Du Barry - Marie Antoinette (2006) Discussion

[–] Felonious-Punk 14 years ago

Thanks for the historical footnote, honestly. It informs me, and it helps me see that Coppola used the history as a jumping off point for her movie but that her movie is not meant to be documentary but rather a progressive palette of emotions and life-truths.

The closest movies to my heart: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=46910443

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

I actually thought the film was a pretty accurate representation. I would say that the 1938 film portrays her the way you describe (as a conniving, jealous b*&ch, out to get marie). This one very accurately depicts a real life incident (as you well know having read the biography) in which Du Barry was understandably hurt that Marie (poisoned by the gossip and pressures of the king's sisters) refused to speak to her, and was eventually persuaded to do so in order to avoid an international incident. Du Barry in this film does strike me as vulgar, but not petty or malicious. She seems like a natural, uninhibited woman, insecure of her position, who wants to belong, and is eventually spurned.

I haven't read that particular biography. I get most of my information from Stefan Zweig. He paints a portrait of Du Barry much like what you described: a conventionally beautiful, unpretentious woman, who was naturally warm hearted, and would not set out to be cruel unless provoked. He writes the marie (much the same type) was provoked by her mischief making aunts, and in turn provokes Du Barry. Du Barry is consequently wounded and unsure of her position, and the course of events we see in the film unfolds. Aside from the shoulder bashing incident, I think this is how the film portrays she and the events.

Furthermore, while Du Barry, as you say, was conventionally pretty and fair, she was bold in her fashions and jewels. She did have a passion for fine things that would make a statement. Marie Antoinette, observing her at her wedding banquet, asked after Du Barry because she was so impressed by her bold jewelry and chic attire. So while the film makes her dark and edgy of appearance, I think it accurately captures the essence of a woman who, like Marie, said something with her clothing. You are right, they probably would have been friends under other circumstances.

It sounds like we agree on the woman, just not on the film.

reply

[–] Aulic Exclusiva 14 years ago

....had Du Barry and MA set aside their differences/stubborness (MA more so), they would have made good friends.

Du Barry was just a high-class hooker. The idea that she could have been good friends with the Queen of France is grotesque.

Snobbery is a form of romanticism, the chastity of the perfectionist

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Aulic Exclusiva 14 years ago

Du Barry left the court as Louis XV lay dying, and was never seen or heard from again there.

She lived on in retirement at the château de Louveciennes, tranquil and forgotten, so much so that she was almost overlooked, until a silly ado about some supposed stolen jewels brought her to the attention of the republican authorities. She was guillotined on 8 December 1793—ironically, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception—less than two months after the Queen.

Snobbery is a form of romanticism, the chastity of the perfectionist

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

And Marie Antoinette did not have an inherent sense of disdain for things sexually illicit as you seem to suppose. Such things were unspoken of in the Hofburg. Exposed to them for the first at Versailles, she was somewhat unfazed, having no predisposition on the matter. It appears to have been her gossip-monging aunts (also spinsters) who implanted a sense of haughty outrage in her toward the Du Barry. As I said before, I think the film depicts this accurately.

Marie, as she herself became the brunt of malicious gossip, and became more a woman of the world, was certainly not one to shy away from unseemly company if it could amuse her. What were many of her compatriots, male and female, if not "high class whores" of one variety or another? She was, ultimately, a very un-judgemental person. Her early, unfortunate run-in with Du Barry was based out of youthful folly and inexperience. It did not stem from an ingrained moral compass that came with her rank.

That being said...I think it was very unfair of Maria Theresa to haughtily shun courtesans in her own court, but pressure Antoinette to stoop to them in the court of Versailles. Shrewd? yes; hypocritical? yes.

reply

[–] drouais 14 years ago

marie-antoinette was not exposed to things sexually illicit for the first time at versailles. although young, she had witnessed the effects of her father's infidelities on her mother. this went hand in hand with the repugnance she felt for the comtesse du barry, combined with the influence of her husband's aunts.

