The 2006 historical drama “Marie Antoinette”, filmed and written by Sofia Coppola, is an overdramatized concept based on Queen Marie Antoinette, played by Kirtsen Dunst.
Going into this movie, most opinions, if not all, were geared towards disappointment and those were expressed by “history buffs”, but I think while the movie wasn’t historically accurate, it provided a great metaphor for the life of a teenage girl.
With this, I feel as though audiences are judgemental as the movie crowd tends to be more harsh on directors’ creative choices, which is why Coppola went a more unconventional way of expressing the story.
These creative liberties played into effect for modernizing Marie Antoinette’s story with the more pop soundtrack and even the pair of Converse in one shot of the film.
This choice was also to express the fact that Queen Marie Antoinette was a teenage girl when she was thrown into this world of aristocracy and matinees, so much so that the mood of the movie shifts when Antoinette has to be married away.
The movie begins when Marie is just 14 years-old, after moving from her home country to marry the Dauphin of France. Her character also goes on escapades, filled with humor, and childish behavior. But as her character grows and gets further into the film, the environment of the French Palace makes her grow more mean, selfish, and cold-hearted.
This has to do with the fact that she accumulated this lavish lifestyle where she could get anything she desires, from diamonds to luminous expensive dresses, but the overarching factor has to be the loss of her third child.
And as I’ve expressed earlier, this is not the film to base a history paper on, but when you typically think of Queen Marie, the whole “Let them eat cake” will more than likely be your idea of her.
Going back to how this movie is a great representation of the teenage girl experience, Marie had to deal with marrying a stranger, baring children, and political relations, all while experiencing the never-ending gossip of the court.
She wasn’t emotionally strong enough to deal with that, and instead was more concerned with living the high life, and in the hoax of all the frilly dresses, unorthodox parties, and major food, she forgot about the people.
This is what geniuses like Coppola do for the film industry, being able to take something as lackluster as the French Revolution and turn it into a movie about the audience’s experience. It is what makes her a great filmmaker.
The relatability to Marie, as far as how she coped with her not-so-hard life but managed responsibilities at such a young age, makes up for the more uneventful parts of the film.
If I really wanted to be relentless towards Marie, I would say that she was a snob and out of touch, whose own stupidity got her killed. A softer approach would be that she was just a kid who needed to escape from the suffocating time of being with the court and eventually lost her head.
And while the movie isn’t an entire retelling of her story, it did make me think differently about her. Like how she cared for her children and didn’t let the handmaid do everything for her. She was kaleidoscopic, didn’t do what was expected of her, never following along with what the court had to say.
History paints her in this bad light as a dumb royal who got her due, and may that still be true, this movie presents a more humane side towards her.
Even after all she had done, she never lost her loyalty, ultimately choosing to stay in the palace with her husband while the mob is at the doors, she faces her imminent death with dignity. Increasingly enough, the camera cuts to her bedroom destroyed, marking the end of an era, the era of Queen Marie.
She was naive when it came to taking care of her people, but that’s the long explanation. In reality, she was there for a good time, not a long time, and by God was it short.