Les jardins du roi

Bon film !

Bon film !

source: A Little Chaos

I watched this through to the end in the hope that there would be an amazing ending or a twist. Anything to relieve the boredom from watching this drivel. Everything about it was awful. I did not believe any of the characters, I will overlook the Frenchman who spoke with a thick Northern English accent, but if this was an amateur play, maybe I could forgive it, but these are well known seasoned actors and no one seemed convincing at all. Kate Winslet was particularly dull, I am sure she was almost asleep in some scenes but the main problem was that nothing lifted the film from being so very dull. The sabotage scene was almost interesting, but even that was as wet as the garden project became. I cannot understand why anyone liked this dull, dreary, lifeless movie.

By just looking at the cast, I shouldn't be surprised that this movie is good. But I was surprised. It was more than good. It was mesmerizing. I am compelled to get something out of the way first. The period piece is set at a period of Louis XIV when France was enjoying power and prosperity and the polarization of rich and poor had not yet developed to the point, a century later, of catastrophic meltdown. Still, to enjoy this movie, one needs to avoid adopting a judgmental stance of condemning the outrageous extravagance of royalty, but focus on the appreciation of beauty and art and the admiration of the protagonist, a female architect by the name of Sabine De Barra, so brilliantly portrayed by Kate Winslet. Without belaboring the details, I'll just report that the simple plot surrounds Louis XIV's (Alan Rickman) wish to have created something of an esthetic perfection in the form of gardens in the lavish Palace of Versailles. One crucial component is an open-air, circular ball room that is complete with auditorium seats and running fountains. Against all odds, Sabine wins this job by impressing the King's trusted master-builder Andre Le Notre (Matthias Schoenaerts) with her design that subscribes to the theory of having a little chaos (hence the title) rather than complete, rigid order. While Le Notre disagrees with her theory, he has the vision and capacity to accept into the project "a voice different from his own". Development of romance is predictable, as are dramatic conflicts and crisis. Winslet is pitch-perfect as a woman with talent and passion for her profession that was all but male-dominated. There is also the more subtle, but fully palpable side of vulnerability which Winslet projects almost effortlessly. Belgian actor Schoenaerts would have impressed you, if you have seen him in "Rust and bone" (2012) providing solid support to Marion Cotillard in her impeccable performance as a women who just lost her legs in an accident. In addition to directing, Rickman also played a key character, giving the reason that since set construction for this movie was so expensive, saving the salaries of one key character would help to ease the budget. Whether you consider that jest or not, his portrayal of Louise XIV is immensely successful in shaping this character into someone almost lovable. Stanley Tucci does the usual Stanley Tucci thing, lighting up the screen with his flamboyant portrayal of a charismatic nobleman. In a small role of one of the woman at the King's court is one who is among my top favorite, Jennifer Ehle. While she has produced an abundance of excellent work over the years, she'll always be remembered from "Possession" (2002) as Christabel LaMotte who, incidentally, is in the same predicament as Sabine De Barra, a talented woman in a male-dominated society. Cinematography, art direction and music all contribute to making this movie such a pleasure to watch. If I have one criticism, it would be the somewhat contriving mysterious background of Sabine who is known to be a widow but with very little other information. It is obvious though that she is trying very hard to block certain excruciatingly painful memories, with little success. It is also obvious that this baggage was becoming an almost insurmountable obstacle in the development of a more intimate relationship between her and La Notre. The mystery, eventually when revealed, is neither earth-shattering nor emotionally compelling. The way it is dragged out like a suspense mystery is quite unnecessary, to say the least.

Alan Rickman is one of the many talents we lost in 2016 and this was one of the few films he directed. It's not a fantastic film, more a collection of good moments that sadly never join up, but you can't fault Rickman or Kate Winslet, who shine when on screen. It was released in a year with a lot of other similar films, and perhaps that hurt it in terms of acclaim, as did the fact that the plot isn't the easiest to explain, but as I say, there are certainly moments within it that make it worth a watch. We miss Alan Rickman terribly.

At a time when "F&F7" is dominating box office takings, this could hardly be a more different offering: not so much fast and furious as slow and sedate. It is pitching for a more refined, but inevitably much smaller, audience and its target demographic will find it a qualified success. Modestly enjoyable but unexceptional. Set at the court of the French King Louis XIV (Alan Rickman) in Versailles (but wholly shot at some splendid British locations), this a well-intentioned, mildly feminist work that presents a woman landscape designer - the fictional Sabine de Barra (Kate Winslet) - in a world (like most) dominated by men such as the real-life Andreé Le Nôtre (Belgian actor Matthias Schoenaerts). Not only does she cause a little chaos in the gardens, but in the court where, in a surprising couple of scenes, she discovers and exposes the sexism and ageism towards the female aristocracy. At one level, this is Rickman's film: it is only the second he has directed, he contributed to the script, and he steals certain scenes as the Sun King. However, for me, it was owned by the ever-winsome Winslet. She is somebody one can imagine getting her hands dirty in gardens and standing up for her sex; she is one of the finest British actress of her generation; and I have never seen her in a role where she did not bring something a little special. But, at the end of the day, "A Little Chaos" has too little going on and too small a budget to be more than an pleasant antidote to the crash-bang- wallop of too many other movies.

