Columbia Pictures | Release Date: October 20, 2006
5.6
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 327 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
175
Mixed:
33
Negative:
119
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
KenGNov 21, 2006
Sofia Coppola shows that she was more interested in Marie Antoinette's shoe collection, then she was in Marie Antoinette.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
5
CarlaCJul 29, 2007
I wanted to enjoy this, but the soundtrack would sweep me right out of the movie to wonder what the heck they were thinking when they chose that movie. Also, it was very uneven between narrative in the first hour and montages in the second. I wanted to enjoy this, but the soundtrack would sweep me right out of the movie to wonder what the heck they were thinking when they chose that movie. Also, it was very uneven between narrative in the first hour and montages in the second. It was very pretty, though. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
RaulSJun 20, 2007
THE BIGGEST DISAPOINMENT OF THE YEAR. An audacious concept, Coppola asks us to watch a two-hour music video, a frothy confection of shoes and parties, only to subvert the film in the last few scenes when Marie Antoinette (unfortunately THE BIGGEST DISAPOINMENT OF THE YEAR. An audacious concept, Coppola asks us to watch a two-hour music video, a frothy confection of shoes and parties, only to subvert the film in the last few scenes when Marie Antoinette (unfortunately played as a wooden stick by Canine-teeth Dunst, the films second flaw) faces her fate with dignity and with class. Character is earned, not bought. By juxtaposing parties and shoe shopping with the queen Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
AliciaD.Nov 14, 2006
I kind of liked this movie.... but it's hard to say... it really dragged on.. a lot! There were certain parts that dragged on for at least half an hour.... then other parts that skipped about 3 years.. parts were very confusing but I kind of liked this movie.... but it's hard to say... it really dragged on.. a lot! There were certain parts that dragged on for at least half an hour.... then other parts that skipped about 3 years.. parts were very confusing but others were very interesting..Over all i give it a 5! I think i would be able to sit and watch it again but not for a while.. it went on too LoNG!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ChadS.Oct 22, 2006
Somewhere in England, in a pub, Midge Ure, with beery breath, blurts out to anybody who's listening, "This bloody movie begins in "Vienna, and I wrote a song called "Vienna"! Fancy that! It would've been f****n perfect, in my Somewhere in England, in a pub, Midge Ure, with beery breath, blurts out to anybody who's listening, "This bloody movie begins in "Vienna, and I wrote a song called "Vienna"! Fancy that! It would've been f****n perfect, in my humble opinion, had it accompanied Marie's journey to Versailles! I'm from the eighties, too, you know! And I need the money, goddamnit!" Sorry. Crazy Ultravox fan talking here. No love for the London-based synth-band, but Adam Ant, of all people, has the unique distinction of having his music accompany a silent film classic(Fritz Lang's "Metropolis"), and a period-piece biopic about a queen with too much free time. "Marie Antoinette" bears a faint similarity to Aleksandr Sokurov's "Russian Ark", in which your entertainment is derived mainly from the historical importance of the film's location. Some of the casting is disastrous. With the right actors, the repetitious scenes of court life wouldn't seem quite as tedious. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
BobM.Oct 20, 2006
The reviews below say "beautifully drawn out", "worth it just for the imagery alone...", "a visual fest", etc. I agree with these comments, but beautiful film making doesn't make an engaging story. This movie unfortunately digresses The reviews below say "beautifully drawn out", "worth it just for the imagery alone...", "a visual fest", etc. I agree with these comments, but beautiful film making doesn't make an engaging story. This movie unfortunately digresses from the perfection of "Lost In Translation"'s ability to combine Sofia's visual mastery with a plot and gentle turn of events that keep you wanting more. This movie returns to the "pop art" feel of The Virgin Suicides, where you want to like it, but after around an hour or so, the pace of the movie put me to sleep (almost literally). Maybe it was just missing Bill Murray? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
SamMar 19, 2007
Great costume/set designs and a decent performance from Dunst saves this movie from being a total exercise in dullness.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
RobinJ.May 16, 2007
There is nothing much in this film than the formal ceremonies and all that glamor. But it does well in showing the excess in indulgence behind the palace walls. Some scenes are too long and unnecessary. The scenes show Marie lazying around There is nothing much in this film than the formal ceremonies and all that glamor. But it does well in showing the excess in indulgence behind the palace walls. Some scenes are too long and unnecessary. The scenes show Marie lazying around and daydreaming which makes you feel like dozing off. The acting was fine, especially Kristen, who does great at being an ignorant queen. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ChiT.Nov 11, 2006
Not total crap but hardly riveting. The film should have had a warning that its more about fancy costumes rather than MA and her place in french history. Looks like the only thing Sofia Coppola basically wanted was for people to sympathise Not total crap but hardly riveting. The film should have had a warning that its more about fancy costumes rather than MA and her place in french history. Looks like the only thing Sofia Coppola basically wanted was for people to sympathise with MA - why else would she not have directed the film in such a way that it also shows her death and how the masses in France were starving whilst she was leading a lavish lifestyle - after all, that's what she is most famous for and everyone associates her with the gallows. Trendy music and moving camera's worked in Lost in Translation cos it was in a modern trendy place called 21st century Tokyo - but to try and apply a rock based pop art soundtrack and camera movements to a slow anti-climatic period drama costume set doesnt really work - but at least we now know what to expect in a Sofia Coppola directed film. Tarantino car boot trunk shots she will never achieve! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MimiW.Nov 19, 2006
Although Coppola captured the selfish decadence of Marie Antoinette's lifestyle well, it was hardly historically enriching. I found it most disturbing that, while it was obviously appealing to the demographic consisting of teenage Although Coppola captured the selfish decadence of Marie Antoinette's lifestyle well, it was hardly historically enriching. I found it most disturbing that, while it was obviously appealing to the demographic consisting of teenage girls, the only real developed storyline revolved around Marie Antoinette seducing her husband. This movie was in no way profound, and only skimmed the surface of a potentially deep storyline. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
TonyC.Jan 17, 2007
A lush, gorgeous watch. The natural nobility of the white, high stepping carriage horses highlighted the shallow posturing of a venal court, and a story too loose and fragmented for those with no knowledge of Marie Antoinette's history. A lush, gorgeous watch. The natural nobility of the white, high stepping carriage horses highlighted the shallow posturing of a venal court, and a story too loose and fragmented for those with no knowledge of Marie Antoinette's history. Kirsten Dunstan did her beautiful best, but her journey from a naive teenage bride to a self indulgent decadent didn't quite come off; she was too nice from beginning to end. Unfortunately, despite its opulence, its a movie that can be dismissed from one's mind immediately after the end credits stop rolling. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
RobespierreJ.Mar 26, 2007
It's worse than I thought. It's shallow and that I expected but I couldn't anticipate its tackyness or at best, its thourough ordinariness. I liked the masked ball.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MarkK.Jun 5, 2007
I wanted to like this movie, really. However, it is too long and after the novelty of having 80s music set to 19th century costume wears off, the movie drags. A disappointment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
HardyC.Oct 17, 2006
Utterly boring film. If only this fantastic cast had a more interesting script to work with . . .
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JohnYoungOct 22, 2006
A vapid costume-drama in which the costumes were the most interesting things in sight. Could have been cut down to 60 minutes without losing any of its plot, tone, or message.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
CateE.Feb 21, 2007
Visually stunning, but how long can that sustain a movie for. You start to wonder during if you're watching Marie Antoinette being self indulgent, or Copala's self-indulgent movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful