Valmont
|
Our Price: $20.98 Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $6.91 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Valmont
Movie Review: A CLASSIC !
Summary: 5 Stars
This movie might be a perfect example of how audiences react more to "famous" names and more "superficial" and "commercial" movies... This movie was unfortunate to come out nearly at the same time as the more popular "Dangerous Liasons" featuring more stars... I've seen the movie many times on television, and I admit it is a good entertainment, but it never really made me crazy. And, personally, STARS DOESN'T MEAN GREAT ACTORS, in most cases...
Not long ago VALMONT was shown on television, and having both read the book and seen two movie versions of it ("Dangerous Liaisons" and an old french version with Jeanne Moreau) I was very curious to see what this one would have to offer...
For me, I've never seen a better Valmont or a better Marquise... And the whole cast is great. That's what I call good acting and directing... I haven't seen all Colin Firth's movies, but I can definetely say that it must be one of his best performances ever... Watching him act as Valmont is simple delicious ! Comparing is not always a good thing, but this movie is more luxurious and more "serious" than "Dangerous Liaisons" and the great acting adds to a great result ; a much classier version. If one is seduced by some aging and not-so-attractive Malkovich & Close, well, each his own taste... And I don't consider Pfeiffer and Thurman as great actresses.
I'm sure I won't be able to convince everyone that VALMONT has much more subtle and full-of-finesse performances, and even though it is not a perfect copy of the book, it is the closest in spirit and meaning. Worth your time !
Movie Review: An outstanding yet neglected film
Summary: 5 Stars
I happened to watch this movie on TV, quite a while ago. Despite the rather "unastable" ending (towards the book) I found it very good. Colin Firth (apart from being an absolute hunk in period frocks is also fantastic-though he smiles too much for such a tragic character) is much more down-to-earth and handsome than -otherwise great actor- John Malcovitch. Colin is brooding, John is SCARY. Not the person I'd trust my heart or body to. Glenn Glose is a lot more scary - Anette Benning is fantastic because she is bad, she is sexy,and can be even good sometimes. Glose is bad, bad, and scary. Not to mention that ravishing - and too old - Uma Thurman can't possibly persuade anyone for being innocent, pure and well, virgin. Fairuza Balk, is yet a child. Milos Forman gives the characters a depth that we don't see in DL1. The only thing I consider a good choice, was Michelle Pfeifer as the tragig widow. She is brilliant, beautiful (Meg Tilly was pretty but not as ravishing), and most of all, CAN ACT. A few years younger and next to Firth, could produce sparks. I definitely go for the Milos Forman edition. Despite the really bad ending, he gives his characters more dimensions. In DL1, the good are too good, the bad are too bad, and the people between, insignificant. Life isn't just that way. I hope i will be able to find it in a DVD region 2 someday. Unless I buy an All-regions DVD player. (sigh).
Movie Review: Among the Top 5 Best Period Films of All Time.
Summary: 5 Stars
I first saw this movie with a bad hangover in 1994, and it inspired a lust for getting back into the game. Believe me when I say that Colin Firth as Vicomte de Valmont had me from the very first frame. This is a stellar cast that involves Annette Bening as the evil Madame de Mertei, Meg Tilley as Madame de Tourvel, Henry Thomas as Chevalier de Danceny, and Faruza Balk as Cecille de Volange. This is a movie that is both sensual and humorous, romantic and tragic, but never loses its lust for color beyond the screen. Milos Forman's direction is second to none in a production of Dangerous Liasons which is far sexier and jovial than the stiff piece of offal that features John Malkovitch, Glenn Close, and Michelle Pfeiffer. I cannot say enough wonderful things about this humorous and beautiful adaptation, except that, as another reviewer pointed out, there was never a soundtrack. The music is some of the most heavenly and unforgettable I have had the pleasure to hear. Then again, the movie itself speaks volumes as well. A masterpiece by any definition, please make Valmont an inclusion to your prized film collection as I have.Movie Review: Better Than Dangerous
Summary: 5 Stars
WOW! I liked the *Dangerous Liaisons* film, but LOVED this one! Annette Bening and Colin Firth make a more human, believable pair of seductive snakes than Glenn Close and John Malkovich did (though GC and JM were good too). This film is stunningly beautiful. Over and over, Milos Forman created scenes that look like masterly paintings in motion. I can't even think what it cost to make this movie, with its grand houses and palaces, outdoor scenes, carriages and horses, market-fair, tavern, church, the clothing -- WOW! The acting is superb as well. The plot is handled a bit differently from in the DL film, with the young Cecile being younger than she was played in DL. Some of the emphases and situations in the story are a bit different too, though of course it's basically the same story. In particular, the motivation of Valmont's actions at the end are less clear in this film than in DL, though some reviewers say that's because a scene is missing on the DVD....?
It's hard for me to believe that DL was better received than this film, which has jumped to a spot near the top of my all-time-favorite list.
Movie Review: Valmont vs. Dangerous Liasons
Summary: 5 Stars
In the minority I preferred Valmont to the over produced DL on a number of levels. Annette Benning is an engaging if somewhat deranged scorpion poised on the point of a very Dangereuse needle while Glenn Close is cold, icy and somewhat removed from the whole situation. In the Malkevitch vs. Firth debate the former is unattractive and slimey while Firth is a man obcessed with his own sexuality and conflicted about love at the same time.Handsome and carefully crafted his Valmont is multi dimensional and alluring. He says more with his dark eyes and body language than JM has ever done.
The rest of the cast is equally superior Faruza Balk vs Uma Thurman FB wins, Sian Phillips vs Swoozey Kurtz-take a guess.
Meg Tilly is convincingly conflicted while Michelle Pfeiffer (one of my favs) is out of charecter and out of period just as she is in other period films.
The scope of DL vs Valmont may be superior and the costumes a bit more striking but overall I prefer Valmont. An interesting excercise if to watch both back to back and decide for yourself.