Lost Illusions (2021) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
20 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Good but spoiled by heavy-handed narration
steveinadelaide10 June 2022
Lost Illusions is a movie adaptation of the classic novel by Honoré de Balzac. The movie follows the young poet Lucien de Rubempré, who naively leaves his hometown in pursuit of becoming an author. I haven't read the novel, but I understand the movie does an excellent job of staying true to the source material. Unfortunately, the constant narration can be quite tedious. It's as if the viewer isn't trusted to understand what's going on without being spoon-fed every detail.

The acting is solid all around, but the standout performance is by Benjamin Voisinas as Lucien. He perfectly captures the naïveté and arrogance of the character. The movie is also visually stunning, with opulent costumes and sets that transport the viewer to 19th century France. The dialogue is fast-paced and witty, but it can be difficult to follow at times. There are some very funny moments, but the movie is a tragedy more than a comedy. It's a long movie, but it's worth watching if you're a fan of period dramas.

Even though the movie is set in the 1800s, it has a lot of relevance to today. The portrayal of journalism and the literary world is just as relevant now as it was then. Fake news was a problem back then and the movie is a reminder that some things never change.

Lost Illusions is a well-made movie and worth seeing if you're a fan of the novel or period dramas in general. I'd give Lost Illusions a higher score if the narration weren't so heavy-handed.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Excessive narration does a disservice to this movie
Oeuvre_Klika20 March 2022
I'm not against the use of a narrator in a movie by principle. Narration can be useful to set context, or, even better, have an interesting dialogue with the action. However, I struggle to understand what the writers of this movie were thinking when they decided that every beat of this story needed narration. I felt like I was reading a picture book. It really diminished my enjoyment of the movie. Too bad, because it's a good story, served by excellent actors (I particularly loved Salomé Dewaels) and beautiful costumes and sets. A lot of the narration could have been cut by being more creative with the script and telling us things in different ways, or by simply leaving a few things unsaid and trusting the audience to cope with some ambiguity.

I'm frankly baffled by the fact that it won the "best movie" and "best adapted scenario" César awards (admittedly, I haven't seen its competition).

Also, the little nods to our present time, mostly done by that same narration, were very unsubtle. In a better film, I might have funnier, but there they tended to annoy me.
23 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Lovely Illusions
daoldiges5 July 2022
I won't repeat the storyline here as that's already been covered by many others. Lost Illusions is a visually sumptuous film throughout. I did notice that all of the camera work is quite tight, with very few if any longshots. As such it can feel slightly claustrophobic, if by design or chance I'm not sure. I'm not suggesting it a positive or negative, just an observation. I generally liked the male performances, especially Voisin does a nice job. Salome Dewaels does a very fine job as well but I feel the two other female performances were both a bit constrained. Several viewers took issue with the volume of narration - to that I feel there might have been a couple of instances of this, ever so slightly, but for the most part I have no major issues with this element. Lost Illusions is a beautiful and interesting film worth checking out.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Winks to our epoch
matlabaraque6 November 2021
Lost illusions is for many critics, the best Balzac's novel and the adaptation that Xavier Giannoli (the director) delivers is not only fairly pleasant, dynamic and very well interpreted, it also has a special resonance in our world controled by social networks, search for buzz, influencers, fake news and a few rich media owners.

However, the story seems quite far from our world as it takes place in the first part of the 19th century (around 1820-1830) during the period of "Restauration", when monarchy came back to power in France but also when the liberals were pushing for changing the regime or at least experimenting new liberties such as parliamentarism and freedom of the press.

Lucien de Rubempré is this young man full of dreams who comes from the French country side eager to live from his literary talents, driven by his forbidden love to a rich aristocrat . Sent away to Paris, little by little Lucien will lose his illusions to discover a world full of greed, machiavellianism and dishonesty.

Xavier Giannoli tackles lots of topics in what we understand is a very rich novel. One of the topic is the transformation of literature into merchandise. The depiction of the book publishers is machiavellian. The depiction of a new kind of journalism based on sensacional news is quite shocking. In fact, Xavier Giannoli doesn't make a plea for journalists, on the contrary, he even tries to discredit them and presents them as filthy people, greedy for money. It's sometimes a little bit too much but we understand that the new liberties conceded by the government back in those days have a repercussion on different fields of the society and we also understand it concerns a certain type of journalism and not all journalisms. However the resonence in our 21st century world is quite obvious concerning the search of buzz.