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

It was an overstatement to say that Marie Antoinette was not exposed to things sexually illicit in Austria, I'll grant you. I still maintain that in later life, at least, it would not at all have been out of the question for her to have been friends with one such as the Du Barry. Polignac had affairs, Marie herself almost certainly had an affair, she surrounded herself with notorious womanizers whom she found witty and amusing. It seems just about everybody was having affairs except Lamballe and the King. Antoinette was not the licentious orgy-monger that the libelles made her out to be, neither was she a moralistic prig snubbing her nose at sexually overt women. Though she appears to have been "chaste" by comparison to others in her court, she enjoyed being around people who invited scandal.

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

It was an overstatement to say that Marie Antoinette was not exposed to things sexually illicit in Austria, I'll grant you. I still maintain that in later life, at least, it would not at all have been out of the question for her to have been friends with one such as the Du Barry. Polignac had affairs, Marie herself almost certainly had an affair, she surrounded herself with notorious womanizers whom she found witty and amusing. It seems just about everybody was having affairs except Lamballe and the King. Antoinette was not the licentious orgy-monger that the libelles made her out to be, neither was she a moralistic prig snubbing her nose at sexually overt women. Though she appears to have been "chaste" by comparison to others in her court, she enjoyed being around people who invited scandal.

reply

[–] drouais 14 years ago

marie-antoinette did not "almost certainly" have an affair. the evidence that exists- in the form of cryptic letters- is contradicted by actual historic fact, including that the queen's whereabouts were never secret, she had been inculcated to abhor adultery as a sin and in light of what she had seen in her father and grandfather-in-law, and that such activity would throw into doubt the legitimacy of her children. in light of the time it took for her to conceive in the first place, i doubt that the attraction of an affair would have seemed as important as the last cited reason. marie-antoinette wrote to her mother that she had found her bonheur essentiel, or true happiness, after becoming pregnant with her first child. why ruin or taint this by engaging in an illicit affair?

in the years after she actually started including fersen in her set (after 1778, although they had met four years earlier at a masqued ball), the queen was consumed with her family, building the petit trianon, and avoiding the scandal attached to her name. with regards to her family, from 1780 to 1789 she was consumed by the quick succession of births and deaths, including her mother's, her daughter's, and her son's. this wasn't really the time for her to be seeking an affair, especially in light of the political situation and the contemporary growth in her charities and adherence to stricter catholic devotions. although she was bent on reclaiming royal authority during the revolution, the increasingly hopeless situation inspired marie-antoinette to turn more to religion. her separation from her son and then her daughter and sister-in-law, to say nothing of the king's death, plunged the queen in utter agony. her chief thoughts during this period were of her children, who she explicitly mentions in her final letter. the scene in the 1938 movie of her life, where fersen visits her at the conciergerie, is totally invented.

the fashionable set before the revolution invited scandal, yes, and marie-antoinette managed to do so in her spending, gambling, etc. her sexual exploits are the product of seditious pamphleteers and later romantics. it's as if her tragic life and true person aren't interesting enough in their own right.

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

Once again, I'll concede that "almost certainly" was an overstatement. What I meant by that is, it seems probable to me that she did based on what I have read on the subject. I did not mean that is was historical fact.

You seem very knowledgable. What are your sources? I get most of my information from Stefan Zweig. I know it is not the trendiest of biographies these days, next to Antonia Fraser's and other more contemporary works. I admit it is too heavily influenced by early 20th-century psychoanalytic theory. But I don't think it should be discounted. I gather that many popular modern biographies, despite their efforts and impartiality, tend to be influenced by post-feminist conceptions of gender and society. I personally think that Zweig is much less biased than is generally supposed by critics, namely Sofia Coppola herself, whom IMDB claims refused even to read his biography.

Chapter 21, "Was He or Was He Not?" gives arguments for both sides. Though the 1938 film based on his book clearly takes the side of a chaste, platonic, but romantically driven love affair (thank you Hays code), Zweig himself seems inclined to believe a sexual relationship did take place, while admitting that it cannot be conclusively proven. He cites the large amount of evidence that has been deliberately destroyed by those with motives to maintain the image of the Queen as a chaste martyr, and the fact that Fersen neither confirmed nor denied Napoleon's flagrant accusation that he had slept with the Queen, arguing that these conspicuous silences on the parts of Fersen and documentation speak louder than words. Zweig also claims that a passage in Fersen's diary has been erased, but is still legible, stating that he had spent the night in the Queen's bedroom at Tuileries. I personally find this claim specious. I am, however, convinced by Zweig's citation of the Comte de Saint-Priest's account of the situation. Zweig writes:

"Saint-Priest, who had the most direct acquaintance with the situation, gives precise details. By no means hostile to the Queen, thoroughly matter-of-fact, he tells of Fersen's secret nocturnal visits to Trianon, Saint-Cloud, and the Tuileries. He declares that Madame de Polignac was privy to the liaison, regarding it with no disfavour..."

