I can quite confidently say that many times movies encourage me to look up history books (okay, Wikipedia) and research what is real and what is fact – whether the movie be based on fact, or be ‘loosely based on a true story’ as some like to disclaim across opening titles. I’m not quite sure what Sofia Coppola had in mind when taking on the project of Marie Antoinette, but it certainly wasn’t to capture more than the materialistic whims and petulant behaviour of an Austrian teenaged duchess put into an arranged marriage to a French prince.

Its undeniable that this film is quite visually stunning; the palette of colours on display is breathtaking and likely to lift anyone’s spirits as well as the costuming; designed by Milena Canonero which won the Oscar award for this film. The lush, colourful and playful designs were quite easily the highlight – as such even at the British Oscars (BAFTA awards) costume design, make up & hair, as well as production design were nominated. Where it is important – categories such as screenplay, best film or best acting – they would never come into it.

At my best assumption, Coppola wanted to be able to portray the notoriously divisive young monarch and dauphine to be angst ridden, conflicted, and a victim of circumstance; but without having seen a larger portion of Marie Antionette’s life, It leaves us with more questions than when we entered. What we are pushed to care about is Marie Antoinette’s failed seduction of her husband, and the fact that he is either so disinterested (or possibly just not attracted to her) that it takes seven years for them to have a child, something which her sends letter after letter coaxing/demanding her to do in order to cement the ‘bond’ between Austria and France. This seems to be the most important aspect of the film, of the plot; the attempts at lovemaking between Marie Antoinette, and husband Louis XVI (played very statically by Jason Schwartzman) and the great ability for her to ‘comfort shop’, spending more money than she or the monarchy can afford. Which is oh, so realistic. Kudos to Kirsten Dunst for acting that out so well!

One of the aspects of this film that grates on me is the soundtrack/score – whilst of course its great to be able to blend what is traditional music for the period of the film it represents, clashing it with loud and brash punk/pop music just doesn’t work.

As pretty and cutesy this is (visually); it really leaves me feeling empty which shows beauty is only skin deep. Or.. ‘screen deep’ in this case?

Related Posts

• Mate, you’re too late and you weren’t worth the wait, were you?
• Consoling your Glee-less heart
• Just Quickly: The Emmys 2010
• Another nostalgic re-watch..
• Legion – a review
• I am.. inspired by Christina Aguilera.
• Before Bieber, there was Esmee..
• Lights will guide you home..
• Booty-Shakin’ Update
• Giggle-Fit Inducing Moments in Film #1