Everything about this picture is beautiful, even the ugliness is beautiful...an oxymoron, but the only way I can describe it. This is a stunning tale of 16th century sex and violence, with a dirty realism, but still an overlay of beauty.

Isabelle Adjani is intense, beautiful, and sensuous as Margot, the highly sexed, intelligent and dutiful sister of the doomed King Charles IX of France. She is forced into a marriage of political and religious convenience by her bitterly ambitious mother, Catherine de Medici (Virna Lisi) to the repulsive Henri Navarre (sympathetically played by Daniel Auteuil). There is a tremendous amount going on, and Margot's incest with her brothers is more than hinted at.

The searingly sensual Vincent Perez plays La Mole, who eventually becomes Margot's doomed lover. Their first encounter is an acrobatic feat of anonymous sex in an alleyway that is breath-taking. Their later love scenes are intensely erotic. This film only becomes better on repeat viewings. I found I was able to grasp more on my second viewing. There is so much going on, so many twists and turns and shocks, and the film is also quite long. It never lags, and even Margot's grudging tolerance, if not love, for her husband, is believingly portrayed. Very highly recommended.

For the American people that have seen this excellent French movie, I will say just one thing: in many countries around the world we get to see movies from abroad with subtitles. Most of the movies that we see in South American countries come either from North America or Europe and we don't usually complain about the subtitles. Only kids movies are dubbed in Spanish. A great part of the romance or charm about French movies comes from the fact that they are actually spoken in French. Nobody in these films expects the rest of the world to understand as they speak but to make a little effort and appreciate the beauty in each language is something I think is missing in American culture. I've seen nothing but comments on how difficult it was for some members of the American public to understand this film. I only ask myself: in times of globalization, isn't it interesting to learn from people from other parts of the world in their own language, specially a French film based on a French novel by the French Alexandre Dumas, placed in the 16th century, directed by one of France's best directors and acted by some of the most wonderful French actors and actresses of the last decades? Would you want to see this film in English? Sorry, but I think you would be missing a great deal of the depth and emotion of this unique film!!!

"Queen Margot" is a French epic drama which tells of the political forces at work in France at the time of the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre which signaled the beginning of the end of the "religious wars" raging in France in the early to mid 16th century. Queen Margot (Adjani) is at the center of this maelstrom of wickedness and treachery which looks at everything from poison lip rouge to a bloody holocaust. An elaborate award winning production, "Queen Margot" presents its history realistically with no clear sense of good or evil - unlike "Braveheart", for example - with countless extras, spectacular costuming, and artistry in cinematography. Well worth its 2.5 hour run, this dark film, based on the novel by A. Dumas, is lacking in the didactic and will be difficult to follow for all but those with historical knowledge of the place and time. A little research prior to watching the film can go a long way toward understanding the complexities of the story.

Back in 1994 ‘La Reine Margot' dispensed of every preconceived notion of traditional costume drama, bringing a radical and shocking slant on history. The lavish sets and costumes remained but the atmosphere was now tainted with bloodshed, poison, lust and incest. The regal palaces that were so stereotypically populated by loyal subjects are transformed into a viper's nest of power politics, schemes and deceit where royal heritage counts for little and deviousness is the key to success.

The year is 1572; France is torn apart amidst the conflict between Catholics and Protestants whilst the King is a mere puppet, first to his domineering, Catholic, mother (Catherine de Medici, played with superlative coldness by Virna Lisi) and later to the protestant leader Coligny. In a half hearted effort to bring peace to the land Catherine marries off her daughter Margot (Isabelle Adjani) to the protestant Henri de Navarre (Daniel Auteuil), a political manoeuvre that deludes no one. Margot and Henri are certainly a less than content couple; as they walk down the aisle they engage in a hissing match with one another where Margot succinctly informs him that ‘Just because we're married it doesn't mean I have to sleep with you' and suggests he steer clear of her bedroom. They also fail to adhere to any form of decorum during the wedding reception; whilst Henri brawls with the Catholics (and flirts with a very youthful Asia Argento, of xXx fame) Margot goes window shopping amongst the male guests, looking for a viable one night stand. When the wedding guests prove unsatisfactory she simply dons a mask and takes to the streets, masquerading as a prostitute, and continues her search amongst the hordes of Protestant soldiers, who have gathered for her wedding, eventually settling on the dour La Mole (Vincent Perez). However any illusions of peace are shattered after a botched attempt to assassinate Coligny, as the Catholics, fearing a revolt, slaughter 6,000 Protestants in what becomes known as the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre.

The sheer horror of the massacre is reproduced with unflinching realism by director Patrick Chireau, who manages not only to shock but also recreate an atmosphere of utter chaos, exemplified by the moment when Margot is wandering amongst the palace corridors which have been besieged by soldiers and are strewn with corpses (Margot is curtly told ‘return to your room and lock the door'). Unfortunately some of the impact of the massacre is lost due to the fact that we know barely any of the characters who are being murdered and it begs credibility that the Protestants seemingly put up no resistance. One of the few survivors of the slaughter is La Mole, who is saved by Margot when he breaks into her chamber, looking for sanctuary, which Margot freely gives to him (and more). In the aftermath of the massacre Margot also manages to save Henri de Navarre, forging a valuable alliance in the process. However, suspicion has been aroused that she is a traitor and she finds that she is in a decidedly vulnerable position where her only hope of freedom is to flee to Navarre with Henri.

Isabelle Adjani, France's premier actress, delivers one of her finest performances as the stubborn and promiscuous Margot, who despite initially coming across as vain and conceited later earns our sympathy as she finds herself in an impossible situation, where her position in the royal family is of little consequence (her brothers love her in a perversely incestuous way and her mother sees her as an inconvenience and potential threat to her authority) and the threat of assassination always looms around the corner. Whilst the political manoeuvrings and power struggles are intriguing the same cannot be said for the tepid romance between Adjani and Perez. The pair lacks any chemistry; even their scenes of erotic passion come across as frigid and awkward. They make an attractive couple, but not a particularly convincing one.

La Reine Margot is also one of the most visually sumptuous films ever released; the big budget clearly didn't go to waste in recreating the gothic decadence of the period and the costumes were deservingly nominated for an Oscar. It's easy to view ‘La Reine Margot' as a precursor to the acclaimed 1998 film ‘Elizabeth', as both centre around a female historical figure who has to endure the conflict between Catholics and Protestants whilst surviving assassination attempts (usually via poison) and overcome tragedy as those who they care for are systematically murdered. Indeed if nothing else ‘La Reine Margot' provides a chilling insight into one of history's most horrific atrocities and offers an unsettling portrait of the moral bankruptcy that pervaded throughout 16th century society.

My Score: 8 out of 10

Alexandre Dumas should certainly be satisfied with this superb adaptation of his classic. The setting is excellent and it gives a wonderful image of 16th century France. Naturally the highlight of the movie is the re-enactment of the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre. The horrendous scenes of the murders in all their crudity are terrific. The actors did a wonderful job here. Isabelle Adjani is, as usual, terrific. Her nude scenes, depicting the queen's adultery, lust and incestuous affairs are acted in such a way that they are a form of art. Vincent Perez is in one of his best roles - his interpretation of La Môle is second only to his acting in "Indochine". The great Virna Lisi is simply marvellous posing as Cathérine de Médicis - no wonder she won the Best Actress Award at Cannes. She is the ambitious woman par excellence, stopping at nothing to get where she wants, not even if she has to see her sons being killed one by one and sell her daughter in a convenient marriage to unite the Catholics and the Protestants. The others, especially Asia Argento, impersonating the tragic countess Charlotte de Sauve did a good job too. A very well deserved Prix du Jury.

