A Revolução em Paris

An inspired perspective about French Revolution. Beautiful cinematography. Admirable performances. And the sparkles of the change in realistic manner exposed. It is easy to critic it but it is not Danton , not the expected fresco , only a courageous exercise of reflection of small histories and their clash against National Ansembly. It is the film of memorable scenes. And that does it more than interesting, maybe useful for feel old events - fundamental bricks of the our present reality.

First, the title is wrong: the king is absent of the movie and carricatured when shown. The link between the king and the people is not shown or analysed.

Second, even if the episodes or the short stories are well depicted and in a way interesting, it doesn't make a film. Where is a story? Where is something to care about? It's not even a documentary. It's not much...

Third, the « left wing » (populist?) vision of a people betrayed by the « elites » is boring.

A visual feast, if a little too 'clean', in its production design. As much as I enjoyed the view I was ultimately disappointed by this film. Where's the story to engage me? I tried to let that aspect take a back seat in hope that the directors vision/world view would become clear. It didn't appear. A juxtaposition of beautifully executed scenes (though overlit imo), does not make a gripping film. For the major finance behind this project it feels like a wasted opportunity.

I'm French and I just reread the chronology of the Revolution, so the names and events are pretty fresh in my mind... at least they were until I saw this movie. The main problem is that it doesn't seem able to find its genre and goal. Not focused enough to be family drama, not precise enough to be a documentary, not nervous enough to be an historical action movie, not neutral enough to be a political movie... In short, it never decides what it wants to tell and ends up not telling much. It's a succession of scenes, each quite OK but not making much sense together. The family we follow is a symbol of course, but come on, the same people being present at every single major event and political assembly of the era? Plus several things are shown in a strange way, like Robespierre being a calm and peaceful person? Marat (very well played!) as an actual friend of the people? Danton (not nearly ugly and fat enough) as a sort of enemy? Technically speaking the music sometimes feels off and is too present, and many filming tricks, down to the very font of the title panels, but also the framing and lights, are cheesy and seem to be from the 90's. Showing the Revolution from an ordinary family point of view would have been a very good movie. Seeing it from the kings' office was nice too. Making a documentary about the Convention, yep, it could work. All at once? Sorry but nope. It ends up too messy and confusing to be enjoyable, despite very good actors and pretty decent sets and costumes.

It has some good ingredients. Francoise and the Uncle are well-played and the centrality of the women and their dynamism is exciting. However, it never develops into a story. It is a montage of names and impressions. The scenes in the parliament are the least interesting. Where was the fear and tension these huge events must have generated? Yes, there are some shouts from the gallery, and a couple of representatives try to inject some emotion into proceedings but it all feels confected.

I'm curious about the dark powder that Francoise was using to wash (?) her hair with in the closing scenes. Does anyone know about this powder and this practice? Maybe it was equivalent to the dry shampoo used today to absorb oil?