Customer Reviews

Vatel [NTSC/REGION 1 & 4 DVD. Import-Latin America]

5 star:		(23)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

It's 1671, and the King of France, Louis XIV, is looking for a general to carry war to the insufferably insolent Dutch. One of his nobles, the Prince de Condé, wants the job, thinking such royal favor will relieve his chronic impoverishment. The Prince's strategy to entice the sovereign's attention is ... well, to throw a lavish party, of course. VATEL is Condé's master of the kitchen and entertainment planner for the big event, for which the King, his Queen, and a large coterie of sycophants will descend upon the Prince's country estate to be lavishly fed, housed, and amused for several days. The expense and bother of it all will be staggering.

Gérard Depardieu, Julian Sands and Julian Glover play the roles of VATEL, Louis XIV and Condé respectively. Additionally, Uma Thurman plays Anne de Montausier, the King's favorite "lady-in-waiting". ("Waiting for what?" would be an obtuse question.) And, Tim Roth has the role of the creepy Marquis de Lauzan, one of the monarch's carousing buddies.

The best elements of this outstanding film are the opulent costuming and production design. Indeed, the culmination to the King's entertainment is a sensational "live event" that is itself an eye-popping spectacle within a spectacle. Depardieu, relatively unknown to American audiences, gives a bravura performance as the over-worked, hard-pressed and self-sacrificing major domo struggling to make his boss look good on a shoestring budget. (His contribution to the alleviation of Condé's gout is particularly heart wrenching.) Roth, in a style he does so well, is exquisitely slimy as the villainous Marquis. Thurman is fetching as a young woman not yet too debased to not want something better out of her life.

In my opinion, VATEL should have won an Academy Award for art direction if nothing else. Visually, it's a truly sumptuous piece. The viewer will leave the screening disgusted at the extravagant excesses of past royalty, but certainly impressed with the flash of their presentation.

See Vatel. See it for the truly exceptional art direction. See it for the performances of Depardieu and Roth. See it because Thurman gives what may be her best performance yet. See it to take a trip back to the Golden Age of France, without Musketeers. See it simply because of the movie magic of watching some of the most beautiful food known being created. However, this is not some Martha Stewart field trip to the seventeenth century .

For all the remarkable spectacle Vatel presents, it is really a wonderful character study, layered over a profound fable of the stresses and dangers of living in a society obsessed with material excess and impossibly complex social codes. Sound familiar? Louis XIV carefully kept an entire social class deliberately distracted by the pursuit of pleasure and prestige in order to politically neutralize them. Considering that we are in the throes of a similar, though far more widespread social regression, the points of view explored in Vatel are relevant beyond what is usually found in a costume drama. Better still, it doesn't go all preachy, preferring to let the story to speak for itself.

The critics panned it - but by and large they didn't get it. They complained about Depardieu's accent (umm, he's like...French! Duh...), which doesn't get in the way of the emotion of his performance unless the viewer is either narrow minded or hard of hearing. Since France has many regions and the social classes had different accents, it makes a weird kind of sense that his speech should be different from the Aristocrats. Then there's the irritating "a babe like Thurman would never go for fat old Depardieu" criticism - doubtless formed by critics who haven't got much experience of life. Others complained about the extravagance of the production overall. I suspect the same critics would complain about the lack of social realism in The Wizard of Oz.

Did I mention that Vatel reminds me why I try not to take critics too seriously? I can't wait to see it again.

This film is such a visual masterpiece! It's absolutely stunning from beginning to end. The set design is by far the most accurate historically that I have ever seen (and believe me, I have seen just about every 17th century period piece there is). The actors performances are overall, perfection. Gerard Depardieu does a magnificent job as playing the title role Vatel, who is a party planner extrodinare! The pretense is an all important visit from Louis XIV (played beautifully by Julian Sands) to Vatel's master's estate. Everything must be perfect so that the Sun King may grant Vatel's master a commanding generals position in an impending war with the Dutch and thus, bestowing riches upon him. Intrigue, lust and pure love is what transpires over the three days that Louis spends at the estate. Uma Thurman gives a great performance as a courtesan who catches most everyone's eye, including that of Vatel however, the King catches her first which complicates matters. Tim Roth gives a fine dastardly performance as a Marquis. In my opinion, this film is a masterpiece of set and costume design, such is the case that the actor performances are secondary, which is fine by me. I cannot praise this film enough, it has knocked off my all-time favorite period piece "Restoration" off of the first place pedestal. It is a gourmet feast for the eyes!