French dynastic history in the late 16th century does not seem a promising subject for a film, but Patrice Chereau, a prominent French stage director, has teased out some personal drama out of the larger historical picture, and provided a vivid and absorbing tale. The story itself is adapted from Alexandre Dumas' novel, which is a pretty highly colored piece to begin with. Chereau theatrically plasters the set with blood and gore, and we are left in no doubt that an atrocity has occurred (the St Bartholomew's day massacre of the Hugenots.) The mendacious Queen Mother, Catherine di Medici, and her weak-minded son, Charles IX, seem to have set it off to deal with the protestant problem without realizing how bad it might get.

In all this horror is the rather cute tale of the relationship between two disparate personalities thrown together in marriage, Catherine's daughter Margo and Henry of Navarre (later Henry IV of France, and one of its better kings). Margo is repulsed at first sight by Henry `the peasant' while Henry rightly regards her as about as loving as a trapped tiger. Yet they reach an accommodation and finish up friends. Both have other lovers (and both respect that) but neither can prevent the lovers from coming to sticky ends.

It's always a bit hard to assess the acting when you are relying on sub-titles (if only the French didn't speak so fast) but Isabella Adjani at the age of 40 pulled off a remarkable job and had me convinced she really was a spoilt, willful little nymphomaniac in her early 20's. She looked as young as she did in the `Story of Adele H' 20 years earlier. Daniel Auteuil was also excellent as the unprepossessing but very intense and quick-thinking Henry. Virna Lisi, a sex symbol in her earlier film career, made a good villainess as Catherine. Most of the other principals seem to have been chosen for their looks by rent-an-ego casting though Jean-Huges Anglade was suitably pathetic as the doomed King Charles.

The rather claustrophobic sets brought home the medieval lack of privacy, even (perhaps especially) in royal palaces – the old Louvre was about as spacious as the ‘loo. The film fades a bit in the second half, but it's still not a bad story, if at times a bit difficult to follow. I have to say I found `Elizabeth' more interesting and a lot less bloody. Anyway, `Margo' is very French, and not to be judged by Hollywood standards (whatever they are).

Young Queen Margot finds herself trapped in an arranged marriage amidst a religious war between Catholics and Protestants. She hopes to escape with a new lover, but finds herself imprisoned by her powerful and ruthless family.

Alright, I had no idea that this was based on the 1845 historical novel "La Reine Margot" by Dumas. I had no idea he wrote such a book, or that an earlier version had been filmed. And most importantly, I have no idea how accurate any of this is. For the sake of cinema, I suppose it doesn't matter.

The truth is at least partially here, because the romance is real and there really was a St. Bartholomew's Day massacre, though I don't think it is very well known today, especially in the United States. (We are woefully ignorant of European history.) Margot (or Margaret of Valois) remains an interesting character, if for no other reason than that she is an ancestor of the current royal family in England.

I don't pretend to know the minutiae of the historical record, but it was Definitely Not Dumas, or I lost it all in the English translations! Like many others I've always been fascinated by this episode in French history, a turbulent and savagely intolerant period and not only in France, but 1572 is yet another year that went down in infamy. This film portrays the complicated machinations performed by Catherine de Medici and her cohorts in furthering her Catholic ambitions for her country and debauched family against the perceived threat of dour Protestantism, and centred around the St. Bartholomew Day Massacre.

It's the rather beautiful Isabelle Adjani's stunning performance as Queen Margot that can leave you as breathless as she often is in the film, without her it would have been a much poorer film. She seemed to live the part, with every emotion imaginable on display. Would French breathlessness, or those huge rustling dresses sound as good dubbed into English?! On the other hand the rest of the cast are superb in their roles too, but especially Daniel Auteuil as Henri de Navarre and Jean Hugues Anglade as Charles IX, making them both extremely believable sympathetic characters when they weren't. The bloodbath and the anarchy of the Massacre and aftermath is vividly presented – we are not spared a single thing in the entire film, all manner of violence and depravity is non-gratuitously displayed. It's impossible to convey a part of what happens in this film – the same as it must have been impossible for the film to convey a fraction of what happened in that era too: it really is a must-see. I've seen it a number of times now since 1994 and I find something new I hadn't spotted before every time. It's a film that can make you realise (if you didn't before) that millions of ordinary folk all around the world could and still can believe in such arrant religious nonsense to the point of committing multiple ghastly murders in the name of empty air.

