Diagonaldi Very well executed

Konterr Brilliant and touching

Michelle Ridley The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Armand A beautiful film about art, life, sacrifice. Very European, refined, splendid image, subtle acting, atmosphere of a historical period recreated in magnificent way. But the principal error is the beauty of a movie in which food, costumes, colors, words, art in every form transforms the story in ordinary pretext.Depardieu is a brilliant Vatel and his impressive talent, his artistic force are reflected in acting. But Vatel was not a victim of hypocrite nobles, of time and of his social origins. The last gesture was not only result of duty conscience. And he was not a great artist in a fragile domain.His job was his life. The parties, the food, the organization of a entire show was essence of an touching existence and reflection of the time's glory. This sophisticated art to be crux of a world was secret ingredient of a special moral victory. So, Vatel was more than a small character, builder of little extravagant shows, toy of aristocracy. His life, his death was ineffable form of sacrifice for a special gift: art to be yourself, part and builder of dream, heart of miracle and desire.

TxMike Gérard Depardieu is François Vatel, I'm not sure what his actual title was, but he was a combination of master chef, kitchen manager, estate manager, and live show producer. The setting for the whole story is the country estate, over a few days, when the king of France, Louis XIV, and his vast party are dropping in for some peace and quiet. However custom at that time was that the king was to be lavishly entertained, no matter what. One problem was Vatel's employer, the prince de Conde (Julian Glover), was virtually broke, and hoped that the king would appoint him to a high military position, one that would pay well. And, if they were to go to war with Holland, that would assure it. Meanwhile, the merchants who provided food and other supplies were put off until then, and it fell to Vatel to convince them that the money would come.Much of the middle story involves the spoiled and decadent behavior the king and his vast traveling party. The king's brother, who was gay, made a request for Vatel himself. The king requested a young kitchen boy, and Vatel put a stop to that. Uma Thurman is the vaguely British Anne de Montausier, having an affair with the king, but attracted to Vatel. The movie focuses on Vatel himself, his everyday life, his skill at making changes in the menu when, for example, half of the lobster shipment was bad, or the fish catch was unusually small. Vatel is painted as a strong person with high integrity, and barely able to tolerate the misbehavior he witnesses. A good movie for those who enjoy realistic period pieces.MAJOR SPOILER. Desperate, Vatel's employer bets and loses Vatel in a card game against the king. When he learns this, partly feeling unappreciated and partly dreading going into service for the king, Vatel poisons and kills himself, honor before all else.

nefariouscoffeefiend This is a superb movie. Gerard portrays the character Vatel perfectly, the "party liaison", shall we say, who is trying to help Prince de Conde' regain the favor of the King, Louis XIV, to save his bankrupt province by putting together a massive weekend of splendor and banquets. Tim Roth plays a good supporting role, as the Marquis who is trying to bed Thurman. Also in the supporting cast is Timothy Spall. The movie is very colorful and wonderfully directed, and was nominated for best art direction. The director does well at portraying the time period, and keeps you captivated during every scene. Tim Roth could have had a better role, but that would probably be my only complaint about this movie. I'd give it a 9.5/10.

rosscinema This film is considered a major flop and the French absolutely abhor it in every sense. I decided to view it and remain neutral and just let the film play out without having read the bad reviews beforehand. Story is set in Chantilly, France in 1671 and a broke nobleman named Prince de Conde (Julian Glover) has decided to throw a 3 day feast for Louis XIV (Julian Sands) and all of his royal friends with the hope that if he is impressed enough he will commission the Prince to General as war looms with Holland. Conde has put the 3 day feast and all of the entertainment in the hands of Francois Vatel (Gerard Depardieu) who can work magic when it comes to preparing feasts even though he may not have enough food. Vatel is a patient man full of loyalty and honor and ethics. At times he is forced to tell some of the royal guests "No" to certain extravagances and this has caught the eye of Anne de Montausier (Uma Thurman) who has become the Kings new mistress and also has to repel the advances of the Marquis de Lauzun (Tim Roth). *****SPOILER ALERT*****While the King is playing cards he asks Conde to put up Vatel as part of a bet and Conde reluctantly agree's. Conde loses and Vatel is given the news that he must pack his bags and get ready to head to Versailles. Vatel is so crushed by his loyalty being ignored that he kills himself. This film was directed by Roland Joffe who had given everyone a truly horrible adaptation of "The Scarlett Letter" and I don't think this film is anywhere near as bad as that although several critics will say otherwise. The look of the film is very impressive and the Art Design was nominated for an Oscar. Good cinematography make this a visual delight but the story seems to be another story. I do recommend this film and I'll first tell what I liked about it. First, I though Depardieu gave a convincing performance and his loyalty was very evident in his characterization. He convincingly played a man sworn to do the best he can and asks of nothing in return. Secondly, even though a romance between Thurman and Depardieu seems very unlikely I did understand why she would admire him. How can anyone not be touched by his tenderness and morals. But I have to admit that the story could have been a lot better if more had been explained about Vatel. We watch Vatel in this film spend too much time poking his fingers in pots and tasting the food. Of course all of royalty is portrayed as spoiled snobs and it's now become cliche to show them in this light. This film caused a ruckus when it opened at Cannes because the script was rewritten by an Englishman from a French story and it was filmed in English. The bad reviews were all aimed at Joffe and I'm not sure if his career will ever be the same. This film does have some glaring flaws but I suggest to people that if they view it to do so with a fair and open mind. I do think Depardieu is good in this film and Thurman isn't bad either. I think it's worth a look.