Phantasma_the_Black

As a fan of folk horror, small-production films, and Matt Smith & Morfydd Clark, I admit I might have had too high expectations. Especially since it took two years between the first limited release and the wide release on streaming platforms, the sheer anticipation raised my hopes even more.

With all that in mind, I still feel the film missed its potential because the thing with small production is that it relies on atmosphere-building and a good storyline. And both of those aspects could have been better.

For instance, regarding the atmosphere, I think they succeeded in portraying grief as raw, lasting, and sometimes merged with magical thinking and anger. Sometimes, it's bearable, and the characters even manage to squeeze a smile and get excited about things they work on or even an unexpected family visit. The grief is ever-present but fluctuating in intensity, which feels realistic, unlike Hollywood cliches that tend to go over the top. However, the film lacks in creating suspense due to the pacing and some scenes that feel disjointed. When you think it will pick up and elevate the tension, it moves to another scene.

Which brings us to another issue of storytelling. While the overall idea is good, the film would have benefited from a more developed lore. You quickly learn there is a lot at stake, but they never tell you why, and it somewhat obscures the characters' motivations. Without knowing more about mythology, we fail to see the appeal and the temptation of some choices they make. For this reason, I believe it was challenging to wrap up the film in a satisfactory way, and they chose a tried and "safe" route instead. In theory, it could have worked great, but in practice, it feels stretched and even forced at some times.

The problems might have roots in the original material - Andrew Michael Hurley's book of the same name, as some works of literature are untranslatable to movie screen. Or perhaps the author failed to develop the mythology sufficiently, so the movie crew did not have much to work with. I still haven't read it but intend to, which means that, despite its shortcomings, the film succeeded in provoking some curiosity. And if you drop your expectations - which, sadly, was impossible for me - it may work even better, who knows?

For some reason, movies about the French monarchy, particularly the fall of it, tend to miss out on the bigger picture and feel like family drama that just happens to be set in Versailles. With some adjustments, these stories would work equally well in different settings and even have the same emotional impact they were going for.

It doesn't matter whether it is a Hollywood or European production, the problem remains the same. Jeanne du Barry suffers from the same lack of storytelling that plagued Coppola's Marie Antoinette. The wider social and political context is simply left out.

The budget doesn't seem to be an issue, as the sets and costumes are top-notch, however, we just fail to see the importance the main characters have outside of the court and their personal intrigues. This is a shame, cause if anything is interesting about the French monarchy, then it is how it affected common people, not their family troubles.

So, if we are optimists, we could say that Maiwenn (and Coppola for that matter) simply does not have the directorial capacity to tackle a more serious political drama. However, if we are pessimists, it easily comes off as the whitewashing of the French monarchy, particularly with the annoying narration that tries to provide the political context of the French Revolution and society at the time in two or three sentences.

You could say it was a romance movie and as such it didn't aim for a broader political message. But even if we watch it as a love story, it does not provide the context to make the romance believable. We never find out WHY the king is so smitten by Jeanne, other than her being a beautiful woman. But the kings in general tend to surround themselves with attractive women, so what is it exactly that makes this one stand out from the rest?

Jeanne's motivations are even more obscure despite her being the central character of the movie. She says she craves adventure but then settles for the most boring and life-draining routine of the court. She starts off as an opportunist with some moral compass, but that character development is dropped as soon as she meets the king and remains the loving wifey stereotype for the rest of the movie.

I won't spoil it here, but at one point, it seemed like there was going to be some falling out between her and the king, so we hoped to see a clever and cunning side of her character, but the very next minute the very same annoying narration "convinces" us that everything is fine and no one is an a$$hole there.

If you enjoy period costumes and aesthetics of 18th century Versailles, then this is an eye candy for you. Otherwise, it does not have much to offer.