Accents.


I've seen Marie Antoinette a few times, as visually beautiful as it is, it's still a dreary and drab film.

However my biggest annoyance is the characters accents. Kirsten Dunst just quitened down her American accent as did Schwartzman?
However others had the proper accent, this was completely mis-leading.

How are you suppose to talk the film seriously when the lead character has an American accent when she is Austrian
and the Queen of France.

This film was made for the fashion and that is all.

reply

[deleted]

Well put! It's not at ALL uncommon to combine different accents these days, with a loose code saying that upper-class accents should be "British" (no definition, though!) while lower-class ones can be pretty much anything. Even that is going by the boards.

I'm surprised that anyone is still shocked by this since it's been going on for years. For instance, in "Amadeus", the eponymous composer, aka "Wolfi", played by American Tom Hulce ("Animal House"!), makes no attempt to change accents except to eliminate regional American accents (ALWAYS a good move!). Elizabeth Berridge, who plays his wife, Constanze, is also American.

Jeffrey Jones, Emperor Josef I, Mozart's patron and Antoinette's brother, was played by Danny Huston in a great though small role, in "Marie Antoinette". He is probably best known as the nutso principal in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off"! The only Brit I can think of offhand in a major role in "Amadeus" is Simon Callow as Schikaneder, producer of "The Magic Flute", who received acclaim in "Four Weddings in a Funeral", but was great in the Merchant-Ivory production of "A Room With a View", and later, the Academy Award-winner, "Howard's End".

I love it when Brits, Yanks, Germans, Czechs, Indians and whoever, can convincingly work together to create a classic like this and many others.



She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply

This was discussed a bunch of times previously, though most of those thread are gone.

What does "proper accent" mean?

If it means how the actual historical figures would have sounded, nobody was even close,* and in that respect it is exactly like virtually every other similar movie.

Just to note the obvious: none of the real-life people spoke English at all (except rarely and not very well), whether with a French accent, an Austrian accent or an American accent. Having Marie Antoinette speaking fluent English with a French accent is in no sense more accurate, historically, than having her speak fluent English with an American accent. Indeed, I would argue that the latter is, in some senses, more accurate than the former.

Slightly less obvious, but worth noting: it's very rare, even when the actors speak the correct language, for anyone to make even a stab at getting a period-correct accent (which is tricky anyway for periods before audio recording, for obvious reasons). For example, all those nicely-made movies of Jane Austen books with the characters speaking in an "RP" (aka "posh" or "BBC") English accent are well off mark, as the accent didn't exist when Jane Austen was alive.

If "proper" means "in accordance with Hollywood convention," then it was, I suppose, improper. Actually, Hollywood convention tends to split between having non-English-speaking Europeans speak English with some approximation of their national accent (current version, not historical), and having them speak with a posh English accent.

The convention isn't super-strong anyway. Consider "Dangerous Liaisons," for example, in which all the characters - all 18th-Century Frencophones - spoke English with the actor's natural accent. The mix included John Malkovich's flat midwestern, Keanu Reaves suburban dude, Peter Capaldi's full-on Scottish, and Michelle Pfeiffer's stab at something vaguely like "classy English," for reasons that are obscure. So far as I can tell, the accents attracted no particular mention. I'm not sure what the difference is, except that Sofia Coppola isn't Steven Frears.

There are others, some pretty prominent. "Amadeus" managed to snag a Best Picture oscar with Mozart chattering away in a straight American accent. "Shakespeare in Love" won the same award, with the actors all talking in modern English accents which sound very little like those of the 16th/17th Century. Of course, with one exception (that I'm aware of) nobody does Shakespeare plays in accents of the period in which they were written ... or, for that matter, in anything that sounds remotely like how people spoke in medieval Scotland, medieval Denmark, Verona of any period or classical Greece.
____
*Okay, I suppose the daughter in the garden is close, though she's out of period.

reply

Personally, I think this film should have been made without dialogue. It's so hugely, lusciously, overwhelmingly visual, that it might as well have been a silent film.

That said, my one big quibble with the accents is that Marie A had the same accent as everyone else at court. Throughout her reign, she was regarded with suspicious because she was a foreigner, both by the court and by the common people. If she does not have some sort of foreign accent we actually miss out on much of her identity and personal relationships, but I suppose that was too much to ask of Kirsten Dunst.




" Jack, you have debauched my sloth! "

reply

I have no trouble with the all over the board languages/accents, etc. in this film....it was meant to be a completely out of the box film and there was no attempt made to have anyone speak in French (except for the little girl playing Marie Therese).....everyone just spoke with either an American or English accent, depending on their country of origin....well Judy Davis is Australian and didn't employ that particular accent in her role, but adopted an English one. Obviously, no matter what their original nationality, French was the spoken language of the Court of Versailles.

If you want a film to be "accurate", this isn't it by any means, shape or form. However I believe it did what Sofia Coppola intended it to do....show the very "teenage" queen and her frivolous lifestyle and some of the reasons behind it....making it more relatable to an audience who otherwise consigns Marie Antoinette to the dusty history shelves for the most part.

She had two boys, they don't even mention the death of the first Dauphin, altho' that was hugely traumatic to she and Louis, and only slightly allude to the death of Sophie Beatrix, who died as a baby.

Lots of cinematic license taken with this....but the saving grace for me is that is was ACTUALLY filmed onsite at Chateau du Versailles, inside and out, which is a first. Same with Le Petit Trianon, Le Hameau, etc. Not to mention the very excellent costumes.

Hopefully this film will get people reading about the actual life of Queen Marie Antoinette, which was far more tragic than what was portrayed in the film...her last few years were beyond horrendous and tragic.

reply

I feel bad for what happened to her kids. But Marie was a horrible, pitiless reactionary, the epitome of the worst of the one percent.

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

[deleted]

But then it should have been in French, right? I found myself unable to watch more than a few minutes of Paths of Glory due to the British accents, despite otherwise being a big fan of Kubrick.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

reply

I know what you mean.

But in this case, it was different. For example, Marie Antoinette's little daughter or other little children weren't dubbed. That's somehow charming. You can hear her little daughter speaking in her native tongue (French, of course) when she and Marie Antoinette are in the countryside.

In this case, it isn't sloppy film making. And even if it is, it fits (like when you see the pair of Converse in the "I Want Candy" segment, it's not sloppy but kinda intentional).

reply

I adored the little girl speaking French, it was so charming!

As a British person, I don't require characters supposedly from foreign countries to speak British with a British accent.

There are films about Versailles and Marie Antoinette in French if anybody wants to watch those and be exact. Although we don't always know how these historic people spoke, so whatever the accent or language it's never completely correct.

I find sometimes in period films that American actors are working so hard on their 'posh' British accent, that the performance suffers, and would have been stronger in their natural accent.

I did think when first watching 'Marie Antoinette' that Kirsten Dunst would have kept her American accent while all around her spoke with a British accent to convey how Marie Antoinette retrained her Austrian accent amongst the French. That would have been genius!

reply

I would have ideally preferred the film be in French. But absent that, having it be in English with French (or Austrian) accents would have been much much worse than what they did. I hate when they do that in movies (like ones about Nazis that have the characters speak English with German accents).

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

"Vee haff ways of making you talk ... in Englisch mit ein Jurrmahn aksent!"

reply

so you've never seen the 2002 version of the Count of Monte Christo?? hardly anyone had a French accent! some even had English accents.


but if you really want to get technical, marie should have spoken Austrian and not English. she wouldn't have known French right off the bat.

OH THANK YOU GOD! THANK YOU SO BLOODY MUCH!!! Basil Fawlty

reply