Apart from all that, it's a beautifully crafted film, the best of its kind there's ever been.

During the late 16th century, Catholics and Protestant Huguenots are fighting over political control of France, which is ruled by the neurotic, hypochondriac King Charles IX (Jean-Hugues Anglade) and his mother, Catherine de' Medici (Virna Lisi) , a scheming power player. Catherine decides to make an overture of goodwill by offering up her daughter Margot (Isabelle Adjani) : Marguerite de Valois dite La Reine Margot in marriage to Henri de Bourbon (Daniel Auteuil) , a prominent Huguenot and King of Navarre, although she also schemes to bring about the notorious St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre of 1572, when thousands of Protestants are slaughtered. The marriage goes forward but Margot, who does not love Henri, begins a passionate affair with the soldier La Môle (Vincent Lindon) , also a Protestant from a well-to-do family. Attempt to murder Protestant Coligny (Jean-Claude Brialy) and other killings by poisoning follow, as court intrigues multiply and Queen Catherine's villainous plotting to place her son the Duke of Anjou (Pascal Greggory) on the throne threatens the lives of La Môle, Margot and Henri of Navarre. Two riders ride to Paris carrying a message for their respective lords. One is a faithful servant of Henry of Navarre, the other of the Duke of Guise (Miguel Bosé) , among others .

It's a nice but overlong rendition from the immortal novel by Alexandre Dumas with pretty budget , attention to period detail , breathtaking scenarios and a cast of thousands . The picture contains rousing action , intrigue , romance , treachery , mayhem and battles . Entertaining epic movie with big budget production , glamorous gowns and luxurious sets . The film was an international co-production between by several companies based in France, Germany, and Italy, with the additional participation of StudioCanal and the American company Miramax and the support of Eurimages . Gorgeous and picturesque cinematography by Phillippe Rousselot , among the locations were the Mafra Palace in Portugal, the Saint-Quentin Basilica, Saint-Quentin, Aisne, and the Château de Maulnes, Cruzy-le-Châtel in France. The La Reine Margot soundtrack was composed by Sarajevo-born composer Goran Bregovic. Like most of Bregovic's work, the soundtrack's melodies are heavily influenced by the Balkan folk music tradition. The motion picture was well directed by Patrice Chéreau .

Being correctly based on historical events : The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre in 1572 was a targeted group of assassinations and a wave of Catholic mob violence directed against the Huguenots (French Calvinist Protestants) during the French Wars of Religion. Traditionally believed to have been instigated by Queen Catherine de' Medici, the mother of King Charles IX, the massacre started a few days after the marriage on 18 August of the king's sister Margaret to the Protestant King Henry III of Navarre. Many of the wealthiest and most prominent Huguenots had gathered in largely Catholic Paris to attend the wedding. The massacre began in the night of 23-24 August 1572, the eve of the feast of Bartholomew the Apostle, two days after the attempted assassination of Admiral Gaspard de Coligny, the military and political leader of the Huguenots. King Charles IX ordered the killing of a group of Huguenot leaders, including Coligny, and the slaughter spread throughout Paris. Lasting several weeks in all, the massacre expanded outward to the countryside and other urban centres. Modern estimates for the number of dead across France vary widely, from 5,000 to 30,000. The massacre marked a turning point in the French Wars of Religion. The Huguenot political movement was crippled by the loss of many of its prominent aristocratic leaders, and many rank-and-file members subsequently converted. Those who remained became increasingly radicalized. Though by no means unique, the blood-letting "was the worst of the century's religious massacres". Throughout Europe, it "printed on Protestant minds the indelible conviction that Catholicism was a bloody and treacherous religion"

The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre---not exactly a subject the average person knows much about these days. But, a VERY important part of French and European history nonetheless. The history teacher in me will now BRIEFLY take over: Like England, there was a lot of tension between the Protestants (Hugenots) and Catholics during the 16th century. However, unlike Henry VIII's ultimate decision to break from the Catholic Church, the French pretty much wiped out the Hugenots--those who were not killed fled abroad. Up until St. Bart's Day, there had been tension but eventually the king granted religious freedom to all. This was not to last, as a conspiracy was hatched and on St. Bart's Day, thousands of Hugenots were murdered. To commemorate this event, the Pope issued a special medallion and ordered a celebration. Not exactly one of the finer moments in human history.

