VERY Good indeed...

Bel ami is a huge disappointment for those who are familiar with Guy de Maupassant's novel of the same name, or for those who have seen George Duroy in movies or in TV! Acceptable the fact that the whole novel might not fit into the cinematic body, nonetheless the caspuled version falls flat, and for me, this turns out to be the worst adapted screenplays of all time!

To start with, the casting went terribly wrong, Robert Pattinson never came close to portraying George - still in colored shades of Cedric Gregory and the vampire boy. The screenplay like i mentioned added to the misery, overemphasizing on certain aspects which did mar the intensity of the plot, and then underplaying the characters and the drama as if we were getting to see knitted episodes from a TV series. The saving grace comes in form of the background score which was brilliant - how i wished to see an appeasing drama for the music!!

To sum it up, this was a real disappointment for me, i wouldn't have minded watching a 3 hour drama (the movie really had the stuff to be that long)but this was just a capsuled dose of what i craved for - the ensemble cast and the build up to the release had sedated me, it just blows :( 4/10

I was fully surprised by how much I enjoyed this film. I love the book, so was sure I'd be disappointed by the movie, which is typically the case. I was also skeptical of the casting, particularly of the lead role. But even so, I couldn't NOT see it.

I soon found myself completely taken in, watching the vision in my head (from reading the book) come to life on screen. The wardrobe and sets and music and lighting were rich and beautiful. The pace was excellent and kept me engaged every minute - the time just flew by.

I was also completely won over by the casting, including Pattinson in the lead role, which was probably the biggest surprise. Not only did he manage to hold his own in the role and with a far more experienced cast, he completely nailed George Duvoy. This required him to convey a depth and range of nuanced emotions and intentions through expression and tone and manner as well as interpretation of script. Kudos must go to the director as well.

Some of the criticisms of the story or of the Duvoy character are mistakenly pinned on the actor's performance, when what they are really reacting to is actually how the character is depicted in the book. That's an argument for the author, not the actor or director. So I have to assume they haven't read the book or would not like it if they did. And certainly there are a lot of people who just can't be objective about Pattinson because of a strong need to belittle his teen idle celebrity and association with the tweenage-targeted Twilight films.

I do think the movie is probably more enjoyable for those who have read the book and can, therefore, connect the dots and fill the gaps that a movie just doesn't have time to do - but that's true of any movie that tries to stay true to the book.

I highly recommend the movie (and the book) to anyone who loves period dramas with great characters. It is beautifully done.

Bel Ami is definitely not for anyone who truly loves French period drama, nor is it the vehicle for changing people's impressions of Pattinson. Here's the ultimate question though: Does Pattinson distance himself markedly from his Twilight character? The answer is "yes, but not enough" because, try as I might, when Georges Duroy walks into the sunlight in the final scene of the movie, I half-expected him to sparkle. And that is a very bad sign. In short, Twihards will totally love this film, but anyone else should skip it.