Madame Bovary (2015)

Pretty Good

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

"Madame Bovary" was already transferred twice to the screen in its native country :Jean Renoir's version (1934) is generally considered the best ;the more recent version by Claude Chabrol who claimed he "made the movie Flaubert would have done" ;there's also Vincente Minnelli's film, starring the most beautiful romantic Emma ever in the shape of Jennifer Jones .Mrs Barthes took more liberties with the novel than any of her colleagues,sometimes not for the best: it's really a bad idea to replace the Marquis' ball by a hunting with hounds : a ball is par excellence the place where a woman can shine,dazzle all the men around and outstrip all her rivals:Flaubert's depiction of the soiree ,which is the turning point of the novel ,reveals Emma's monotonous living,her longing for a socialite life ,for a romantic love story her meek oafish hubby cannot give to her;the Marquis ,becoming Emma's lover , led the screenwriters to do without Rodolphe Boulanger ,which may disappoint the readers.Gone is Emma 's daughter -she wanted a boy and she found her ugly- who landed as a working girl in a spinning mill ,ironical fate for a daughter whose mom wanted to climb the social scale.On the other hand,Lheureux,Emma's evil genius, is given a (too) prominent role ,and Monsieur Homais ,the atheist chemist hardly appears ,he 's only in it to urge Charles to operate on Hippolyte,the person with club- foot ;the scene in the church with the vicar is much weaker than its equivalent in Renoir's movie;the agricultural meeting fete is botched ,and passes over in silence the way Flaubert showed "the poverty of the century " ,in the shape of a very old lady who is awarded a medal after a life of hard labor.(Renoir did not forget that either)The movie is not completely wretched though.Mia Wasikowska is a very credible Emma ,and even if her suicide may surprise Flaubert's readers,the final scene with these torches in the night is cinematographically dazzling(but the prologue which makes the movie a flashback is pointless);Charles Bovary(Henry Loyd-Hughes) is exactly how Flaubert depicted him,an unambitious good man with a small mind, whose main pleasure in life is to sit down at table and enjoy his meal;the wedding night -not shown in precedent versions- is revealing .To get a semblance of a luxury life,she's seized by a compulsive desire to buy mountain of things ,most of which are thoroughly useless.She lives in a world of illusion,even Leon (Ezra Miller)holds a second-rate position he may easily loose if he continues with his romance with a married woman.This new version will probably not go down in cinema history.But ,even though the screenplay is eminently debatable,the cinematography is splendid indeed.

For the first 15 minutes of this latest film version of Gustave Flaubert's "Madame Bovary", I thought it was a misfire. But that slow start leads to a beautiful and affecting movie.Anyone who knows Vincente Minnelli's version with Jennifer Jones will be surprised at how different this one feels.Emma Bovary (Mia Wasikowska) goes from a convent school into a marriage arranged by her father. She marries novice doctor Charles Bovary (Henry Lloyd-Hughes) who takes up a practice in a French provincial town. However Emma has a romantic imagination inspired by novels; she aspires to beautiful things and a life of elegance and style. She is encouraged in this by unscrupulous merchants who extend her credit. She is also seduced into a number of affairs in a vain search for true romance.Now this is tricky stuff to build a movie around and still retain sympathy for Emma whose actions otherwise seem self indulgent and hedonistic.Minnelli's version used narration based on Flaubert's text and we learn from the beginning that Emma was driven by an unattainable romantic vision. In this version, directed by Sophie Barthes, there is no narration, we must catch the story as it unfolds. For anyone who knows nothing of the story, it may seem at first to be an exposé of predatory credit practices in 1850's France. But as Emma is drawn into extramarital affairs, we sense the looming tragedy; she is naive and seduced by notions of romance that cannot be fulfilled and all the men in her life take advantage of her.This film is beautifully made. It has a more authentic look than the B/W Minnelli version, which was shot on the MGM backlot. However that version's detachment from reality added to its charm. Even the scores for the two films mark the differences; a lush, powerful work for Minnelli; a subtle one for Barthes. The character of Charles is also treated more sympathetically in the earlier version; here he seems a bit of a jerk.However the success of "Madame Bovary" comes down to Emma. Mia Wasikowska is a quieter beauty than Jennifer Jones who had a sensuousness that leapt from the screen. Wasikowska's Emma slips under your guard, she has a fragile quality and the problems of debt and infidelity develop at a slower pace. Eventually she seems more a victim of other people's shortcomings than her own. The two versions are so different that they can be enjoyed on their own terms. However some of the criticism of this version seems harsh. It unfolds at a measured pace, but I think it will become more appreciated over time.

