Overrated and overhyped

Good start, but then it gets ruined

Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Young Queen Margot finds herself trapped in an arranged marriage amidst a religious war between Catholics and Protestants. She hopes to escape with a new lover, but finds herself imprisoned by her powerful and ruthless family.Alright, I had no idea that this was based on the 1845 historical novel "La Reine Margot" by Dumas. I had no idea he wrote such a book, or that an earlier version had been filmed. And most importantly, I have no idea how accurate any of this is. For the sake of cinema, I suppose it doesn't matter.The truth is at least partially here, because the romance is real and there really was a St. Bartholomew's Day massacre, though I don't think it is very well known today, especially in the United States. (We are woefully ignorant of European history.) Margot (or Margaret of Valois) remains an interesting character, if for no other reason than that she is an ancestor of the current royal family in England.

La Reine Margot is about the St. Bartholomew's day massacre and the intrigues at the court before and after the event. It uniquely tries to denominate Catherine de Medicis as the evil culprit as can be seen, in a way, by her terrible Italian accent. Even though till today the orchestrator of the massacre is in doubt, the movie seems to place the blame on an outsider, on an Italian. Ah, the French, always weary of the outsider. It is close to hilarious to see the portrayal of Charles the ninth as a hypochondriac/drunk, always under the control of external influences. External from himself. Himself representing France. An acute sense of this movie can be derived from a dialog lasting fifteen or so seconds, and which I could not get out of my head {and I kept telling myself throughout the film}. It is the scene where Margot tells Charles XIX, after he witnesses the massacre: Calme-Toi, Calme-Toi. The film is a stupid, overly dramatized piece of work that plays to the emotions of the French. It is a crime against historical fiction and should be persecuted to the fullest extent; the penalty being its burning. The burning of all its copies, original and duplicate reels, so that not a word of it might be spoken of; ever.

If as a young boy, I had been able to watch a film like La Reine Margot I would probably have enjoyed history a lot more than I did. The first time I saw it at the cinema it knocked me out and I had to go back again later that week. Now I have it on DVD I'm still seeing and understand more with each viewing finding myself searching the internet for the historical record of the events portrayed. Seeing it again now, the only thing that slightly jarred was the make-up. It may be accurate but seems to look slightly out of period although I'm not an expert by any means. I think it helped that there were no recognizable 'Hollywood' actors and I also think it should be compulsory viewing for every History student.

"La Reine Margot" should delight history buffs even though the portrayal of its central character makes her far too important. The princess Marguerite is remembered mostly for her life of dedicated whoring right up until her death. However, three of the characters are masterfully depicted: Henri IV (Auteuil) Catherine de Medici (Lisi) and Charles IX (Anglade), who account for most of the film's veracity. A more accurate portrayal of Henri III who for a time occupied the client throne of Poland in a travesty more like its Queen than its King, would have been welcome. Only a very slight hint of this is given when he is shown kissing his mignon (a bit part played by Thomas Kretschmann, who has lately developed into an impressive actor.) It might also have been interesting seeing the attempt to capture the throne of England by sending the youngest, Duke D'Alencon, to woo Elizabeth I. For a better understanding of Catherine de Medici's character, her youthful life as the scorned and betrayed Italian queen of Henri II is portrayed by Marisa Pavan in the 1956 film "Diane" and the early part of her Regency and the prophecy concerning her children's dire fates in the 1994 film "Nostrodamus" in which she is played by Amanda Plummer. The parallels with her troubled reign and that of her contemporary Elizabeth of England are many. Elizabeth had the Babington plot to deal with and (all the usual glorification of her aside) had many Catholics executed and the remaining Catholic nobility taxed into eventual penury. Not to mention the terrible persecutions she visited (like her predecessors) on Scotland and Ireland. So don't be too quick to judge Catherine de Medici as a monster. Expediency made both of these women ruthless but successful monarchs in very adverse situations. Despite some inaccuracies, this film has a genuine feel for the period that should be greatly appreciated by historical cognoscenti.