(no subject)

[tearosefury.livejournal.com]

In a convo with a friend of mine on AIM last night, after being asked if the film Danton was ambiguous in not clearly taking sides, I said this:

EccentricBeauty9: Well, it's about the Terror

EccentricBeauty9: So, *lol* by consequence yes, to a certain degree

EccentricBeauty9: Danton is lionized to a certain extent

EccentricBeauty9: But Robespierre is also treated more sympathically than you could, theoretically, treat him

EccentricBeauty9: But everyone has a soft spot for Robespierre (by everyone I mean, those who study the Revolution; most of us at least) so, that makes sense

 Would you agree that this is for the most part true, that most of us to some degree are a bit of a sucker for Robespierre? Or are there some hard core anti-Robespierrists out there?

Comments

[tearosefury.livejournal.com]

1) Ah!, I love Gerard Depardieu but, that's just a matter of preference and

2) The only thing I have to argue with here, (because the rest of it is about being annoyed by historical inaccuracy which I address above)is that I *cannot believe* you found the characters in this movie to be stiff and unpassionate -- many a film critic thought they were the exact opposite of what you said, "old men in awkward clothes...etc" - see Roger Ebert's review, for one. I very much felt the passion, the extremeity and and the intensity of the time flying off the screen; what about all those scenes in the Assembly with the screaming and intensity of the political passions and instability at the time? And Desmoulins deep seated love of what he was fighting for, in face of his very obvious fear of death, is likewise very touching. Anyway, I think this is just an example of different styles touching different people, because these men felt very real, very passionate, and very down to earth to me in this film.

And as for Robiespierre - his legend revolves around the fact that he was actually that prudish - or somewhere approaching it.