Sofia Coppola’s 2006 film Marie Antoinette has been at the center of movie critic controversy since its release. It has been regarded as stylistically beautiful and fun to watch, while also accused of being devoid of any historical significance. While the film nods its head to popular culture, it does follow the life of the Austrian Archduchess turned French Queen Marie Antoinette. The film opens as Marie Antoinette begins her journey to France to meet her future husband, Louis Auguste (Louis XVI); a marriage arranged between the families to cement a political alliance between the two states. It ends with Marie and her family leaving Versailles at the onset of the Revolution. Coppola’s decision to follow only the title character does not lend
…show more content…
It is difficult to inaccurately represent people or events tied to the Revolution without mentioning some of the precursing events; such as the bread shortages, the storming of the Bastille and the March on Versailles, all of which mentioned in the film. The first mention of the economy is when King Louis debates whether or not to aid the Americans in their Revolution. One of his advisors mentions that the Crown does not have enough to pay the soldiers, to which another advisor replies “just raise taxes.” It is also mentioned that France’s participation in the American Revolution was less about helping the Americans and more about exerting power over the …show more content…
What is more glaring however, is what was left out. Life outside of Versailles, for both the aristocracy and the commoners, is lacking in its entirety. As mentioned previously, the viewer may catch a fleeting fragment of dialogue that pertains to the increasing financial problems of France. The film ends before Marie Antoinette and her family actually leave Versaille. The other important life events, such as getting caught at the border, imprisonment, and the eventual beheading of the King and Queen are completely left out. Furthermore, the audience is wholly ignorant to how France lost its money. It should not take someone with an advanced knowledge of History to be able to understand the film. While it is understandable why Coppola decided to focus on the early adult life of Marie Antoinette and explore her life through a feminist lense, it does not contribute to the larger Historical significance of the era. Given that of the large events that were depicted in the film were done so accurately, my largest critique is about the subject matter itself. This film fulfilled its purpose for being entertaining for a mass audience, however it would need to expand beyond its comfort zone and discuss larger and broader concepts that affected the Revolution if it were to be shown in a
It is difficult to inaccurately represent people or events tied to the Revolution without mentioning some of the precursing events; such as the bread shortages, the storming of the Bastille and the March on Versailles, all of which mentioned in the film. The first mention of the economy is when King Louis debates whether or not to aid the Americans in their Revolution. One of his advisors mentions that the Crown does not have enough to pay the soldiers, to which another advisor replies “just raise taxes.” It is also mentioned that France’s participation in the American Revolution was less about helping the Americans and more about exerting power over the …show more content…
What is more glaring however, is what was left out. Life outside of Versailles, for both the aristocracy and the commoners, is lacking in its entirety. As mentioned previously, the viewer may catch a fleeting fragment of dialogue that pertains to the increasing financial problems of France. The film ends before Marie Antoinette and her family actually leave Versaille. The other important life events, such as getting caught at the border, imprisonment, and the eventual beheading of the King and Queen are completely left out. Furthermore, the audience is wholly ignorant to how France lost its money. It should not take someone with an advanced knowledge of History to be able to understand the film. While it is understandable why Coppola decided to focus on the early adult life of Marie Antoinette and explore her life through a feminist lense, it does not contribute to the larger Historical significance of the era. Given that of the large events that were depicted in the film were done so accurately, my largest critique is about the subject matter itself. This film fulfilled its purpose for being entertaining for a mass audience, however it would need to expand beyond its comfort zone and discuss larger and broader concepts that affected the Revolution if it were to be shown in a