We clearly understand that what the director wants to make us some winks thoughout his film, winks that the attentive spectator cannot miss. There is notably the explanation of how the buzz is created among the press, but also how the media (for the time, mainly newspapers) are controlled and owned by rich entrepreneurs or by the big bosses of advertising agencies and how these influencers of the 19th century try to invade the parliament and get the hold of the main positions among the government. The sentence "there will be a time a bankier will be president of the republic" is clearly a wink to our French president Macron, former banker himself.

All in all, Xavier Giannoli makes a great adaptation, with a lot of characters and a fine depiction and understanding of the changes that were at stake back in the 19th century and that have a special resonance nowadays.
55 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Long but gold
geraldineboillereaux20 February 2022
It's very rare to be able to watch a 2h long literature movie without getting bored at any point.

Great cast, great adaptation of dialogues that make it a modern adaptation of Balzac while still translating the soul of it.
30 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A Disappointment
jromanbaker29 April 2022
I was looking forward to seeing this film, and the first half is extremely good indeed, especially on its observations that without being ' known ' or have people rooting for you you stand very little chance in either getting into the so-called literary world and into journalism. I could smell the corruption just by watching the screen. It was like this in the Bourbon era and so I feel it has been for a long while. So what went wrong for me ? The force of the story carried the film, despite the fact that the direction seemed very conservative. Fine images at times, but not really that spark that showed a new voice in the cinema. My mind often wondered back to the 1950's and the very long adaptation of ' Le Rouge et le Noir ' and the blandness of the direction then. And yet despite doubts I thought I would give this film a higher rating. Xavier Dolan was much, much better than the lead Benjamin Voisin, who often failed to convince me he merited the role of Lucien and I thought it a pity Dolan was just that much older for the part. Apart from him and the excellent Vincent Lacoste I found the casting weak and that applied sadly to the female actors. Where are the actors like Riva, Seyrig, and Huppert to take these parts ? I have thought this over carefully and that is my honest opinion. The ending after a very long film seemed rushed and the final scene was literally a washout. But all that said the first half is very fine and has a truth to it that castigates French society, then and now.
16 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Qualité 21
EdgarST29 April 2022
The French cinema "de qualité" was heavily attacked by "nouvelle vague" critics back in the late 1950s and early 1960s. While many of the masters of the preceding decades were no longer giving the best of themselves (with the usual exceptions, such as Renoir or Bresson), the reason for the ridicule was the urgency that the critics (Godard, Truffaut, Rivette et al) had to make their own movies and with their writings they tried to "overthrow" the classics, who were too old to engage in diatribes and humiliations.

The worst of the case is that today we can take works by Clair, Duvivier, Carné or Clouzot and discover magnificent, beautiful, and lustrous films that those angry critics discredited. That cinema "de qualité" accompanies French cinema since cinema is cinema, it is not always of "quality", but there are outstanding works. What is ironic, furthermore and to the point, is that the new French cinema, despite the awards and praise given by festivals and the new critics, alienated the public from the cinemas en masse, Panama included, which had the Teatro Presidente, an exclusive theater for brand new European cinema.

And even more ironic, it is the return to the vein of "quality" cinema. In this category we can add «Illusions perdues», a film based on the novel by Honoré de Balzac that, in the last edition of the César award (supreme prize of the French film industry), it won five distinctions, including best film and screenplay based on another media (adaptation).

Everything is beautiful in the film, including the cast, everything is magnificent, from listening to Gérard Depardieu's hoarse, spirited, and passionate voice as the literary editor who cannot read or write, to Christophe Beaucarne's beautiful images (awarded the César). The weight of the film falls on a cast of young actors, possible big names of the future, who perform with equal panache and skill among veterans.

The anecdote of the film (and the novel) does not propose anything that has not been told before. What makes it very interesting is the social, media, labor, political, economic contexts - in a word, cultural - and their parallel with the present: Lucien de Rubempré is a young man from Angoulême, a country boy with immense poetic talent, to whom society denies him even the option of using his mother's last name, Rubempré, as "nome de plume", which would give him access to an estate, a place at the court and a noble title.

Lucien de Rubempré (Benjamin Voisin, who was 24-year-old actor when playing the role, winner of the César for Best New Actor) not only falls into the corrupt circles of Paris, with their vices and bad habits, he not only exercises vile and caustic journalism , but he literarily does not create anything beyond his book of poetry, written when he was 20 years old. In Paris he comes into direct contact with the city (at a time when the Bourbons were restored to the throne, betraying the ideals of the 1789 Revolution) and falls in love with Coralie, a young and beautiful theater woman, despised as an Andalusian and an actress. The film describes, with the aesthetic rigor that characterizes French cinema and with a current tone, the Parisian world at the beginning of the 19th century, that of the press, critics, publishers, authors, playwrights and the most rogue courtiers that, in their "salons" and circles, scheme to stay in power and marginalize the triumphant bourgeoisie.

