This film is considered a major flop and the French absolutely abhor it in every sense. I decided to view it and remain neutral and just let the film play out without having read the bad reviews beforehand. Story is set in Chantilly, France in 1671 and a broke nobleman named Prince de Conde (Julian Glover) has decided to throw a 3 day feast for Louis XIV (Julian Sands) and all of his royal friends with the hope that if he is impressed enough he will commission the Prince to General as war looms with Holland. Conde has put the 3 day feast and all of the entertainment in the hands of Francois Vatel (Gerard Depardieu) who can work magic when it comes to preparing feasts even though he may not have enough food. Vatel is a patient man full of loyalty and honor and ethics. At times he is forced to tell some of the royal guests "No" to certain extravagances and this has caught the eye of Anne de Montausier (Uma Thurman) who has become the Kings new mistress and also has to repel the advances of the Marquis de Lauzun (Tim Roth).
*****SPOILER ALERT*****
While the King is playing cards he asks Conde to put up Vatel as part of a bet and Conde reluctantly agree's. Conde loses and Vatel is given the news that he must pack his bags and get ready to head to Versailles. Vatel is so crushed by his loyalty being ignored that he kills himself. This film was directed by Roland Joffe who had given everyone a truly horrible adaptation of "The Scarlett Letter" and I don't think this film is anywhere near as bad as that although several critics will say otherwise. The look of the film is very impressive and the Art Design was nominated for an Oscar. Good cinematography make this a visual delight but the story seems to be another story. I do recommend this film and I'll first tell what I liked about it. First, I though Depardieu gave a convincing performance and his loyalty was very evident in his characterization. He convincingly played a man sworn to do the best he can and asks of nothing in return. Secondly, even though a romance between Thurman and Depardieu seems very unlikely I did understand why she would admire him. How can anyone not be touched by his tenderness and morals. But I have to admit that the story could have been a lot better if more had been explained about Vatel. We watch Vatel in this film spend too much time poking his fingers in pots and tasting the food. Of course all of royalty is portrayed as spoiled snobs and it's now become cliche to show them in this light. This film caused a ruckus when it opened at Cannes because the script was rewritten by an Englishman from a French story and it was filmed in English. The bad reviews were all aimed at Joffe and I'm not sure if his career will ever be the same. This film does have some glaring flaws but I suggest to people that if they view it to do so with a fair and open mind. I do think Depardieu is good in this film and Thurman isn't bad either. I think it's worth a look.
*****SPOILER ALERT*****
While the King is playing cards he asks Conde to put up Vatel as part of a bet and Conde reluctantly agree's. Conde loses and Vatel is given the news that he must pack his bags and get ready to head to Versailles. Vatel is so crushed by his loyalty being ignored that he kills himself. This film was directed by Roland Joffe who had given everyone a truly horrible adaptation of "The Scarlett Letter" and I don't think this film is anywhere near as bad as that although several critics will say otherwise. The look of the film is very impressive and the Art Design was nominated for an Oscar. Good cinematography make this a visual delight but the story seems to be another story. I do recommend this film and I'll first tell what I liked about it. First, I though Depardieu gave a convincing performance and his loyalty was very evident in his characterization. He convincingly played a man sworn to do the best he can and asks of nothing in return. Secondly, even though a romance between Thurman and Depardieu seems very unlikely I did understand why she would admire him. How can anyone not be touched by his tenderness and morals. But I have to admit that the story could have been a lot better if more had been explained about Vatel. We watch Vatel in this film spend too much time poking his fingers in pots and tasting the food. Of course all of royalty is portrayed as spoiled snobs and it's now become cliche to show them in this light. This film caused a ruckus when it opened at Cannes because the script was rewritten by an Englishman from a French story and it was filmed in English. The bad reviews were all aimed at Joffe and I'm not sure if his career will ever be the same. This film does have some glaring flaws but I suggest to people that if they view it to do so with a fair and open mind. I do think Depardieu is good in this film and Thurman isn't bad either. I think it's worth a look.