I noticed that several people gave this film a poor review and while I realize that historical films are not for everyone, I think a few people missed the point of the film. Aside from the bittersweet love story, the sharp contrast depicted between Vatel and the court of Louis XIV highlighted the reality of the French aristoracy and court life during this period (as well as into the reigns of Louis XV and XVI). The situation of the French aristoracy vis-a-vis the King was not at all like that of their English counterparts. The aristocracy depended upon the King for a good deal of their wealth, as well as their position within the court and government. Hence the Prince de Conde's need for money from Louis XIV and his willingness to go so far as to bet Vatel in a card game to secure it was not so far fectched as it may seem. Although I cannot talk specifics pertaining to the real-life Vatel, I can say with certainty that during that time securing the King's good favor was worth almost any price. If any one out there has ever visited the palace of Versailles just outside of Paris (a project undertaken by the Sun King, himself, building upon a hunting lodge of Louis XIII) then I need not say more. For those who have not, however, French court life was lavish and based very much on adhering to etiquette (according to most historical accounts). Was it ridiculous and over the top? Of course, but that was the reality of the French court. For anyone to criticize Vatel based on the obsurdity of the court and a "childish king" then you don't know much about French history. Why do you think Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette were such easy scapegoats (although that is arguable- some blame the king directly and at the very least indirectly for the revolution)? People were starving and heavily taxed, while the aristoracy sat unmoved or ignorant (depending on which accounts you agree with) of their plight. Vatel highlighted this contrast beautifully- in the movie Anne (who we can agree was a kind person) said to Vatel- "But the poor are happy to be the King's creditors." To which Vatel responds something to the effect of "My parent's were so happy [to be the king's creditors] they died of it." In truth, Vatel is a story set within a story- that of the frivolous and lavish French court and two people trying to get along within it. Anne understands what she lives in and the precarious nature of her position at court. In Vatel, she sees something different- something good. Vatel, on the other hand, isolated on a country estate knows little of the ways of court and only of the people he works with and the pride he takes in his job as master steward. His naivity of the reality of the court and of the court system proves to be his undoing. He believes his life and his work are not subject to the demands of King and court and on this, he discovers he is terribly wrong. I highly recommend this movie to fans of good historical films. It is both artistic and moving, and at least in terms of the setting and of court life, historically accurate.

A brave and overwhelming movie. Ronald Joffe (a true master director)(The mission) describes carefully the efforts and creative virtues of Vatel, a true artist in the sense of that Jean Renoir statement: The art is not a job; it's the way you make that job".

All the corrupt and decadent atmosphere that surrounds the Kingdom and the Court of Louis XIV are shown through a powerful script and very brief but also bitter dialogues, and an amazing employment of the visual and corporal languages.

The direction is first rate , the astonishing visual angles are supported by a descriptive style, breathtaking "travellings" , monumental images and a superb cast. Depardieu show us once more why he's a living legend and one of the top twenty actors in the world; the exquisite and exceptionally gifted and beautiful Uma Thurman gives probably the most powerful performance in her career and obviously Tim Roth, amazing as always.

Watch this film. You'll be widely rewarded.

You'll feel and experience that special rapture , a trademark so typical of the masterpieces.

Roland Joffe's directorial career has been a roller coaster from the powerful debut "The Killing Fields" in 1984 to the critically acclaimed "The Mission" in 1986 to the Demi Moore box-office bomb "The Scarlet Letter" in 1995. "Vatel" has apparently kept Joffe out of the director's chair for the last 5 years. Visually, it is stunning. If you love period pieces with spectacle, this is going to be great! The costumes are gorgeous and the sets exquisite. The banquet with fireworks and ice sculptures is visually stunning. Gerard Depardieu who is one of the most consistent working actors in the world and got his sole Oscar nomination in 1990 for Cyrano de Bergerac does a good job in his role. I found the picture was about courage. As Vatel, he stands up to the brother of Louis XIV who wants to use a kitchen boy for his sexual pleasure. Vatel seems to have a modern sense of outrage and protects the young lad, only to himself become the target of the brotherly affections. Vatel works for Prince De Conde played by Julian Glover from "Troy" while his lovely daughter Princesse De Conde played by Arielle Dombasle romps around lightheartedly. Julian Sands as Louis XIV who previously worked with Joffe in "The Killing Fields" plays the king with a balance of style and danger. Tim Roth plays the rather unsympathetic Marquis De Lauzun and hits on Uma Thurman. As the lady in waiting honored by the king's bed, Thurman is lovely and is one of the few along with Vatel to show a sense of ethics. Her role highlights the dependency of women of her day on pleasing men and her scene where she breaks down is heart-wrenching. "Vatel" certainly is not a flawless film, but it is delivered with style and panache. The themes of courage and personal ethics make it a film about something important. Enjoy!

It seems that filmmaking is every bit as "give and take" as other aspects of modern life. VATEL is an absolute visual masterpiece--the costumes, scenery, special effects, and accute attention to detail left me breathless as I watched this film not once, not twice, but three times. This is a film about a master party planner, and it certainly delivers on that premise.

VATEL, played by French actor Gerard Depardieu, is a fiercly loyal steward to his master--he rarely sleeps during the king's visit because he alone is responsible for the successful staging of the over-the-top festivities. I suspect the audience is supposed to get a good sense of his rags-to-riches story, admire him for his selfless service to his bosses, and root for him when he falls for the impossible Anne (Uma Thurman in an understated role) but the character of VATEL, as poignant as it is, is all but lost in the overwhelming eye candy of this film. Other subtle hints at the lavishly opulent lifestyle of royalty (nothing has changed, really) and distinct separation of the "servant" and "the served" are also fuzzed by the abounding superfluity. The lack of sufficient buildup to VATEL's final decision left me a little confused until I watched it again and was finally able to focus on the actual storyline.