The young cast includes Vincent Lacoste (Cesar winner for Best Supporting Actor) as another country boy, hashish smoker and unethical journalist; Canadian filmmaker Xavier Dolan as a talented novelist whom Lucien is able to destroy with one of his cruel and malicious reviews, who ends up being his only friend (and apparently his secret admirer) and Salomé Dewaels as Coralie, the young actress who adores Lucien and is reciprocated.

Lasting two and a half hours, «Illusions perdues» is a model of academic and prestige cinema for exportation, which does not skimp on details, evocations, reconstructions and becomes one more example of how European cinema represents itself better than Hollywood's attempts , tinged with a certain vulgarity, such as «Desirée», with a ridiculous Marlon Brando nasally applying "the Method" to evoke the image of Napoléon Bonaparte; or as «Dangerous Liaisons», with John Malkovich trying to give us, by means of the usual tics (possibly also of the "Method"), an 18th-century Parisian gentleman.
20 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A wise parable of life in a rotten world.
Chinesevil9 April 2022
The quality of the movie is high and it is always full of emotions until the last minute. The meaning is wisdom, because life is often like this, in a world full of many evil people and so many low quality people ... wolves that tear apart other wolves. Art is often bought, even today. Excellent film with some problems in some scenes and some actors.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
"The Rules of the Game" for our times?
Mengedegna13 June 2022
Xavier Gianolli's breakthrough film may at first glance to seem like, ho-hum, another period costume drama. But that's before you realize that the source is Honoré de Balzac (as with his hero here, the aristocratic "de" was self-attributed), the merciless dissector of society's corruption and malice.

The period in question (one that isn't often seen in films or novels) is that of France under the post-Napoleonic Restoration of the monarchy, likely during the reign of Louis XVIII, who allowed a measure of post-revolutionary freedoms to persist until pressure from the ultra-royalist faction became irresistible and led to a crackdown. Physical details and social relations are, as far as I can tell, depicted with rigorous fidelity, including in the musical background, drawn from that period and from the preceding century - Vivaldi and Rameau to Mozart and Schubert.

The story line, based faithfully on one of Balzac's greatest works, follows a well-trodden path: provincial boy dreams of turning his good looks and his modest gifts as (in this case) a poet into a life of love, fame and fortune. External forces conspire bring him to Paris, where he plunges into a snakes-and-ladders ascension, casting aside caution and ever more scruples until his presumption (both social and artistic) is, inevitably and crushingly, exposed. (Coincidentally, the Metropolitan Opera has just ended a brief run of Stravinsky's marvelous opera "The Rake's Progress", whose basic plot line, taken from what today we would call a graphic novel of the same name by the XVIIIth century engraver William Hogarth, tracks eerily with Balzac's - but of course with so many others' as well.)

The film is dazzlingly well acted by everyone involved, starting with the handsome Benjamin Voisin as Lucien Chardon, a callow pharmacist's son (who assumes the name Lucien de Rubempré, thus signalling his pretension to an aristocratic background that the real aristocrats quickly catch on to and do not forgive), whom others play like a violin to achieve their own, usually foul, aims. His sudden transformation from innocent, awkward, likeable provincial into an absurd fop is stunning to behold. His moral innocence is washed away just as quickly, but he is never clever nor evil-minded enough to keep up with those with power and far greater experience who, for an array of reasons, pull puppet strings to ensure his destruction.

Paris, both among bohemian (but always cynical) littérateurs and unscrupulous journalists and publishers (with a scenery-eating cameo by Gérard Depardieu as a successful publisher who can neither read nor write but who has an unfailing sense of what will sell), is shown to be a machine for crushing innocence, ambition, and talent - a place where all that matters is your connections, your ability to please, and your willingness to achieve your ends by whatever means. Prostitution is universal, and everyone, not just the city's many overt sex workers, is prostituted in one way or another.

It's a wonderfully gifted cast, including the particularly wonderful Cécile de France as the aristocratic deus ex machina whose lust for Lucien sets the plot in motion; the earthy Salomé Dewaels as Lucien's true love (she will surely be going places after this); and a host of journeymen and women from the deep well of French acting talent. All take their roles with gusto and real depth. Every face, even in crowd scenes, is expressive, every nuance (so important amid such highly codified social constructs) is pitch perfect.

