Rating: 
Summary: Not such a swell party
Review: The biggest French box-office disaster in recent memory (it lost more money than Heaven's Gate, wiped out the massive profits of Asterix et Obelix Contre Cesar and nearly took Gaumont with it), this pretty much completes Roland Joffe's unbroken post-The Mission run of box-office and artistic failure. While not as bad as The Scarlet Letter, it's also not as much fun. Unfortunately, this is the kind of film Martha Stewart or Delia Smith might appreciate, but few others will. It all starts off so well. So well that I was wondering why this has such a bad reputation, but it quickly becomes apparent that it really is just a film about a lavish three-day party seen from the point of view of the caterers. The fact that the party is thrown for the Sun King gives it plenty of visual opulence, but the lack of substance becomes more and more apparent as it drags on towards the third day - it's definitely one of those parties that goes on way too long and which you should have left much earlier while it was still in full swing. When one of the characters kills themselves because there aren't enough fish to go around and the script strains to turn it into an act of revolt against a world where nobility of the spirit counts less than accidents of birth, you know that someone's reading a little too much into it. Gerard Depardieu looks alarmingly unhealthy throughout, Tim Roth gives a very bored reprise of his Rob Roy party piece and the wooden Uma Thurman is borderline disastrous/vaguely competent (the scene where she stops the wind by force of will is one of the most laughable pieces of face pulling in recent years). The supporting cast fare better - mostly Brits like Julian Glover, Timothy Spall, Richard Griffiths and Julian Sands. Shot in English, it is very odd to note that Depardieu is dubbed for the odd few words (but rarely full sentences) by another, very British sounding actor. Maybe he was too ill to make the ADR sessions. It is lavish and you can see where the money was spent, you just can't see why. (A version of this review appeared in Movie Collector magazine)
Rating:
Summary: Sad Story, beautiful costumes and rich spectacles
Review: The costumes are magnificent (direct from the museum I guess), the spectacles are well orchestrated, and Gerard Depardieu is in the cast, but the story is so sad; a lot of jealous people despise Vatelle, the cook; they will do all they can to prevent him from succeeding; he commits to pay his providers on behalf of his master; and at the end, the pressure on him is so strong that he just snaps and commits suicide. So Vatelle is a typically sad story.
That is why I didn't like it.
Rating: 
Summary: A DAZZLING VISUAL TRIUMPH...
Review: 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.
Rating: 
Summary: Simply Divine
Review: 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!
Rating: 
Summary: Lavish, perhaps one-star too over-the-top
Review: This ultra-lavish movie is based on the true story of a steward for a nobleman who wants to curry favor with the decadent Louis XIV. The settings, the waterworks and fireworks, the complex presentations of food, the style of dress - - - all the pomp and pagentry tend to get somewhat in the way of the underlying story. Sexy Uma Thurman, mistress of the young king, enters into an improbable affair with the steward, drawn (we are expected to believe) to his innate goodness. But the crux of the whole tale rests on a bet in a poker game...
To tell more would be to tell too much.
Good flik.
Rating:
Summary: Lovely period piece, somewhat lacking in depth
Review: Though the costumes, acting, and setting were all interesting, over all I was disapointed. The film was a little slow.
Rating:
Summary: Vatel's "Choice"...
Review: Vatel is a very subtle story that is cleverly baked into a jumble of party decorations, conspiracies, and love as the main character François Vatel (Gérard Depardieu) is hurriedly preparing for the arrival of Louis XIV (Julian Sands) to the Chantilly chateau. Vatel is the man with the solutions to the problems, the artist behind the decor, and the organizer of all the creations. His job as the steward requires the outmost concentration and eye for detail, and he loves his job. It is also Vatel's belief that he is in control of his fate, but as the party commences he is soon to find a different conviction. Vatel is a film of realism and class struggle as it reveals the different worlds of aristocracy and the plebeians, which together will bring the audience a genuine cinematic experience.
Rating:
Summary: Vatel's "Choice"...
Review: Vatel is a very subtle story that is cleverly baked into a jumble of party decorations, conspiracies, and love as the main character François Vatel (Gérard Depardieu) is hurriedly preparing for the arrival of Louis XIV (Julian Sands) to the Chantilly chateau. Vatel is the man with the solutions to the problems, the artist behind the decor, and the organizer of all the creations. His job as the steward requires the outmost concentration and eye for detail, and he loves his job. It is also Vatel's belief that he is in control of his fate, but as the party commences he is soon to find a different conviction. Vatel is a film of realism and class struggle as it reveals the different worlds of aristocracy and the plebeians, which together will bring the audience a genuine cinematic experience.