The movie concerns the machinations leading up to the event as well as portraying the massacre and the after effects. I'm not going to say more, as I don't want to spoil it for the viewer. However, I will say that the writing, acting and pacing of this film were excellent and kept my attention throughout. This fictionalized account of this true-life tragedy is compelling.

Director Patrice Chéreau of "La reine Margot" belongs maybe more to the world of opera than to the world of film. In 1976 he was, togeher with Pierre Boulez, responsible for a "Ring des Nibelungen" production.

This opera experience can be seen in "La reine Margot". The set pieces and costumes are very beautiful but the complicated story is hard to follow. Maybe Chéreau assumed that the details about St Bartholomew's Day massacre ( a wave of Catholic mob violence against the Huguenots (French protestants) in the night of 23-24 august of 1572) were known to his audience, but at least for the non French audience this is a rather ambitious assumption.

The violence in St Bertholomew's Day massacre is closely linked to the marriage of Henry de Navarre (played by Daniel Auteuil) and Marguerite de Valois (played by Isabelle Adjani). Both the violence and the marriage were staged by Catherine de Medicis (mother of the bride, played by Virna Lisi).

There is a European and an American version of the film. In the European version the emphasis is on the violence. Star of this version is Virni Lisa, who plays her part as a sort of Godmother. She was awarded at the Cannes film festival. In the American version the emphasis is on the marriage (romance would be to big a word) between Henry and Marguerite. Star of this version is Isabelle Adjani. Besides being a very beautiful woman she is also wearing very beautiful costumes. The film was nominated for an Oscar for best costume design.

The book is a masterpiece, full of court intrigues, affairs and plot twists but you would not know it from this awful adaptation.

I gave it 2 starts - one for each of the main characters and their great on-screen chemistry.

Isabelle Adjani is beautiful and would have made an amazing Queen Margot if it wasn't for the horrible script. Vincent Perez makes a very handsome La Mol.

Visually (and in a superficial way) the movie looks great - the set designs, cinematography etc. They have done a great job of capturing the brutality of St Bartholomew's night. Perhaps a bit too much of it - I know it gave me nightmares the first time I saw it.

Some of the costumes are spectacular - I'm not sure how accurate they are for the time period, but that's besides the point.

This is where all the positives end.

The rest of the film is full of gratuitous nudity, extremely graphic violence and some completely made up bits.

Some of the actors are absolutely terrible. The plot is all over the place - a few brief moments are straight from the book, but almost everything else is made up.

There is no character development.

If you don't know history or you haven't read the book you will be completely confused.

The worst part is that Queen Margot is portrayed as promiscuous and shallow. The scene where she's walking the streets 'looking for a man' was certainly not in the book - in fact the book only contains hints of affairs and leaves the rest to your imagination.

I'm not sure why they didn't just make a faithful adaptation of Dumas' book.

It could have been amazing.

This is not flawless filmmaking, but it IS flawless cinema. One won't bother recounting the story, or the plotline, a viewer can gather that from history, OR previous reviews, OR even a casual overview of Dumas novels. One would like to speak to the filmmaking here, and along the way, on the movie.