I have no doubt of the legitimacy of Marie Antoinette's children, and I do not think that a woman who has one affair (in a society that looked at things in a different light), cannot also be a devoted mother, and in her own way, a loyal wife. I have high regard for the late Queen as a complex woman with a morality of sorts, and do not think that her having been sexually intimate with Fersen need rob her of her interest or humanity.

I also concede that there is no conclusive evidence, and respect your opinion on the matter, which seems to be well-informed.

reply

[–] drouais 14 years ago

i'm not really a fan of fraser; sections of her book just don't mesh with what is known about marie-antoinette, notably her analysis of the relationship with fersen. yes, contraception existed in the 1780s. does this mean marie-antoinette used it? it's not very convincing. at this point in time the queen had finally achieved her mission, sealing the franco-austrian alliance with several surviving children. why would she risk ruining this? the idea that she could because contraceptive devices existed and because she was ruled by some sort of untamed passion, as fraser argues, just does not hold water.

i'd suggest evelyne lever, desmond seward, simone bertière, chantal thomas, nesta webster, hilaire belloc, etc. for biographies of marie-antoinette. munro price is especially good for analysis on louis XVI and the royal family's politics during the revolution. i'm not a fan of zweig, whose theory is pretty dated and doesn't explain why other, older courtiers were spending even more than marie-antoinette.

for an example of where i disagree with zweig, just take his inclusion of the comte de st-priest's testimony. it doesn't take into account that the comtesse de st-priest had been one of fersen's mistresses. she made her love for the swedish count known to everyone, making her husband a laughingstock and publicly ridiculed at court. is his testimony so reliable then? saint-priest was a liberal in the 1780s, hostile to the comte d'artois and the duchesse de polignac. he wasn't a fan of marie-antoinette, and her friend had been sleeping with his wife.

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

Hm, thank you for the insight. That does shed a different light on things.

I'm a fan of Zweig. As I wrote before, I do think his perspective is too driven by early 20th century psychology. But being a student of literature, I cannot help but be seduced by his deft way with words (which so well captures the spirit of the rococo, though critics may argue how well it captures historical truth).

I look forward to reading the biographers you suggested.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Aulic Exclusiva 14 years ago

I never denied du Barry lived in retirement at Louveciennes... only that she and Marie Antoinette had a lasting enmity which was not the case.

The Dauphine loathed the King's hooker. As Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette ascended the throne, Dubarry left the court and became a non-person. The Queen is not known to have mentioned her ever again. Those are the facts.

Snobbery is a form of romanticism, the chastity of the perfectionist

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] blankk23 13 years ago

" She was guillotined on 8 December 1793—ironically, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception—less than two months after the Queen."

Why is that ironic?

reply

[–] ilovetati 14 years ago

Remember that Coppola intended for you to see the events from Antoinette's perspective. It's like when teenage girls feel tension with their peers for legitimate reason.

Everybody wants to be found.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtieZvF-LUM

reply

[–] carmen_corral 14 years ago

I don't even know if Sofia even bothered to look at a portrait of Madame Du Barry or she would've never had cast Asia Argento to play her (Sofia loves her pals though). Du Barry was a legendary beauty, in a conventional way and that was a huge part of her charisma, as well as other traits of her personality, but she was also a very complex individual, which I guess that doesn't really matter if you're just going to "make her up". I mean: that scene where Asia Argento is loudly burping at the table???? Yes, Du Barry used to be a prostitute, but COME ON!!!

reply

[–] FloatingOpera7 14 years ago

Nothing against Du Barry. I personally think she was not a mean bratty bitch but somewhat hardened by her tough life. She was said to be kind and sweet by some actual sources so it's true. What I think she had was bitterness she hid by enjoying the wealth that she had never had in her life. Barry was born into poverty. Early in her life she would have never imagined she'd be at Versailles, the most powerful court of Europe, and the lover of the King! She became a prostitute although she seems to have been more of the "COURTESAN" type of hooker, that is an educated, beautiful lady who was groomed to be the mistress and lover of aristocratic powerful men, even if married or entitled nobility. She was a beautiful woman and used her seductive charms, and obviously her sexual experience, to move up "socially in the world. She married a Count and was given an aristocratic title but it was a way for her to enter the French high society at Versailles. Once she had a title, she lived at Versailles. Her husband was sent away conveniently and she became the lover of King Louis the 15th, and although the King had countless of lovers, she was apparently his favorite and the most famous of his mistresses. She was indeed the "uncrowned" Queen, the most talked about and most shining figure at court. Until Marie Antoinette arrived at Versailles.

Personally though I do believe that there was rivalry and animosity between Du Barry and Antoinette. Someone as important as Du Barry felt threatened for the first time by Antoinette. She was A PRINCESS, the daughter of Empress Maria Teresa of Austria, a Hapsburg royal. And who was Du Barry ? A poor street rat (laundress, miliner, etc) who got all "dressed up" as a member of royalty when she really wasn't. If you weren't born to money and power, you're no one. Du Barry must have known that and here came Marie Antoinette, who was born to the life of power and wealth, not only that, she was to be Queen of France, which Du Barry could never actually be. Once Du Barry's "hand that fed her" - the King Louis the 15th died and that was soon to happen since he was very old, Antoinette would be Queen. Du Barry knew that the King's son, Louis the 16th hated her guts. She definitely felt snubbed by him too. And by Marie. She must have really wanted with all her heart to belong to these people, to the high-born Bourbon family, but she was not one of them, and it ate her up inside. She was waiting for her own end to eventually come. Once Louis Auguste 15th was made King, she was out of Versailles and on her own.

I think that Marie didn't like Du Barry because according to all the sources, they were not on speaking terms and avoided one another. Of course realistically you can also say that Marie didn't care one way or another. Maybe she didn't hate Du Barry but instead she was honoring her husband's wishes in not addressing Du Barry in person or talking to her. Louis Auguste never did talk to Du Barry and he hated that she was his father's mistress. Clearly Louis Auguste loved his mother and was a momma's boy and disliked that this vile Du Barry came and took her father for herself. Louis must ordered Marie never to talk to Du Barry and to snub her, to make her feel that she should never have set foot in Versailles. Du Barry felt snubbed by Marie and what she wanted was for Marie to acknowledge her presence and rank (even if it was a phony rank) just one time. One time was all it would take to satisfy her ego and her desire for someone as VIP as Marie to appear to accept her as member of Versailles high court. Marie obviously never saw her as belonging there, considering Du Barry's background. This infuriated Du Barry. In her mind, she was deserving of titles and luxuries and power. In her mind, she was royalty. Marie Antoinette's real-life-royal background gave her a "reality check" but according to the etiquette of the Versailles court, one word spoken to her by Marie and she would be "totally accepted" by the court. So you see it wasn't enough that she was the King's mistress. Du Barry clearly wanted for everyone to see her as being one of the aristocracy. Versailles appears to have been like a high school where everyone wanted popularity and everyone had a clique and entourage. The real Queen was Marie, since by birth she was destined for the throne. Du Barry was basically the young gold-digging girlfriend of the King of France. It was her one moment in the sun.

After the King died, she was sent away to her other private property in France. There she found another wealthy man to keep her (true to her courtesan ways) and finally it all came crashing down when the Revolution came. She was forced out of her home, she hid her expensive jewels and treasures, and was taken to the Guillotine to die. And she showed no dignity as Marie Antoinette did at the guillotine. Marie died bravely and didn't fight it. Du Barry went kicking and screaming. "One moment more please" was her famous last words where as Marie's were the meek and loving "I'm sorry sir I did not mean to do it."

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

Sofia must have looked at a portrait. Say what you will about this film, it is copiously researched (at least from an art direction standpoint). Besides which she read the Antonia Frazier biography, which I think may have included a portrait of Du Barry, I don't recall.

