User Reviews (19)

Add a Review

  • emilykarangg9 March 2019
    I never write reviews, but I wanted to read one before watching and could not find one so here it is!

    So many lines of this script hit me... This film is not only wonderfully written, but the acting is exquisite. The actors do a really nice job of using their expression to relay subtext which makes the movie a more full experience. Alice Isaaz is particularly emotive (in the best way). The ending will leave you satisfied without being too painfully cliche.
  • Gerry-5014 September 2018
    Being unfamiliar with the director's name (Emmanuel Mouret), I searched imdb for information regarding this film. There was a single user's review which would have put me off if I had not read external reviews. Let me say right away that although we are in a different league from James Ivory's this film is beautifully crafted. The matching of home decoration with dresses is pleasing to the eye but most of all the plot is as unexpected as it is cruel and yet fair. The film was inspired by one of Diderot's novels, an author whose books I never managed to read till the end in my teens. I have enjoyed Cecile de France's subtle acting even if it might not be as profound as Emma Thompson's. Don't deny yourselves a good film!
  • Lady J was such a great surprise for me to see. I was not expecting to like this movie and I had not heard of it before streaming it on Netflix, but I loved it. This movie was filled with beautiful, over-the-top, ornate sets and costume design, with intricacies that made almost every scene fit to be painted. It also had a great soundtrack that fit the genre but was not boring. My favorite feature of Lady J was how the likability of the characters changed throughout the movie. The screenwriting and directing, of course, accomplished that, but I also saw difference in the slight mannerisms of the actors that changed with their likability changes. Since I cannot understand the spoken language, the non-verbals were very important for my understanding of the characters. Each main character was both good and bad and most acts are framed as both good and bad. My perception of who was the hero/villain, who was as the protagonist/antagonist, flawlessly ebbed between the characters and themes. Most of the characters are likable at some point, and all have some good personality traits, but throughout the movie almost all of them do morally wrong, or downright creepy or cruel, things. There seems to be something in Lady J for everyone- it's beautiful to view, fun to hear the French language and musical score, filled with compelling and realistic characters (albeit rushed in terms of character development), and overflowing with meaningful themes about societal themes and interpersonal relationships. Lady J seemed to embrace and push past the cliches of its genre to touch on human nature, the complexities of relationships, and the inherent tensions and corruptions resulting from inequality (sex, age, financial, influence, religion) and self-centeredness (delusion, self-aggrandizement, callousness, vigilante justice, lack of introspection, pride). I'm not sure how those who made this movie managed to do so, but this movie left me with renewed belief in humanity. The value of connection to other people and society and of connection to a transcendent sense of morality, justice, and emotion across humankind reveals itself throughout the movie through the failures of the characters to connect and the messy process that results from the lack of true connection to each other and humankind.

    The ending is a good one, depending on which character you ask!
  • lacalmette9 March 2019
    Highest rating because I am happy the French can still pull off films that are fully in character with the culture of the 18th century. This film is right up there with "Ridicule" and, even Dangerous Liaisons.
  • Don't pay attention to the negative reviews below from people that probably like action movies a bit too much and watch this! The movie does start off a bit slow but Édouard Baer and Cecile de France manage to convey their emotions without overacting (something that is too common in this kind of movies). The plot is great and the slow descent into hell of the main character is well orchestrated.

    Overall, i was very pleasantly surprised and would recommend this movie to anyone with a bit of sensitivity.
  • lexxes10 March 2019
    The film is beautifully crafted. I enjoyed every single color palette and the perspective chosen in every scene. Although the plot is a little predictable, it very much suits the reality of the characters and where they lived in. I loved the concept of a subtle revenge and karma. That everything you did will always get back at you one way or another.