If one is at all interested in French history, one has already seen this movie a thousand* times, * meaning enough. However, a digital dvd transfer of the movie as it was originally intended to be seen by M. Chéreau, without subtitles, without interference,the VO [version originale] is stunning. The first and foremost difference is the lighting - il te frappe, as the French would say, "it strikes you." Not being a technician, one can't speak to the difference between the film one saw on DVD and the film one saw in American theaters, or on American DVD, or even on VHS, French and/or American. The difference is striking. From the opening scenes, one is suddenly, almost frightfully, drawn into the 16th century, an epoch without the cushions of modern life. The light is everywhere, and it shines in a way that is pitiless and revelatory. This was never, unfortunately, appparent to theater goers here, and, I suspect, to cinema goers in France. If it had been, there would have been Oscars. One is not sure cinema projection equipment can convey what M. Chéreau did with this film. Where there is light, there is "liminality" and where there are shadows, even there there is light, but it is dim (thus not liminal), and the cadaverous flesh of the living players conveys more than anyone could ever say in dialogue - these are "dead" people, living out a drama that is already predestined for them, which is a marvelously conceived conceit of the filmmaker. M. Chéreau is playing with predestination and Fate here, and it is through the art of cinema that he is doing it. Mlle Adjani turns in a bravura performance, and it is only by grace of Jeanne Moreau's 1954 performance that we have any scale of comparison. Moreau's performance is cool, ice and politics, but Adjani's is heat, love and politics, and suited to her generation. Vincent Perez is suitably heroic (watch the rose tones come and go on his flesh as the light changes). The kudos for male performances, however, are shared by Jean-Hugues Anglade, long an underrated French actor, and Daniel Auteuil, too long appreciated for his bravura performances elsewhere and not given enough credit for what he can do with a gesture, with a line, with a look. M. Auteuil is almost always lit with cool hypocrisy, (ambers and greens) as suits his performance, but M. Anglade turns in one of the best roles of his career as the doomed Charles IX, and he never looks less than "on death's door." A naturally sensitive actor, he adds a touch of "soullessness" to his Charles IX that is unforgettable - weak, yes, king, yes, momma's boy, yes, but also, in the end, needy child. It is stunning in its ultimate simplicity as a performance for cinema. Very few performances in film measure up to Virna Lisi's Catherine de Medici(s) [the s is French spelling]. She is "incroyable" (incredible), and something was wrong when she wasn't recognized universally as '94's best supporting actress. Her queen is multi-layered, loving, hating, deeply cynical yet naively superstitious, playing son against son and daughter against political reality, in other words a perfect incarnation of the 16th century in France. Any political woman you can think of could have sat at her feet and learned lessons on "how to do it." Mme Lisi herself might have been a confidante to the real Catherine, she is that good in this role. She was crowned for this performance in Europe, but should have been crowned universally. Watch her as she vacillates between love and hate and politics, and especially watch the lighting - it subtly changes according to her role of the moment. Watch her carefully towards the end, as Fate winds things up, and watch an actress give herself up totally to the role, to the moment, in order to incarnate a character that is absolutely unforgettable.

Apparently, M. Chéreau lets his actors know what he is doing, because they respond in according " shades" of emotion. When the lighting is dim, or the focus is midrange, they "fuzz" a little, giving the viewer a sense of their uncertainty, but if he focuses, they focus, too, and there are frightening moments of soul-baring intimacy when you almost want to look away - it is like watching your intimates make love; too much, too intimate, too deep. Dominique Blanc turns in a nearly flawless performance as the over-the-top lady-in-waiting to Margot - watch her lighting, too, and how she responds. "Conspiratrice", duchesse, cynical woman in love despite herself, she is very, very good. Pascal Greggory as the future Henri III is wonderful, and the rest of the cast stand out. This was obviously a labor of love and intensity, and all gave their best to M. Chéreau.

In the end, one keeps wondering what it is about the film that was so memorable - and the french dvd transfer makes it perfectly clear. The performances, yes; the "mise en scène," yes; the director, certainly. But it is the whole, the light and the shadows, the darkness and the glow, as in those candles in the marvelous square paper lanterns in the late night of the Louvre as the people begin to weave their plots, that make it memorable. Good actors, great performances, and a sure director - flawless cinema.

