Edmond

A great homage to French writer Edmond Rostand, the author of "Cyrano de Bergerac", a work that would become a legend, the play was played uninterrupted from 1897 until today, plus being screened many times, with many famous casts, in many films, the most famous being the one with Gérard Depardieu. All the actors are excellent and Alexis Michalik's direction is truly revolutionary.

What a pleasant surprise. I started streaming this movie for lack of a better option, thinking I was about to watch a tasteless biopic, and I ended up with the warm feeling of having watched a great moment of cinema.

Far from being a boring biopic, Edmond is a fast paced comedy full of emotions which brings you into the theatrical atmosphere of 19th century Paris. Dialogs are fantastically written (at least if you watch it in French). Casting brings together more than a few good actors, and the acting itself is perfectly on point and really carries the movie.

Overall a very good film, as French as a fine Bordeaux wine. Thanks for this delightful motion picture.

One of the best films we've seen in many years. Excellent casting, well paced, captivating plot, well-structured flow, excellent lighting and processing... the craft and effects are top notch. An overall excellent film in all aspects!

I saw the play 'Edmond' written and staged by Alexis Michalik in Paris almost two years ago. The show had received five Molieres prizes (the supreme distinctions of the French theater) and impressed me with the combination of modernism and respect for tradition, of perfectly professional acting with tasteful directorial innovations, placed in the service of the spectators and their experiences. Theatre du Palais-Royal where the performance took place was also the place where (about 120 years ago) the events in the play take place - the story of the creation and of the premiere of one of the most successful works in the history of French theater, Edmond Rostand's 'Cyrano de Bergerac'. I was looking forward to seeing the film version created by the same director, and my expectations were largely rewarded.

For the spectators who are passionate about the history of the theater and especially the history of the French theater, this film will be a delight. The sparkling dialogue, the humor based upon situations and characters, and the interpretation of the actors team made up in the good tradition of the Comedie Francaise (with a special mention for Olivier Gourmet in the role of the great actor Coquelin) seemed to me very good. Beyond the love story or story in the film's plot, Alexis Michalik's 'Edmond' is a love affair with the French theater and an affectionate tribute to theater creators 120 years ago. Another great quality of the film is the glamorous and colorful reconstruction of Paris in the last decade of the 19th century. From this point of view, 'Edmond' walks on the traces of films like 'Moulin Rouge!' directed by Baz Luhrmann or Martin Scorsese's 'Hugo', combining meticulous documentation, attention to detail and respect for authenticity, and using computer graphics techniques to enhance history and to create the landscape of an era of fascinating social diversity and artistic effervescence.

How does the film compare to the play (which originally was based on a script that could not find financing a few years ago)? The theatrical version of 'Edmond' directed by Alexis Michalik was free-flowing and dynamic, in a cinematic style. The film version of 'Edmond' directed by Alexis Michalik is largely based on a theatrical style in which the beauty of the text and the art of the actors transform the words into feelings, with focus on passion for theater. Technically, both achievements are impressive. As an impact on the public, however, I believe that the theatrical version succeeded better. The reason is, perhaps, that in theater the cinematic style has most of the positive influence, while in the film the theatrical style adds a difficult-to-avoid ballast.

Some of the best, most innovative and some of worst, most narcissistic film (lr play) has been "play within a play" premise. I understand the writer of Edmond was attempting to copy the idea of "Shakespeare in Love."

Ultimately though the result is not engaging, or coherent. The premise is good, the result is not. Th dialogue is nowhere near as engaging as Rostand's own work. And the structure and direction don't reflect any talent. I

The cinematography and costumes are good. The actors are not without talent. But it just doesn't work