    Also, I don't know if it's a language barrier or what. But I think it's genius how in the end we never really get to know the characters' first names. It gave a feeling of watching this from a distance which I must say differentiate the film from the others with similar plots.
  • I came into this not knowing what to expect but some kind of love story. Though it started off slow and continued to spectacularly fail the Bechdel test, it grew strongly into a curiously entertaining romp, aided by an almost pantomime score. The best part was that it could be viewed as a light comedy, but should the viewer deign to scratch the surface, they would notice the bitter pill under the sugar coating. The movie alludes to a number of human themes, mostly around forgiveness and redemption, and for the discerning viewer there is a lot more to enjoy than at first might meet the eye
  • If you want to unwind, I recommend this visually stunning, full of clever intrigues movie. "One should be taught about life as a couple before getting married". Don't miss "Call my agent" french series also- nearly all french movie stars are in it, including Cecile de France.
  • The best text. Costumes perfects. Big fascination and entepretations.
  • I give this two stars just because I adore evrything that has to do with 18'th century France. The costumes and mannerism are wrong, so I did not finish it. No matter how long you search, you will never find a painting from the 18'th century showing a man with facial hair. It was regarded as filthy and unclean. The man walks like he is wearing jeans, with hands in his pockets, and full of facial hair.

    The womans hair is also wrong, she would have had powdered hair, and a pouf or bonnet outside.
  • gerarddappelo18 September 2018
    What do we like most about costume films? Certainly the magnificent accoutrements, but also and especially the dialogues chiselled by the language of the eighteenth, the historical context, the fine and elaborate frame as in the novels of the time. Alas, none of that in this movie. Diderot's distant transposition, verbal exchanges are wordy, flat ("A happiness that does not last is pleasure" "Our feelings are as full of tenderness as reason" ...) and also extremely repetitive. The historical setting is reduced to decors set, dresses too neat, and it presents us a simplified libertinism, ignoring its revolutionary dimension of free thought and religious denial, denying even by the extreme prudery of images that libertines are also of the enjoyers. At the supreme moment of a rapprochement of lovers on the couch, the camera wisely turns away on a book that one hand on another! No sensuality in this film starched. As for the plot, it only becomes interesting at the very end, after a boring hour has passed without almost nothing happening. A TV movie? But the dullest is in the realization. The image does not translate feelings or situations. Whatever the circumstances, even when they want to be dramatic, the staging is limited to a few paintings: walks in the spring alleyways of the castle, moving flower vases from one fireplace to another, medium shots protagonists filmed in front of a paneled paneling in their sumptuous costume. Lighting that is invariably too bright does not change when circumstances become dark. Court music, strong and ubiquitous, does not modulate the progressions of the scenario. It's very schooly, almost a TV movie. Under such conditions, how could the game of Cécile de France and Édouard Baer get by: half-smiles equal and agreed, a constant flow and quite left almost from one end to the other of movie. The suffering of Baer is translated just by a neck unhooked and a rebel lock, that of C. de France by nothing. A strange feminism And then this anachronism in the underlying allusion to feminism: a question addressed to stick to our time when the era mentioned does not address it yet: Condorcet has not yet spoken. Diderot, in his essay "On Women", describes "the confinement of women in their physical inferiority", and to read many of his quotes it would be taxed today misogynist pride (Ex: "It is also ridiculous to a man to believe faithful women that their being faithful "). What strange feminism is it in the film itself, since the outcome shows us a man certainly libertine and unfaithful but who proves courageous and sensitive, facing a woman that was thought to be honest but whose fragility finally makes it the worst of the vipers?
  • Mademoiselle de Joncquières is a sumptuous costume drama of court intrigue, revenge, and moral turpitude is what I hoped for, and that is what I got. Anyone who ever saw 'Dangerous liaisons' back in the day will be familiar with this sort of tale, but what this movie lacks in glamour compared with that film is more than makes up for in elegant taste and style. For a good while now, I have despaired of the French film industries lurch towards populist trite sentiment and away from its reputation for sophisticated thought-provoking artistic films. This then is an echo of past glories, and just maybe it will provoke a rethink, although, sadly, I doubt it. The plot is taken from a classic French novel and concerns a Count who has taken to hanging around the country mansion of a wealthy Duchess with a determination to have her succumb to his charms. Eventually she does. However, instead of revelling in his conquest, our Count wearies of her and her weakness, seeing as she was fully aware of his reputation as a bed-hopper. He is up front about his mood and they agree end the relationship but to remain friends. Meanwhile, deep inside she is livid, as well as heartbroken, and so decides to play a cruel revenge on him by tricking him into desiring a supposedly chaste young woman, who actually turns out to be anything but. We can see the plot unfolding, and, despite the count being a likeable rogue, we are happy to see him fall into her trap. However, the Duchess, and us, are in for more surprise than we expected. The acting here is a delight; Very understated, and done with a joyous relish.The dialogue is witty and sophisticated but never for the sake of it. We, as audience, understand the vagaries of our own passions and the contradictions of love, rivalry, pride, and vanity, so there is nothing here a normal viewer could not grasp. I love that about this film. It doesn't spoon-feed but neither does it become esoteric. As for the filming.. well, in contrast to the recent costume drama 'The Favourite' this does not indulge in fancy camera angles and showy updates of the genre. Instead it plays the filming straight and the movie benefits from its unobtrusiveness. The only night scene is while the Count is wrestling with the knowledge that he has been duped and that others have been wantonly used to play the trick out. This seems like a simple tonal device but movie-making does not have to be reinvented; It is best served when that just feels like a natural feature. Why re-invent the wheel (?) At the Sunday morning screening I attended there were only seven of us present. This was a shame I felt. I contrasted this with the full house for the latest Tarantino which (despite possessing a swagger of movie chutzpah) is devoid of subtlety, resonance, and emotional depth, and the Dutch film De Dirigent which the local audience loved but was in effect a Mickey Mouse movie compared to this delightfully crafted French delicacy.
  • suhaila-3896318 March 2019
    Warning: Spoilers
    It was very good , but it's a little sad that he ends up happy with the other girl i think he deserves more suffering and i think him and "a happy ending & happy marriage " doesn't match based on his charactar , the ending didn't make sense to me but it still nice
  • Arthur Schopenhauer on Women's Love & Hate: ~In revenge and in love, the woman is more barbaric than the man. ~When a woman loves, a man should be afraid: because she sacrifices everything at this time, and she considers everything else worthless.