No, Asia Argento does not resemble Du Barry in a physical way. Du Barry, as you say, was a conventionally pretty, fair woman whose portraits suggest she was partial to whites, pinks and pale blues. But she WAS a conspicuous figure who DID get attention from her fashions and was famous for being utterly natural in a pretentious court. Possibly her burping audibly was a shade over the top, I'd have to consult a historian. But Zweig's biography (which I admitted earlier not to be infallible, but am still a fan of) recounts Marie Antoinette noticing a loud, exquisitely dressed, and bejeweled woman at her wedding feast whom she inquired after, and was told Was Du Barry.

reply

[–] FloatingOpera7 14 years ago

Coppola didn't make Du Barry to be realistic, since this is all about Marie Antoinette; but she could have done better. Du Barry in this movie is a total stereotype and false image of her as a jealous rival, a spoiled bitch, a meanie. She's in and out of the movie so fast that you don't really understand what her character is all about and what she was really like. As for fashions, stop it. This movie is more than just about fashion. And Marie herself really cared about other more important things than fashion.

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 14 years ago

I didn't mean to imply that fashion is the only thing worth considering here. But since both women often used fashion to define themselves, it is worth mentioning. Also, this is a film, which means that costuming is an important tool for developing characters, not just about dressing people up pretty.

reply

[–] FloatingOpera7 14 years ago

I don't see it as being as important as their lives! There is far more to these women than how they dressed. Their lives are the stuff of legend. The way they died was so dramatic. Du Barry, like Marie, also died at the guillotine with her head chopped off! Du Barry and Marie met the same fate and strangely enough, despite coming from different backgrounds, ended up in the same category and "label" by the Revolutionists - pro-monarchy aristocrats who in their eyes were traitors and enemies to the people of France. Naturally, they all knew Du Barry had been the mistress of King Louis the 15th, whom they also hated. Louis the 15th was never considered to be a good king, never praised and beloved like Louis the 14th, who was even said to have been loved by even the lower-level peasants. Louis 15th pursued only a life of pleasure and decadence. He had so many mistresses. Du Barry was his last big mistress, an extravagant woman who represented all the evils and licentiousness that the Revolutionaries hated. She really stands for more of that than Marie Antoinette, who was an unfortunate victim of her destiny. Marie was born to Austrian royalty. She was sent off to marry into French royalty, but not by choice. So only because she was the Queen did the anti-royalty folks hate her. Du Barry, who was one of the poor people, chose to leave that lower class life behind and to enter the upper class...She was among the hated upper class. That's why her head was cut off ! She should have gone back to the street! At least that way she would have lived to see at least the year 1802 LOL

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ejs8882000 12 years ago

It is indeed unfortunate that Du Barry in this film is portrayed as the "typical hot, dumb, shallow biatch with no manners", (such as burping at the table). She was the brunette bimbo of the film. And of course as was talked about before, in real life she looked physically different and her personality was different. She had blonde hair, and was quite friendly and intelligent. And I assume she had MUCH better manners. However, one can't really blame her too much for her behavior at the guillotine. After all, she was going to die! That would absolutely terrify anyone going through that. She didn't come from any royal family so of course she wouldn't die "with dignity". She already lived a hard life and now this. I'm sure it was just too much.

reply

[–] Aulic Exclusiva 11 years ago

since both women often used fashion to define themselves, it is worth mentioning

Marie-Antoinette was an Archduchess of Austria and Queen of France. She did not need "defining".

Scostatevi profani! Melpomene son io...

reply

[–] ClassicMovieholic 11 years ago

No, she didn't "need" it, but she chose it. Marie Antoinette's fashion was legendary. As I clearly wrote, it was hardly her only distinction, and was not the only thing worth considering. Besides which, titles aside, as a young girl in the foreign and hostile climate of the French court, she did struggle to find a sense of identity...not Marie Antoinette, Archduchess of Austria and Dauphine of France, but Marie Antoinette, human being.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MydnightRose 12 years ago

I hated how Du Barry was treated in this film. I wish someone would take the time to represent her more like she really was. She can still be an antagonist without being so disgusting and vulgar.

Clark Kent + Lois Lane 4ever
DC Can Suck It

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]