Tolérance (1989) User Reviews (4)

A gem too good for mankind

[ibriery · 14 May 2000]

Tolérance went unnoticed. If you believe that popularity is the measure of cinematographic success, you can pass.

If you believe that magnificent gems might be discovered in the mines of oblivion from time to time, Tolérance is worth the quest. The whole movie revolves around French XVIIIth century concepts with a totally remarkable talent. The title (toleration) gives a clue to a pure joy of a scenario which culminates in an unforgettable twist, exposing the darkest side of prejudice and the brightest one of redemption. It is so subtly constructed that, as a discreetly manipulated spectator, you're very likely to shamefully end up on the wrong side of human sentiments, just before the enlighthening final climax.

The casting is in perfect harmony with the exceptional characterization, quite a feat given the immense heterogeneity of the leading parts. Assembling Italian, English and French actors works perfectly well and adds an adequate cosmopolitan strength to the story line. Tognazzi IS Dionysos, Brochet IS innocence and Everett IS redemption. They are all magnificent.

Photography and soundtrack (where Everett's wonderful soft-spoken French leaves a lasting imprint) are impeccably executed and seeing this ungratefully ignored gem again and again will reveal sophisticated new angles time after time, as all masterpieces do.

Do it justice: see it.

A masterpiece

[mariedup · 10/10 · 5 January 2000]

This movie touches the very heart of human feelings and human condition. It asks a very controversial question: what does the word tolerance mean? In a very tortured self-questioning way, Horace (Rupert Everett) will change his life as a religious hermit into a life of luxury and extravagance. As with everything else in his life he is determined to go to the very end...

You'll need a lot .

[angie-235 · 5/10 · 4 July 2007]

Being able to tolerate this film is an art in itself. I ordered it after reading the chapter on it in Rupert Everett's autobiography .It started badly with a lot of horrible , dirty , insane looking French "Incroyables" . They are covered in make-up , beauty patches , dirt and look like extras from an Adam Ant video . I love beautiful clothes , sets and designs . I have a few doubts about the authenticity of the costumes which just add to the feeling a pop video maker was let loose. The main characters inherit a hermit from an English relative ( think Rasputin) who they seen unsure what to do with . The sheer insanity and decadence of these people is vomit inducing .The gluttony of their lives made the gorge rise in my throat. The hermit asks to learn debauchery ( although he knows it already being a criminal who used the fashion for hermits as a disguise) . He cleans up lovely being Rupert Everett whose chuckle and mannerisms shine through the layers of make-up and lurid outfits.

One character collects severed heads in the hope he will discover that after the chop they can communicate. This is based on fact .It was reported that King Charles 1st swore after his execution.I think this is medically impossible .The nauseating atmosphere is not helped by his penchant for carrying what looks like a "hat" box. The lady of the house is called Tolerence and Horace Walop ( the hermit) arranges with her to appear that he has served her to the Academy of Gastronomy. If he had it would be rather odd that she appears later. At the end Horace is be-headed and his head glows. I don't know enough about beatification to be sure but Saints have been beatified for throwing stones off roofs . Rupert himself mentions being able to see the room of a particularly odd Saint who really believed she had a physical relationship with Jesus . His Catholic schooling might have helped him understand this film. It is messily edited and badly photographed , no masterpiece.

Intrigue in revolutionary France

[etherdog · 1/10 · 5 April 2008]

This is an awful movie. It doesn't start our that way but you are going to be disappointed by this piece of dreck.

We had high hopes because we found it in our library under "French Cooking" and there was nothing to warn us.

I am warning you now. This is slow, dark (as in underlit for cinema) and without a payoff.

This takes place during the French revolution where the guillotine plays a major role. An English criminal disguised as a monk comes to a French estate in a crate and becomes a Roux. No nudity. Then he serves his paramour at a banquet before meeting his fate.

Blame the writer and the director for this abysmal mess.