    This movie was exactly like what Schopenhauer said: When a woman loves, a man should be afraid, and he shall scare to death if she hates you. You may fool her once but her revenge will be served cold.
  • Wooden acting (le marquis is particularly awful), pretentious and way too wordy dialogue, wonderful costumes, unimaginative yet pretty scenography, weak use of light, a movie that could have been much better by using less words and more emotion.
  • Madame de La Pommeraye, a young widow withdrawn from the world, gives in to the court of the Marquis des Arcis, a notorious libertine. After a few years of unfailing happiness, she discovers that the marquis has grown weary of their union. Madly in love and terribly wounded, she decides to take revenge on him with the complicity of Mademoiselle de Joncquières and her mother...

    Light, sometimes too light, Emmanuel Mouret ("Let Lucie do it", "Un Baiser, s'il vous plaît") long favored (if not followed the easy route) of burlesque marivaudage. When he tried his hand at pure melodrama ("Une autre vie"), he was not really convincing. But with "Mademoiselle de Joncquières ", he seems to have found the ideal formula, namely sprinkling lightness on an underlying layer of gravity and cruelty. Diderot (from whom he here adapts an episode of "Jacques le fataliste") and the 18th century undoubtedly inspire him: subtle dialogues, deep but never sententious considerations, superb costumes, natural and interior settings. Ans his actors as well : Cécile de France, elegant and acidulous, and Édouard Baer, deceitfully languid and detached, are the perfect embodiment of this couple living what I would call their "well-mannered passion": they excel in a double game, all the more fascinating as it remains unexpressed verbally. It looks as if they wear velvet gloves with hidden points. Alongside them, two other performers shine, Alice Isaaz, as the candid and virginal Mademoiselle de Joncquières and the vivacious Laure Calamy playing a rather perfidious friend of Madame de la Pommeraye. Note that the subject had already been treated by Robert Bresson in "Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne", in a very different style.
  • ljayb-987597 December 2020
    Well worth the time to watch!! I have but one question. Why did Lady P's cherished childhood friend lie to her at the end?! Please know I welcome all thoughts in regards to this question b/c I am quite perplexed.
  • Not sure why it's classify as TV movie but the production just serious and up to real movie standard. Two messages I got after watching. Firstly, men just lower body thinking creature. Secondly, it's a mistake for the marriage but this accident makes this marriage last long for sure. Ironically, Lady J plan was a failure in my perspective.
  • martincid12 March 2019
    It's a film beyond this time, a film from the past based on a Diderot's work