In France in 1572,Queen Margot(brilliant Isabelle Adjani),a catholic,marries Henri of Navarre(Daniel Auteuil),a protestant,in an arranged marriage that neither wants.Two religious camps hate each other and the war is about to break out.The cinematography in "La Reine Margot" is amazing-it's dark and grainy,and the set design is very good! The acting is excellent-Adjani is really believable,it's also really nice to see Asia Argento,the daughter of famous Italian horror master Dario Argento in a small role!The film is packed with bloody scenes-there is a lot of violence,rape,sex,nasty throat slashings etc.-definitely not for the squeamish!A must-see!

The lurid makes a surprisingly bland backdrop against Daniel Auteuil's transcendent performance as a sensible man caught among madness. Once you get past the massacre and the sex, the story picks up, and you may find yourself taking a small interest in what happens to Margot as she begins to betray more human qualities. Furthermore, other elements of the story do remain in the memory, such as the poisoning scene. Really, it's handled quite well. But the beginning is regrettable. Wanna-be ballet- dancers drizzled with blood verges on a spoof of a massacre. If meant to be taken seriously, as this was, it's an obscene gesture to any witness to or victim of a real one. It turned me off to the movie, and the sex scenes made for more, "Oh come on" moments. Even so, I watched it again, fast-forwarding through the silly, tasteless parts to watch this certain actor carry out a gem of a performance. Here, as in other films, you have to hand it to Auteuil. He's a brilliant actor.

I'm so glad I got to see this brilliant and amazing movie. I was happy to see that many people liked it. I got to see many people's comments and realized that most of them agreed this is one of the best epoch movies ever made. Isabelle Adjani is as plausible and marvelous as Margot. She envelops herself into the role quite well. The rivalry between Catholics and Protestants was very well told and acted out. It looked very real. The musical score was amazing as well as the costumes and the cinematography. It takes us to 16th century France where we could see a period in history violently dramatic and magnificently exciting. A decadent, wicked and attractive atmosphere is shown throughout this movie.

The ending made me think a lot as Margot was getting teary-eyed inside the carriage because of Henri of Navarre (Daniel Auteuil) waiting for her. This is certainly one of the greatest endings. It's a must-see. Don't miss this masterpiece! 10/10

The movie is centered the re-enactment of the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre (which I haven't been taught about before in my history classes).

Mainly, i am impressed with the beauty of the cinematography, wonderful painting-like images. Also the setting is excellent and it gives a wonderful image of 16th century France: the costumes, the locations, the hair/makeup. It might not be 100 percent accurate, but creates a rich, aristrocratic, dangerously beautiful vibe on its own. The horrendous scenes of the murders in all their violence are terrific... the viewer is loaded with many, well narrated scenes; especially the piles of corpses stayed in my mind afterwards, which were depicted in a nearly poetic manner.

The actors did a wonderful job here. Isabelle Adjani is, as usual, terrific. Her nude scenes, depicting the queen's adultery, lust and incestuous affairs are acted in such a way that they are a form of art. They are certainly not typical Hollywood style and deserve to be celebrated.

Overall, I must say, for me personally the film epos was - too long. nearly 2,5 hours and I had sometimes a difficult time to keep up with the actions as I confused characters and places. (must one be familiar with the historical background beforehand? I am not sure. But it might be better...). Some scenes were intentionally slowly paced, which is a great choice of the director in terms of mood and style, but it was too much for me. I compensated that by admiring the wonderful images, costumes, sceneries (nearly everything the art department did for this film!) and got many new inspirations out of this.

Overall still a great movie which deserves to be watched with 100% of your attention (otherwise you might miss important things). Prepare for love, blood, violence and a feast for the eyes.

You may have heard of the Huguenots, but until you've seen "La reine Margot" ("Queen Margot" in English), you have no idea just how horrifying the massacre was. The marrying-off of Margaret of Valois and her subsequent affair with a soldier are but a backdrop for the sheer terror that overran France in the battle between Catholics and Protestants. At the time, it was a big deal to be a Protestant; there would soon be places would it was a big deal to be a Catholic. People sure are good at killing each other over petty issues.