While watching this film for the first time, one will be too overwhelmed with the artistry of this picture--which explains why it was nominated for the art direction Academy Award--but the real "plot" is there and it's a good one. This film isn't all fluff. It's multi-layered and much more complex than many people realize.

No matter how much the King may says he favours you,in the end you are still his property,and therefore dispensible! This is the harsh reality of Court Life under the reign of Louis X1V.Everyone is a puppet,dancing,singing,cooking and even performing sexually for the pleasure of the King.Enter a bankrupt Prince who seeks to regain the favour of the King by planning the most sumptuous weekend entertainments of spectacle and mirth.He calls upon his chief steward,Vatel (Depardieu) as the only one who could pull off such a fete.All stops are to be pulled out,and Vatel tirelessly attends to every decadent detail.It is during the planning of this amusement that Vatel is captivated by Anne (UmaThurman),a stunning Courtier whose very existence also is held in the balance by the King.These two see their very existence and worth devalued to the point of death and ignominity over this weekend,as they both come to the stark realization that their lives are not their own,and never will be.VATEL is a startling and sadly true tale.Movies with such screenplays and attention to costumes and set that are so boldly and intricately made are relatively rare; but when the likes of renowned playright Tom Stoppard and orchestrater/composer Ennio Morricone and director Roland Joffe are involved it is tough to have anything but a hugely entertaining success.VATEL succeeds on ALL LEVELS.Once seen it will likely never be forgotten.Lovers of Early French Baroque music will be enthralled with a soundtrack that is filled with the tunes of Jean-Phillippe Rameau. Excellent companion movies
to watch would be ALL THE MORNINGS OF THE WORLD and RIDICULE.

This exquisitely wrought film is a sumptuous visual masterpiece. While it is, undoubtedly, a feast for the eyes, with stunningly beautiful sets and costumes, the storyline does not keep pace with the visuals.

The story itself is simple. The King of France (Julian Sands) and his royal retinue and entourage of sycophants pay a visit to the financially pressed Prince de Conde (Julian Glover). The Prince impresses upon his steward, Vatel (Gerard Depardieu), the importance of the King's visit, as the Prince hopes, should his efforts to please the King succeed, for a war time Royal appointment to lead troops against the fractious Dutch in order to restore his too depleted fortunes.

Vatel does all that he can on a shoestring budget, and his efforts are glorious indeed, beautifully rendered and an absolute delight. Vatel's eye is caught, however, by one of the King's mistresses, Anne De Montausier (Uma Thurman), a woman whose tender nature has not, as yet, been hardened by the cruelties displayed by the ruling class, and he is smitten. His affection is eventually returned by Her, and it is here that the story line begins to pall, not because Depardieu is considerably older and timeworn, and Thurman is young and beautiful. It palls because there is really nothing that would lead her to take such a leap of faith in such a short time and at such danger to herself. Afterall, the King's entourage is only at the Prince's estate for several days.

Still, Vatel does all he can to contribute to the restoration of his master's fortune, only to find out that he has been the subject of a bet during a card game, one which his master has lost to the King, who has coveted Vatel's artistry and entertainment virtuosity. Vatel discovers that he is to go to the Palace at Versailles, where he will now work. His spirit crushed by this and his heart broken on any number of fronts, Vatel, nonetheless, continues on to his very last breath with his heroic efforts to make his master succeed in with heart's desire.

Look for a beautifully nuanced performance by Depardieu, as well as a compelling one by Uma Thurman. Julian Sands is marvelous as the extravagant and morally bankrupt King of France. Julian Glover is excellent as the financially strapped Prince. The rest of the supporting cast is likewise superb. All this, as well as its visually dazzling art direction, however, is not enough to make it any more than a moderately entertaining period piece. It is a visually sumptuos confection that, ultimately, fails to satisy an appetite.

Vatel, perhaps a weak title to a spectacular film; it recreates the excesses of the French court in its pre-off-with-their-heads-phase. In order to escape bankruptcy, the gout afflicted Viscount must entertain the King so sumptuously and so entreatingly, that the King may commission a war with Holland, thereby paying the Viscount's debts. To keep the King and his courtiers entertained, it was no small thing, so the entire countryside is enlisted in the feasts and entertainment. None will be paid unless the banquets are a success. Louis' entourage of Queen, mistresses, and waggish cavaliers run riot through the festivities. The fete is essentially an Olympic opening parade that goes on for three days in dazzling costume orchestrated by one great artist, the Viscount's steward, Vatel.

Vatel orchestrates the extravaganzas and falls for Uma Thurman, the King's new mistress. She is not yet the jaded courtesan and sees greatness in Vatel's can-do veneer. Indeed, Vatel is a man of integrity, denying the King's pedophile brother a young kitchen boy at the risk of his life. Vatel swats away meddling noblemen and women for the entire feast while making love to Thurman, star-crossed lovers though they are. Gerard Depardieu is brilliant even with his modest grasp of English.