Nouvelle-France

Ultimately, this movie is a Brazilian soap opera. There are intrigues and billets-doux. The pop theme, recorded by an orchestra in Prague, is good but over-used. At least seven or eight crescendos cover various characters when they either grasp each other, look at each other or wistfully stare out windows while thinking of each other.

I didn't mind the historical and geographical inaccuracies. The need for financing seems to have motivated scenes of Pitt and Voltaire. (Was the inclusion of Franklin a failed attempt at American financing?) In fact, these scenes were not necessary since the movie used symbolism. The basic facts arguably fit the presentation. A case can be made that New France was abandoned by France, abused by the Catholic Church and strung up by England. Marie-Loup, get it? In the movie, she is illiterate but very articulate. Indeed, everyone spoke with modern international accents from mouths with white straight teeth. (So what! It's only a movie!)

Jean Beaudin made "J. A. Martin Photographe" which was both a beautiful and sensitive movie with Monique Mercure in the lead. She's in this one too but her presence only hearkens to the past. Despite its flaws, I enjoyed "Nouvelle France" but I'd probably enjoy any movie about the history of northern North America. If you have no interest in such history, this movie will be a convoluted Brazilian soap opera.

I am NOT a Canadian historian but I am a lover of romance in film and I found this to be a touching, heart wrenching love story, well acted with breath taking scenery and, as background, an interesting look at Canadian life in the 18th century. I have visited Louis Bourg in Quebec with my family and was thrilled to see it "come to life" on the big screen. Whether or not the film is historically accurate is, I believe, unimportant since I believe the history touched upon was more or less for ambiance and was not the focus of the producers/writers. It is, instead, most definitely a love story, and viewed in that perspective, I found it to be brilliantly and sensitively acted. Perhaps I had the advantage of not hearing any "hype" in advance before I sat down to watch it. It was recommended to me by my aunt who wrote that I "had to see it". I'm very glad I did. Melodramatic....perhaps a bit. But, in the end I felt emotionally satisfied and that's worth a little melodrama in my books. And my French-Canadian husband enjoyed it as thoroughly as I did.

That's the worst film I saw since a long time. Historic accuracy is totally non-existent. For example, James Wolfe, who his depicted as an anti-French Canadian, is shown in London during the summer of 1759. Natives are like Indians of a bad Hollywood movie of the 60's : They wear deerskin clothes and ride horses (The Montagnais had never ride horses). The film is taking place in Quebec City, but footage is set in Louisbourg, showing the Atlantic Ocean.

The original scenario was supposed to include the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, but the producers drop this idea saying that costs for uniforms and participants would be more than 4 millions dollars ! I think they never heard about re-enactment.

All the movie is planned to be a new Titanic : an impossible love during an historic tragedy (the fall of New-France). There's even a song performed by Celine Dion at the end of the movie (Yes, I stayed till the end of the movie, but I deeply regret). But the worst thing of all is that this movie cost 30 millions dollars. I just don't know how they spend all this money.

Sorry for my anger, but I'm just too irritated.

Beautiful film to be enjoyed for what it is - a lovely way to spend an afternoon at the cinema. Sweeping vistas of the province of Quebec, beautiful shorelines, spectacular forests and yes there's a love story in there as well.

There are some historical inaccuracies, true. If you want a documentary, look elsewhere.

For pure entertainment value, the film delivers. Beautiful costumes, a nice story, good acting, a number of tears at the end of the film.

Beautifully done. A nice 'first date' movie, or a nice mother-and-daughter film.

This is, literally, one of the most uselessly complex and "I-want-to-make-my-way-into-cinema-history" movie ever produced. I cannot think foreigners will see this movie and understand THAT as an accurate review of what happened to my country. I left the theater 38 minutes ago, and I am still shaking with anger.

First of all, cut the all-charm hero who's good at everything and the tough and revolutionary woman who dears go against armed guards by punching them in the face. I do not buy. I got nothing against Noémie Godin-Vigneault, she did a worthy job, but her character's flawed. Cut also the dull love story, absolutely unimaginative. The secondary characters, like Marie-Loup's father, like Voltaire and France Carignan, Marie-Loup's daughter. They deserve credit.

And finally, how dare did they destroy one of the finest North American piece of history by wanting to copy the "historical-moment-in-a-love-story" like Titanic and Pearl Harbor did. Historical values are not even respected. 4 years passed between the capitulation of Quebec and the Treaty of Paris. 4 years. Well, it seems nobody aged a day.

Please, before or after seeing this movie, ask for a French Canadian, for the REAL version of what happened. That way we can keep our dignity intact.