Yet again we have an incarnation of Flaubert's novel of infidelity and this time the transformation of the book to screen (by Felipe Marino and director Sophie Barthes) is, at best, weak. The pacing of the film is adagio and the cast is adequate if unremarkable. The only standout in the film is the costumer and the strange but adequately atmospheric music by Evgueni and Sacha Galperine.For those who have forgotten the story, 'In mid-1800s Normandy, France, farmer's daughter Emma (Mia Wasikowska) leaves the convent where she was educated and marries a young doctor, Charles Bovary (Henry Lloyd-Hughes). With high hopes for a fulfilling and romantic future like the ones she reads about in novels, Emma leaves her childhood home and loving father, moving to the small town of Yonville where Charles has based his practice. While Charles loves his new wife, he is consumed by his work and is out of the house all day visiting patients. During their brief daily time together, Emma is bored and repulsed by his talk of ailments and dull business affairs, and Charles is all but oblivious to her ennui. With no regular company besides their maid, Henriette (Laura Carmichael), Emma becomes a vulnerable client to the crafty local merchant Lheureux (Rhys Ifans), who entices her with luxury goods available for purchase on credit. Emma soon befriends a young clerk, Leon Dupuis (Ezra Miller), who shares her romantic frame of mind and disdain for provincial Yonville. Emma longs to go to Paris and immerse herself in the culture, and has quickly tired of her dull existence as a country doctor's wife. Leon secretly confesses his love to Emma, who, despite the mutual attraction, dismisses his advances. Leon departs for law studies in Paris. Charles and Emma are invited to a hunting party by the Marquis d'Andervilliers (Logan Marshall- Green), who had dropped by Doctor Bovary's house to have one of his servants treated. The Marquis was immediately attracted to Emma, who becomes so excited about the excursion into high society that she orders expensive clothes from Lheureux for the occasion. At the party, she is entranced by the luxury of the upper-class and by the subtle advances of the Marquis, whom she meets once more at an agricultural show. Emma's thirst for extravagance only grows, and she begins to spend liberally to beautify the house and her wardrobe, all on credit from Lheureux. She also takes the advice of local pharmacist Homais (Paul Giamatti) and convinces her husband to operate on the club-foot of Homais' servant Hippolyte (Luke Tittensor) and become a celebrated surgeon. The surgery fails. Ashamed of her husband's incompetence and feeling all the more stifled, Emma visits the Marquis at his home and confesses her misery. They begin an affair, with Emma making regular trips on foot through the woods to visit him. Charles has no inkling of his wife's unhappiness in the marriage or of her affair. Emma eventually begs the Marquis to run away with her, and though he initially refuses, he calms her by promising to make arrangements to elope.' And to tell the rest would be consider spoilers.Mediocre at best this is a very long song that could have been so much better in so many ways.

Mia Wasikowska as Emma Bovary is one of the worst casting decisions I've ever seen. I read the book quite a while ago but I remember picturing her as pretty, delicate, vivacious, fun-loving, lively, romantic, naive and gullible. Wasikowska projects none of these qualities. Emma is supposed to transform into a depressed, frustrated, shadow of her former self, dulled by her uneventful country life with a dull husband she doesn't love before turning to other men and recklessly spending money she doesn't have to bring some excitement into her life. In the movie she seems to meet her first male distraction the day after her wedding and then falls in love with the marquis simply by looking at him, demanding he rescue her from her disappointing life and sweep her off to a high society life almost immediately. Incidentally, the first time they see each other is during a stag hunt, when Emma rides astride her horse - surely not in rural France during the mid-18th century?Emma seems to attract men like flies, although I can't see anything in Wasikowska's Emma that would attract any man.And what's going on with the accent mash up?! Most of the characters, including Emma, sound American, but her father has a French accent, others sound English and Rhys Ifans... I don't know what is going on there but sometimes he sounds slightly French, sometimes purely French and at other times completely English. The most frustrating thing about this film is that there is no sense of time passing. Everything seems to happen within a couple of weeks.Visually though, it is beautiful and there are some excellent moments and scenes. Watch it for the gorgeous costumes and setting if not the actors or the plot!