How many are we, who appreciate the movie Valmont?
Fifteen years ago, I went to the movies with a young woman, and the only movie at the theatre at the time, which wasn’t obvious rubbish, was a movie called Valmont, by once famous Milos Forman.
After the film, the girl said: “Well, that one wasn’t too good.”
I said: “Mmm…”
I saw that movie five times in the next ten days, at the same theatre, often by myself. It was simply the best movie I ever saw. Still one of the greatest.
I thought that once the “Dangerous Liaisons”-hype was over (Malkovich, Close movie based on same novel, appearing just before Valmont) this picture will be appreciated as one of the true masterpieces ever.
But no, nobody’s heard of it, and those easily counted who has, don’t regard it as anything special at all.
I could go on forever, why this picture is a masterpice – the script, Bening and Firth, the details and the whole, but I just want to throw out this question:
Isn’t it great, the last great picture of Forman, the peak of his career? It’s absolutely perfect, isn’t it?
I am a big fan of this movie, too! I like it much better than Dangerous Liasons. The acting in DL is, IMHO, too over-the-top. Valmont’s performances are more believable, while still being dramatic and entertaining. Annette Bening is outstanding, and I love Fairuza Balk and Henry Thomas in their roles as the young lovers.
I like some parts of DL and some parts of Valmont, and would sort of mix and match them to come closer to the book [which I read in french lit 25 years ago…hm, wonder if i can find a copy in english]
I didnt like Anette Bennings performance and preferred Glen Closes’ performance. I thought that the story line and dialog and directions for DL’s Mme de Tourvell were better, but I liked Meg Tilly as the poor woman, but not her dialog and direction. Keanu as the chevalier sicked, I thought that Henry Thomas did it better. If we could have combined Malkovich’s behaviors with Colin FIrth’s looks it probably would appeal to more people, but Malk had that air of superciliousness that I associate with the character as seen in the book…Fairuz was better as the little exvirgin than Uma Thurman…she just acted the way I saw her.
oops…I guess that I let the cat out of the bag that I rather liked taking french lit…and can enjoy seeing them turned into movies…and the ‘letter’ novel is a format I find endlessly fascinating! [though I admit the book being a series of letters makes it an excercise in mental imagery, and as I said, parts of each version were close to the book but neither version was true to the book.]
I love both movies in different ways. Nothing in my mind compares to John Malkovich in DL and the “It’s beyond my control” scene. Man that was powerful. However, Colin Firth and Annette Bening bring something else to the story that I never considered until I’d watched both movies repeatedly. The characters in DL are so cold and menacing. It blows my mind that young Cecile or anyone else would trust Glenn Close’s steely Merteuil or John Malkovich’s heartless Valmont. Annette Bening and Colin Firth, on the other hand, bring a lightness and likeableness to the characters that wasn’t there before.
Perhaps it isn’t as historically accurate to have these French nobles being so carefree and fun, but in my opinion, it works better because we can see why the young lovers are sucked into the games. Let’s face it, Bening and Firth make Merteuil and Valmont really cool, fun people who know how to have a good time. Even though you know what they’re up to, you really want to like them. Great directing on Milos Foreman’s part. It’s too bad that this movie will forever be in Dangerous Liaisons’ shadow.
I agree that Valmont is unfairly overshadowed by Dangerous Liaisons, as it’s a pretty good movie in its own right, but I can’t knock the latter down much, either. They’re both good films in their own right; don’t confuse style with quality. The Frears film is played like an over-the-top opera; the Forman film is lower key. They both do what they set out to do, and do it admirably. Just different takes on the material.
Incidentally, for anyone interested in yet another angle on the story, there’s a South Korean version that came out a couple of years ago and that I can solidly recommend as also being very good. There’s one narrative hiccup toward the end where they had to change something because there would be no Feudal Korean equivalent of a French character, but otherwise it works extremely well. I’d put it very close to the previous two films, in fact. You’ll probably have to scrounge around to locate a copy, but it’s definitely worth it.