i must have seen a different film!!

good back-story, and good acting

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

When one pretends to write a scenario on a major historical period of ANY country he has the obligation the historical facts of that period. The French Revolution whether one agrees to what happened or not, is a major event of my country. I completely disagree with the idea that It benefited France as one of it consequences was to deprive the country of some of the most illustrious scientist (Antoine Lavoisier father of modern Chemistry for instance), writers (André Chénier famous French poet), etc... of the time. But there is one thing which is intolerable is to transvestite events. Who can seriously imagine that one could escape unnoticed during the minutes between you were called in the prison and driven to the cart which would bring you to the guillotine which by the way was Place Louis XV the actual Place de la Concorde which topography remained the same but for the presence of the Luxor obelisque set much later in the center of the square. The only known and established fact of people escaping the guillotine concerns some of the actors of the Comédie Française. Charles Labussière (1768-1809) was an actor of the theater. He was employed by the "Comité de Salut Public" as he needed money to live. The Committee would establish lists of people who should be forwarded to the Revolution Tribunal last step before the guillotine. Labussière was so distressed to see on the lists names of people he admired, authors, scientists, actors that he imagined a way to slow down their presentation to the tribunal and eventually escape their fate. He would snatch the document concerning those people's names, make a small ball of the paper and soak them in a bucket of wine under his desk. At night after leaving his office he would go to the river and throw the balls of paper in the Seine where they would dissolve and be taken by the current. The Committee did not make copies of the lists so that the Tribunal could not double check the names presented to it. It is estimated that by Labussière's courageous act some 1000 persons escaped the fatal end among them a great number of the Comédie Française actors. Among the famous persons of the time were Florian one of the major french fabulists and Josephine de Beauharnais future wife of Napoleon and Empress during the 1st Empire. As one can imagine Labussière played a very dangerous game as risking his head if he had been discovered. This is history, this movie is nothing but invention without any interesting purpose. Period movies should somehow increase the knowledge of the viewers at the same time it entertain the public. Even Alexandre Dumas novels which contain many errors, have a historical foundation which made the story credible. Michelet History of France also contains approximation but they were due to absence of documents at the time the book was written and would be corrected later. These are valid excuses, in this film nothing can excuse such incoherence. We know the facts for certain today and have to use them.

When it comes to revolutions it's possible to go too far, and they have gone it. They're chopping off head after head while the crowd cheers. It's the aftermath of the French revolution, the 1780s, and the Reign of Terror prevails, perhaps another case of the cure being as bad as the disease. Most social movements follow a similar path only in revolutions the results are more dramatic. Fidel Castro worked his way down to government mailmen. I'm going to call this "revolutionary inertia." Inertia means an object continues its motion until acted upon by an opposite force. The Salem witch trials resulted in more than twenty hangings and only stopped when he girls started accusing community leaders. That's all for now, and thank you for your kind attention.The citizens have deposed the King and taken over France and the first thing they do is start beheading whatever aristocrats they can find reason to. Everybody's getting it in the neck, and the guillotine is in the public square, the executions surrounded by screaming mobs of the newly empowered and bloodthirsty. Intolerable.So a wealthy Englishman, Anthony Andrews, while posing as an effete and shallow fop, periodically disguises himself, visits Paris, and with the help of some comrades smuggles handfuls of aristos out of the country. The Committee on Revolutionary Protocol or whatever it's called is furious with this mysterious "Scarlet Pimpernel" who seems intent on helping suspects escape the bloodbath. We don't actually see any heads tumbling into baskets, thank God. There is a good deal of action and suspense that underlines the intrigues we see developing in the story -- clattering tumbrils, galloping horses, an occasional knife duel.Especially annoyed is Ian McKellen as the Minister of Executions or whatever he's called. And he SHOULD be. Andrews, still in his guise of a peacock, has managed to swipe McKellar's beloved Jane Seymour. Seymour, of course, knows nothing of Andrews' secret persona and neither does anyone outside of Andrews' small circle of conspirators.Jane Seymour is delicious in her 18th-century finery, despite a fright wig of such proportions that it carries its own weather system. Andrews is all right with both identities except that NOBODY in his right mind could endure the presence of Sir Percy Blakeney, Andrews' fop identity, for more than one or two awkward moments. Really, the guy could clear a room without using a gun. "They seek him here, they seek him there. Those Frenchies seek him everywhere. Is he in heaven? Is he in hell? That damned elusive Pimpernel," is some doggerel he improvises in the presence of the revolution's head honchos, much to their annoyance. Sir Percy struts around in his meticulous dress carrying a tiny magnifying glass through which he examines persons of a lesser breed, his head tilted back, his nostrils quivering.Best performance is by Ian McKellen who is truly in love with Jane Seymour and is emotionally damaged by seeing her drift away into the arms of that English snob. But he does an extraordinary job of projecting his anguish, torn between his love for Madame Seymour and his allegiance to Madame Guillotine. You know something -- McKellen is a youngish man here, not the wrinkled and wretched fairy of "Gods and Monsters." In fact he's handsome and rather rugged. He resembles Leonard Nimoy so much that there were times I thought it WAS Leonard Nimoy. Is it possible that McKellen and Nimoy are one and the same person? No? Has anyone ever seen the two of them together in the same room? I thought not.

I seldom find any films, especially those from the 80's, that I would classify as timeless. This film is a masterpiece. Based on Baroness Ozzie's classic about history's first masked hero, the story takes place during the bloody years of the French Revolution. The plot brilliantly unfolds with enough drama to keep the audience on the edge of their seat while Andrew's and McKellen's dry back-and-forth keeps the movie light-hearted. Seymour is breath-taking as always, although save one seen in the library, her interactions with Andrew's seem a little forced, especially when compared to the chemistry between Sir Ian McKellen and Anthony Andrews. Definitely one of my favorites.

Jane Seymour and Anthony Andrews star in this remake of "The Scarlet Pimpernel". I haven't seen the original with Leslie Howard, but it's probably a good guess that it's notch above this made-for-TV version.The film centres on a secret organisation of do-gooders, led by a man named Percy Blakeney (Anthony Andrews), who risk their own necks in order to help prisoners escape execution during the French Revolution. Apart from the name they go by, "The Scarlet Pimpernel", no one has any idea who they are. And to ensure that no one will ever suspect their true identity, they make themselves out to be idiots, weaklings, cowards, any trait that least resembles the heroic trademarks of "The Scarlet Pimpernel". Also to avoid recognition, they work under a range of disguises and are continually having to dodge a group led by the villain (who doesn't come across as all that bad), Chauvelin (Ian McKellen). Chauvelin and his men are determined to find out who they are and stop them. To complicate matters though, Percy meets Marguerite (Jane Seymour), falls in love with her and ends up marrying, which leads to all sorts of problems.The script is incredibly ordinary at times and the acting in places is a bit stiff. It's also difficult to accept that Jane Seymour's classy character of Marguerite would fall for such a pompous idiot as Percy. Anthony Andrew's acting is a bit off in parts, especially during some of his disguises and the film never has a high point. It stays on an even keel and never really takes off.Yet, oddly enough, there are shreds of likability to the film and a sense that there was organisation during production. But overall, the film is nothing special.