I feel the sudden urge to rush to Estellacat's aid here! :)
First of all, I will readily confess to absolutely loving Robespierre and sharing the perspective that he was much misunderstood and unjustly maligned both in his own time and today. While nearly all the other key revolutionaries have received streets / statues named after them in Paris (and many also in their birthplaces), there has yet to be a rue Robespierre (actually I think one working-class suburb named a tiny street after him, but it got renamed after much controversy). His person and politics remain to this day a lightning rod for controversy (ooh a nice figure of speech if you know his early life :) ), and he attracts many, many more detractors than fans. Unfortunately films such as "Danton," which attempt to connect him to the Communist/Facist movement, do nothing to set the record straight. The fact that Communist leaders, including Lenin, borrowed freely from his and Saint-Just's speeches in particular (one of Lenin's is practically a word-for-word repetition of Saint-Just's speech proposing the Laws of Prairial, if memory serves), only serves to cement the popular misconception that Robespierre was ultimately a tyrant who committed atrocities in the name of the "people."
True, the film "Danton" is not rabidly anti-Robespierrist, but that's about the best that can be said of it. I agree that it would be very hard to cram the Revolution into feature length in any accurate or meaningful way. Since this film doesn't even try, as history it is barely useful. Professors assign it for viewing for two reasons: 1. there is virtually nothing else much better out there on the subject 2. it does show how the Revolution continues to have relevance in the modern world. From a historical study point of view, "The French Revolution" ("La Revolution Francaise") would be a better starting point. It too is wildly inaccurate in many places, but it is a step up. For one thing, it does start at the beginning, rather than in the middle.
As for "Danton" from a cinematic point-of-view, I must confess a bias in actually being in the movie industry, but I think it is mediocre at best. I can't stand Gerard Depardieu, and I know I am not alone (though admittedly this is better than "Green Card"). If you've done some reading on what Danton was really like, you will see in places his characterization amounts to laughable caricature (I recall a drinking scene in particular). The rest of the acting is ok, but the cast overall is way too old - most visibly in their 40's - when the revolutionaries were really very young men, most in their 30's (some younger). I honestly couldn't tell Desmoulins and Saint-Just apart half the time, which is a problem. (Note to self: If you're going to have two cute young men in your movie, they should look really different, so you can keep track of which hottie is which.) Overall, the film lacks the amazing charisma, lustre, frenzied pace, hightened and conflicted emotions which were the hallmarks of these people and this time. It feels like most history: old men in awkward clothes speaking stilted, literary-sounding dialogue. Try to picture it more like the "West Wing": young, brilliant, energetic, sharp individuals who exude charisma speaking eloquent, intelligent, often witty dialogue and moving at a breathtaking pace through a series of intense moments.
no subject
First of all, I will readily confess to absolutely loving Robespierre and sharing the perspective that he was much misunderstood and unjustly maligned both in his own time and today. While nearly all the other key revolutionaries have received streets / statues named after them in Paris (and many also in their birthplaces), there has yet to be a rue Robespierre (actually I think one working-class suburb named a tiny street after him, but it got renamed after much controversy). His person and politics remain to this day a lightning rod for controversy (ooh a nice figure of speech if you know his early life :) ), and he attracts many, many more detractors than fans. Unfortunately films such as "Danton," which attempt to connect him to the Communist/Facist movement, do nothing to set the record straight. The fact that Communist leaders, including Lenin, borrowed freely from his and Saint-Just's speeches in particular (one of Lenin's is practically a word-for-word repetition of Saint-Just's speech proposing the Laws of Prairial, if memory serves), only serves to cement the popular misconception that Robespierre was ultimately a tyrant who committed atrocities in the name of the "people."
True, the film "Danton" is not rabidly anti-Robespierrist, but that's about the best that can be said of it. I agree that it would be very hard to cram the Revolution into feature length in any accurate or meaningful way. Since this film doesn't even try, as history it is barely useful. Professors assign it for viewing for two reasons: 1. there is virtually nothing else much better out there on the subject 2. it does show how the Revolution continues to have relevance in the modern world. From a historical study point of view, "The French Revolution" ("La Revolution Francaise") would be a better starting point. It too is wildly inaccurate in many places, but it is a step up. For one thing, it does start at the beginning, rather than in the middle.
As for "Danton" from a cinematic point-of-view, I must confess a bias in actually being in the movie industry, but I think it is mediocre at best. I can't stand Gerard Depardieu, and I know I am not alone (though admittedly this is better than "Green Card"). If you've done some reading on what Danton was really like, you will see in places his characterization amounts to laughable caricature (I recall a drinking scene in particular). The rest of the acting is ok, but the cast overall is way too old - most visibly in their 40's - when the revolutionaries were really very young men, most in their 30's (some younger). I honestly couldn't tell Desmoulins and Saint-Just apart half the time, which is a problem. (Note to self: If you're going to have two cute young men in your movie, they should look really different, so you can keep track of which hottie is which.) Overall, the film lacks the amazing charisma, lustre, frenzied pace, hightened and conflicted emotions which were the hallmarks of these people and this time. It feels like most history: old men in awkward clothes speaking stilted, literary-sounding dialogue. Try to picture it more like the "West Wing": young, brilliant, energetic, sharp individuals who exude charisma speaking eloquent, intelligent, often witty dialogue and moving at a breathtaking pace through a series of intense moments.