Rating:
Summary: Sumptuous but sad
Review: Vatel, a steward in the house of the Prince de Conde, wishes to impress Louix XIV by orchestrating a sumptious three-day feast. Vatel's motivation is two-fold: If he can impress the king with his elaborate festivities, he will win approval for his master, which will bring much needed money into that man's coffers. Vatel is the type of person who keeps deep feelings at bay by organizing and managing his life and the lives of others. To succeed in impressing the king would be the ultimate challenge to his organizational and managerial skills. There are many minor conflicts in this story. Vatel's master is nearly bankrupt and the creditors do not wish to extend him more credit to pay for the food and pyrotechnics. The fishmongers are unable to obtain enough fish to feed the royal party, the candle globes break during shipment, and a worker is accidentaly killed during one of the fireworks shows. But, the biggest external conflict is between Vatel and the villain, the Duc de Lauzun, who is jealous of his connection to a certain noble lady. The internal conflict is intense. Admist all of the festivities and preparations, Vatel has fallen in love with one of the royal guests. Because of his impoverished background and demanding position in his master's household, he does not allow himself to connect deeply with others. The feelings he has for the young woman wreak havoc in his neatly ordered life. This is a sumptuous movie based on a true story. It is a beautiful film depicting a dissipated group of people during a glorious era. The acting is superb. Tim Roth, as usual, is a treat to watch.
Rating:
Summary: eye candy
Review: Vatel, Franois (frŠNswŠ« vŠtl«)Ê(KEY)Ê, fl. 17th cent., French chef, famous in the time of Louis XIV. Mme Marie de SŽvignŽ,
in her letters, speaks of him as the chef of the prince of CondŽ and says that on a Friday, when the king was coming to dinner
and the fish failed to arrive in time, Vatel committed suicide. The authenticity of this story is doubtful.
-The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition.ÊÊ2001. Playwright/Screenwriter Tom Stoppard and Director Roland Joffe have taken the Francois Vatel of historical legend and turned him into a
quintessential French hero in this fabulous looking but oddly soulless film. In France in 1671, Louis XIV is King and, as Mel Brooks might say : "It's
good to be the King!" Fab babes are always ready to get their freak on with you and your nobles will do anything to curry favor. So when the Prince
de Conde is informed that Louis and his court will be coming to visit his estate , Chantilly, Conde tells his famed steward Vatel to pull out all the
stops. Perversely, Conde, who is in desperate need of money, will have to plunge himself even deeper into debt in the mere hope that Louis will
choose him to command the royal forces in the coming war with Holland. Given a blank check, Vatel proceeds to put on the most sumptuous and ornate feasting imaginable. There's a moment early in the King's visit where
as the King walks through the garden the scenery rises, collapses, is rearranged and fits together again like pieces of an elaborate puzzle--by itself this
scene is worth the price of admission. It is remarkable. As the visit goes on, Vatel must improvise when shortages crop up, must respond to the
extravagant requests of the various guests, and must navigate the petty jealousies of the spoiled visitors. He gets himself in a real bind when he
dallies with the beautiful and reserved Anne de Montausier (Uma Thurman) who is both the King's latest favorite and the object of desire of the nasty
and vindictive Marquis de Lauzon (Tim Roth). The caged bird imagery that Mr. Joffe resorts to is a tad heavy-handed, but the film nicely captures the stratification of society (though that does make
the relationship between Vatel and Anne rather improbable) and shows the degree to which everyone is subject to the whims of the King, who can
make or break you with the wave of his hand. Gerard Depardieu as Vatel is appealingly earnest and his total commitment to his work raises it to the
level of artistry. He is so decent, and the culture around him so indecent, that we can understand why Anne is attracted to him, even if we don't
believe they could have been friends given the circumstances of the day, let alone lovers. Then the story takes a couple of odd twists, one that seems to have been pilfered from Ruggles of Red Gap, as Conde loses Vatel to the King in a
card game, then one which matches the fate of the historical Vatel but which occurs for precisely the opposite reason. In real life Vatel supposedly
killed himself for failing to serve the King well, here he kills himself rather than serve the King at all. That seems too much license to take with
history. The film received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for Art Direction, but one wonders if so much energy went into the look of the movie that the
filmmakers lost track of the need to tell a compelling story along with the pretty pictures. When the climactic scene of the film was going on it came
so suddenly and was shot so obliquely that, not knowing the background of the story, I honestly didn't realize what had happened right away. The
logic they saw on their story boards didn't quite make it to the screen. It's definitely worth seeing (and DVD is a must), but you can probably watch
with the sound off; it's intended to be looked at more than watched. GRADE : C+
|
