I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

It is a performances centric movie

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

First, I want to thank the two reviewers who read Honoré de Balzac's "Cousin Bette," and commented on this film at length as of the time of my writing here. It was long ago that I read anything of Balzac, and that was in school. I understand that this film is a considerable deviation from the novel, and that the theme is altered as well. So, my comments here will be about this movie and story as they are. I won't compare it to the novel or any other productions based on it. But, as its own story, this film, "Cousin Bette" might very well be compared to other stories of literature and film. About half way through watching the movie, Bette (played by Jessica Lange) reminded me of another character from literature – Svengali. He was in George du Maurier's 1896 novel, "Trilby," that was also set in mid-19th century Paris. Svengali hypnotized the talented Trilby to make her a famous singer. He dominated and controlled her every move. In this film, Cousin Bette doesn't hypnotize but she cleverly manipulates and controls people under the guise of friendship, family and helping them. It isn't just one person, but all of the main characters eventually. And, it isn't to have any of them achieve anything. Rather, she uses them as pawns to help destroy someone else – most of them, unwittingly. From that standpoint, Jessica Lange's performance is very good. She plays a female Svengali who is even more dastardly than the original character because she brings the death and ruin of more than one person. This Bette could write the book on revenge, conniving, lying, stealing, lusting, manipulating, concealing, deceiving and hating. How anyone can see this film as comedy is beyond me. It is drama and tragedy. It's a tragedy not only for all those whom Bette brought down – but not because she brought them down. They fell because of their own foibles, deceit, wasteful lifestyles, self-indulgence and meaningless lives and living. That, I think, was the real point of Balzac's novel and others like it. But, it also was a tragedy because Bette lost her own soul in the process. No, I didn't find any glee or chuckles in a "black" comedy here. This film clearly was tragedy, no matter how the movie marketers labeled it. I suppose all the roles played were good for what the film became. But, I don't get enjoyment out of watching such sinister stories or features of such characters. One can get an idea that the movie will be stuck in the muck of hatred, revenge and destruction and never rise above it or attain any kind of redemption. About mid-point in the film, Bette says, "Oh, my dear. The devil has a sister." She was right. And her name is Bette. I would be interested in seeing the 1971 BBC mini-series, if it becomes available on DVD at a reasonable price.

---spoilers--- I haven't read the book as I never could get on with Balzac - those movie or TV adaptations I've seen were always interesting but didn't touch my heart. So I can't comment on whether this movie seems faithful to the book. I found the movie is very good and very well acted. I was readily able to admire Cousin Bette who has been treated disgracefully over her life one way and another, lost the first man she loved to another woman and later loses another man to his daughter.... and eventually loses patience with being taken advantage of. I could also happily despise the nasty young Germanm sculptor she so unwisely falls for, what an arrogant irritating twerp. Being English I'm used to Hugh Laurie being only a comedian and it was interesting to see him in a more serious part as the family's patriach.But I'm mystified by one aspect of the story. Toby Stephens is cast as a son of the family, Victorin, and the only one with a brain in his head and one feels for his frustration as the rest of his family behave like idiots. Is he intended to be priggish? Hardly surprising since without him managing the estate and the shockingly large loans that're all keeping them going and his father so determinedly squanders on a showgirl and general stupidity, they'd all have been in the poorhouse long ago. Yet when it comes to retribution time, why is Victorin forced to flee with his family so as to avoid being murdered by one of the lenders calling in the money whilst no-one else suffers or does someone pay off the debts? If the theme is Bette's retribution, what on earth has she got against Victorin? And if the theme is wider than her personal retribution, it's not exactly clear. Perhaps there is an explanation in the book that was omittied from the movie, or the theme is that Victorin must suffer because he doesn't stop his father's excesses. But at least it seems he escapes to build a new, safer life with his family, whilst the rest of them suffer far worse. As people who live to excess and get themselves into trouble are colourful but also can be considerable bores, I would have liked to hear more about the financial aspects and seen Victorin used more in the movie.But what happens to the extensive debts? At the end we see Bette living in the great house but what do they live on? Perhaps the book explains this, I certainly hope so. I'd have given 8 stars but for those two quibbles.

I'm not familiar with Balzac's novel, but I've read a ton of Romantic literature. And this is one of its classic variations (The virtuous are redeemed). I would never have selected this movie myself (friends did) but I enjoyed it. If I described this as Madame Iago, you'd have the entire plot. Nothing is quite so much fun as watching someone who's been disrespected revenging herself on a crowd, especially after how needlessly cruel they've been. Since the playing field will never roll the arrangement back in Bette's favor, why not just destroy everyone? It's like a bomb went off when she's done. I am in no way a fan of Lange, but she's adequate (while looking distressingly like Jim Carrey in drag).On the minus side, the lead-up to the 1848 Revolution is trivialized. The writing is extremely weak (Point A is always too overtly connected to Point B), and the lighting of every scene is too brazen. The accents are all over the place, which becomes very distracting.

Jessica Lange is just fabulous in this movie. I had to watch it a couple of times to see where Elizabeth Shue fits in. The music was very enjoyable. I thought the movie was very well made, and enjoyed the little cameos of the musical director.