Let Them Eat Cake .... please!

Watched "Marie Antoinette" (Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwarzman), directorial work of Sofia Coppola at Evanston. Movie chronicles the life of the ill-fated Marie Antoinette, a Hapsburg Austrian royalty, from her passionless marriage to Louis XVI of France as part of a strategic alliance to unite Austria and France, to her life with the French royal family, her much-delayed success at producing an heir to the throne, to the Versailles being attacked by the mob, her responsive curtsey to them, to her and her family's exit from the palace. (It ends at this point, nothing told of her tragic beheading).

The movie was heavily edited by music (classical and modern). Effect: Series of MTV clips. Cinematography was edgy and experimental (e.g., camcorder views, ants eye views, bird's eyeviews, etc.). There was no harmonizing on the actors' accents, and thus Marie Antoinette had an American accent, her mother had a very British accent, her daughter spoke French, …. You get the picture. Come to think of it, there wasn't much dialogue in the entire movie really. All these therefore made me conscious that I was watching a movie, and I did not get lost in the "period-ness" of the film. Which ain't all that bad really. It's clearly the intention of the director to make this a novel experience of sorts, and none of the restrictions of a docu-drama. This lack of pretense in turn has allowed her licence to veer away from historical accuracy.

Another observation about the film: There was a lack of identifiable storyline development. There is none of the traditional laying of a foundation, to the development of a plot, to the denouement, to resolution. Just plain old telling of a seemingly never-ending story. And so if you asked what was the point of the movie.... I cannot really say it was a story about the triumph of good over evil, or a story of love overcoming hate, or a story of the ironies of life .... I can only tell you... It is a story about Marie Antoinette.

So what did I enjoy about watching the movie? (If this be the gauge of a good movie)--

1. The setting and background definitely had all the fun stuff. Big palace, ornate drapings, all the period furniture and costumes…. Elaborate table settings and food, nothing subtle about this film. It is all about over-the-top, as French royalty in that period was known for.

2. the shots of the palace, the grounds and gardens;

3. the costumes, shoes (YES!), finery, and ... very importantly, the heavenly DESSERTS (sweets, puffs, chocolates – all fluffy and rich even from across the screen);

4. little Marie Therese (with her wild curly blonde hair);

5. The "I Want Candy" cut – fun, fun.

Other than that, I had moments when I just wanted out. The movie felt on the whole dragging, sad to say.

And I don't get why Kirsten Dunst had to keep this self-amused (read: bimbo-ish) smile all throughout the movie. This is clearly all intentional. But it didn't make much sense to me.

Photo: Tile fresco of Marshall Field's (now Macy's) on State Street in Chicago.