It was Alan Rickman's birthday. February, twenty-first, two-thousand-fifteen. The art-house GFT cinema in Glasgow had devoted the entirety of cinema 1 to premiere his second directorial feature 'A Little Chaos'. Rickman fans clutching beloved memories of Snape, The Sheriff of Nottingham and Hans Gruber, among devotees of his "art" films thronged the auditorium. Rickman came out to ask that the audience put all thoughts of historical inaccuracy from our minds and enjoy his film. What followed was a slight tale, painterly but meaner with colours and longueurs than Peter Greenaway. In fact, with the plot of Kate Winslet's architect Sabine being hired to design an elaborate feature of Louis XIV's Versaille with all concomitant trials and tribulations, this could have been a Tarantino-esque chimera tribute to Greenaway. However this was something else. With a hero increasingly willing to sacrifice herself in more dangerous situations in order to secure a building, this was Die Hard in pompadours and corsets. With a lowly individual championing the cause of revolutionary ideas in the face of manipulative local powers and one particularly scheming higher-up, this was Robin Hood with a set square. With ghostly memories of a bygone tragedy arresting the hero's progress this was 'Truly, Madly Deeply' in powdered wigs. This was more of a Rickman greatest hits package than he may have presumed. However, Rickman dismissed questions, in the follow-up q&a in Glasgow (when he could understand questions delivered in none too heavy a "too Scottish" accent), about the blockbusters his fans cherish his villainy in. "These were all about twenty five years ago" he gently chided a 'Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves' fan. Maybe, in those name-making roles he - a trained artist before he stepped foot on stage - felt that he was broadly scribbling while in his "deeper" films he may feel he was - and is - applying oil to canvas - but what in cinema is more captivating than a scribble and what could be duller than watching paint dry? 'A Little Chaos' is by no means dull but it is as guilty of the Hollywood conventions Rickman would deny as his burdensome blockbusters. Beginning with the independent and single woman Sabine de Barat in her self sufficient farmstead it charts her battle in a world "where men stand still and give the orders and women bow and curtsy" but the feminist message is slightly lost in what becomes a (financially steered?) Disney princess plot with an over-reliance on handsome noblemen and wall-to-wall wobbling cleavage. Verite gives way to caricature by turns but Stanley Tucci sketches a humorous and diverting character in his Duc D'Orleans and Rickman himself performs Louis XIV in Zen- like cruise-control, a hidden danger lurking under quixotic whimsy. From its title to its "peak-plummet-peak" Hollywood skeleton, Winslet facial grimaces and period drama pillar-hiding and fan-fluttering, 'A Little Chaos' could be a clichéd Ricky Gervais spoof of the kind of film that receives Oscar nods. In this light it is difficult to mark the film as truly escapist of the Rickman-dismissed blockbuster movies in which he made a pretty penny. Surely though, in the age of 'Birdman', actors of Rickman's standing can't dismiss the comic-book caricatures they are beloved for. Rickman, in a subtle dig at the chiselled supermen his villains contended with, told Glasgow that he liked working with the actors of the ilk of 'A Little Chaos' cast because they, like him, had performed and directed stage plays, had "been in the gym". Such high handedness serves only to gift Rickman a complacency that blinds him to the effete superficiality of "art films" whose pauses, symbolism and moments of plot highs and lows strike the same beats as the cop partner being killed, the bomb being detonated and the villain being dropped from the roof in an action blockbuster.

This is one grotesque production. Historically, the premise of that movie is simply absurd (a woman in charge of landscaping a Versailles garden in 1685? Hey, what garden herb did the screenwriters smoke?!) but the promise of glorious visuals or some interesting insight on Louis's court convinced me to see that movie on DVD. Oh boy, what did I get myself into: the anachronistic nonsense is matched only by an equally ridiculous and hackneyed plot, and the dialogues are so bland my jaw dropped. The actors are doing a good job, uh, with whatever they have to work for -i.e not much. One feels sorry for them, truly. I fear too that not one scene was actually filmed in Versailles -every château front or rural landscape on view in this film is indeed clearly British. (yes Victoria, there is a difference between French and British architecture!)The final view of "Versailles" looks completely CGI. What target audience did the producers have in mind with this expensive piece of drivel? I learned nothing from it, and -to quote another empire builder- I was not even amused. You can cinematically toy with history if you get something out of it (possibly some education, Monty Python-type humor, etc) , but out of the inane plot cooked up by this movie, I got only boredom, and great sadness at the waste.

A rare gem in the world of contemporary movies, this story has sympathetic characters. I thought they all but disappeared from the screen. It is purely fictional, but I like to believe it could have happened. Schoenaerts plays Andre Le Notre, the real landscape architect who designed the park of Versailles for King Louis XIV. Andre is interviewing other landscape gardeners to help him with the job, among them the only woman, fictional Sabine De Barra (Winslet). They don't meet so cute, but Le Notre is intrigued and Sabine is hired. In the society of the time, Sabine is a bit of a low class oddity who manages to make friends in high places. Admitted to court, she attracts attention and curiosity for her beauty and skills, but she also attract Le Notre's wife jealousy. Le Notre is unhappily married with his unfaithful Madame, but Madame is well connected at court and sort of blackmails him into staying with her. However, that will not stop the slowly burning romance between Andre and Sabine. Sabine holds back not only because Andre is married but also because of her mysterious tragic past. We finally get to know Sabine's sad history during one of the most moving scenes of the film. Sabine talks to the court ladies and discovers that they also share tragic losses, although at court it is forbidden to talk about death. Once able to face her past, Sabine can finally move into her future. Winslet is really good as Sabine and Schoenaerts seems particularly gifted for the role of the strong, silent, lover. He had similar roles in The Danish Girl and Suite Francaise and was equally good. Their scenes together are moving and tender, without any of the artificial slickness or aggressiveness of contemporary romances.Rickman playing Louis XIV as a rather melancholic man who takes a fatherly fancy to Sabine. The music is not overbearing period and the costumes are absolutely fantastic. The final scene looks like is taking place in the real, still existing, rock ballroom. Great movie, a balm for the soul.