The bulk of the credit should go to Isabelle Adjani as Margot. She got thrust into this world of intrigue and deceit against her will and just wanted to live her life. I think that an equal amount of credit should go to Virna Lisi as Catherine of Medici; she shows Catherine to be a cold, ruthless individual. And of course the men play some good roles. Appearing in early roles are Asia Argento (co-star of "xXx" and daughter of horror director Dario Argento) and Thomas Kretschmann (co-star of "The Pianist" and "King Kong").

A good movie, but mind you, it's one of the more intense movies that you'll ever watch. Practically every scene contains something violent. Make sure that you can tolerate this before turning it on.

The French movie La reine Margot was shown in the U.S. with the translated title Queen Margot (1994). Patrice Chéreau directed the movie. Many of the events we see are historical facts, but the film is adapted from the novel by Alexandre Dumas. Dumas was aware that historical accuracy doesn't sell novels--violence, sex, and intrigue sell novels. Violence, sex, and intrigue are definitely in evidence in this movie. (Note that apparently several different DVD versions of Queen Margot are available. We saw the 144 minute version.)

Isabelle Adjani portrays Marguerite de Valois, called Queen Margot. Daniel Auteuil portrays Henri of Navarre, Margot's husband. Vincent Perez plays Magot's true love, Joseph de la Môle. In an important supporting role, Virna Lisi brilliantly portrays Catherine de Medici, Margot's mother.

This movie has impressive production values with (literally) a cast of thousands. Dozens of handsome people fill the screen. Sometimes they wear clothes, sometimes not. All of this works well for a historical drama. What didn't work for me was the graphic scenes during and after the Saint Bartholomew's Day massacre.

The massacre was a true genocide, as the film makes clear. However, for me the killings and the corpses were just too much. We expect violence in a historical drama, but we don't need to see almost 15 minutes of it.

Another problem I had was in following the plot and sorting out the characters. Adjani as Margot was unmistakable. So was Auteuil as Henri. However, there must have been a dozen handsome guys with long hair who played major supporting roles. Who was the good guy? Who was the bad guy? Who was the good guy who became a bad guy and who was the bad guy who became a good guy? Hard to say.

The historical Margot was 19 when she was married. Isabelle Adjani looks 19, so that wasn't a problem. The strange thing is that Adjani was 39(!) when she played the role. Adjani was born in 1955. The film was made in 1994. No matter how many times I did the math, it always came out the same. I think she is a Martian.

This movie was meant for the large screen and, indeed, it was recently shown in the wonderful Dryden Theatre at the George Eastman Museum in Rochester, NY. We saw it on DVD, where it worked well enough. The reason we didn't go to the Dryden is that you can't fast forward a movie in a theater. We used fast forward for the massacre, and that was effective.

So, if you like historical dramas starring beautiful ageless actors, and you can tolerate sustained scenes of violence, this movie will work for you. If not, probably better to stay away.

P.S. On our DVD player, the violent massacre lasted from the 47-minute point to the 60-minute point. It was at 47 minutes that we hit fast forward.

The performances in this film are so energetically pitched as to occasionally be laughable. The period lavishness is pushed into anachronistic excess. Virtually every single scene is crowded with extras, the frames dense with faces and the leads are almost all distractingly gorgeous.

Every single shot is like a Late Renaissance painting, you can hit pause anywhere and be delighted by the richness, color and detail. It's drenched in blood (people actually sweat blood in this movie) and animated by extraordinary music. In its romantic fire the film is unapologetically, almost satirically, French.

If sumptuous spectacle done with tremendous craft is your bag, then this thing is a monster of a flick. But if script logic and nuance is something you demand, this is going to be a long one.

Personally, as a piece of pure cinema to be experienced, I loved it. It succeeds at exactly what it sets out to do… that is, be gorgeous and swooning and grand at the cost of all else