Jeanne Balibar as the Marquise d'Espar is the terrifying arbiter of all the nuances and proprieties by which everyone else is assessed as belonging to proper Society, or, in most cases, not. And special notice must be taken of a stunningly understated performance by the young Canadian wunderkind actor and director Xavier Dolan, not until now known for understatement. Yet here he is, a darkly recessive, chillingly alert and watchful presence -- and, boy, does he nail his role as the agent of Lucien's nemesis. Kudos also to Vincent Lacoste, until now only seen in unambitious soap operas and telefilms, who does a wonderfully engaging turn as the Lucien's hash-smoking mentor, initiating him into the dark arts of journalistic prostitution, revealing to him the ease with which, if one is only willing to be unscrupulous and clever enough, one can use the dark arts of fake news to casually destroy lives and careers while gaining wealth.

Beautifully filmed, perfectly paced, this takes the best of the Jane Austin films, for example, and gives them a Gallic (and so, of course, cynical) twist. Balzac's is a world of endless fake news and mindless ambition, in which there are no happy endings, and in which the tragedies of others are merely the subject of tight self-satisfied smiles. Jane's world, in which an ambitious young woman can in the end become the master of at least part of her fate, is far away. This one is a lot closer to ours, and this film might just be "La Règle du jeu" for our times.

PS on accents: For perhaps understandable reasons, the historical verisimilitude is cast aside when it comes to speech. Thus not only does Xavier Dolan completely drop his Québecois accent (so pronounced in his own films), but he and everyone speaks the French equivalent of the King's English -- in this case perfect, modern Parisian. I must go back and see if Balzac says anything on the subject, but Lucien is from the Charentes, in southwesstern France, and would have arrived in Paris with a very pronounced accent which would instantly have exposed him as a provincial (to the literary world) and a commoner (to the aristocratic one). Understandably, the film doesn't go there, but it's worth reflecting on why.
19 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
They had to boil it down
bob9989 March 2023
It's a 600 page novel that had to be boiled down to fit the running time of 2 1/2 hours, some minor characters had to be thrown out. The third part of the book is dispensed with--no great loss.

We are left with a wonderful satire of the popular press in France circa 1830. Graft and bribery are part of the game, and our hero Lucien is never quite sure where the next knife is going to come from that will enter his back. My favourite character is Sarfati, the claque leader, whose mob can be bought for whomever pays top dollar. The acting is superb, as you might imagine: Depardieu, de France, de Lenquesaing all acquit themselves well, and Vincent Lacoste as Lucien's changeable buddy Lousteau is marvellous. Only Benjamin Voisin doesn't quite meet the demands of the role, and he's in almost every scene. Sets and costumes are very good, and Giannoli's direction is assured.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Delightful adaptation of Balzac
johanrazak26 June 2022
After a long hiatus since the pandemic, I made a return to the cinema notably to catch up with #lefrenchfilmfestival. Most of the films I would say struggled to justify your time in the cinema indulging in such frivolity but this one particularly stood out.

I am not familiar with and have never read Balzac but I reckon this film gives you a glimpse of his genius and why he remains a giant in French literary circle, not merely for prose or poetry but for his devastatingly incisive social commentary still relevant today.

And one couldn't help but feel despite our technological advancements and having totally plundered the planet, from a moral standpoint the world hasn't progressed not even an inch today and remains mercilessly mercenary under a veneer of righteousness as Balzac had so accurately depicted some two centuries ago.

Dazzlingly executed with a superb ensemble of cast, illuminating performances, a production nothing short of breathtaking and lashings of Baroque including the less often heard Jean-Philippe Rameau, the film remains and stays with you long after you have left the cinema.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Interesting and thought-provoking
grantss20 March 2023
France, 1820s. A young poet, Lucien de Rubempre, moves to Paris with the aim of being published. After a few menial jobs he finds work as a journalist, an art critic. Here he sees the corruption and influence of the press and how to play their game.

Interesting, thought-provoking...and a little disappointing. I watched this because it is based on a de Balzac novel but set my expectations rather low before watching this. It appeared to be a period piece potentially revolving around the social mores of the time. These sorts of movies always bore and frustrate me as they usually involve some sort of Machiavellian scheme or humiliation that rests on something really arbitrary by today's customs but usually ends up in someone killing themselves or dying in a duel in the movie.

The first few scenes hinted that this was the path it was going to take but then thankfully de Rubempre whisks himself off to Paris and the story starts in earnest.

Things get really interesting once he becomes a journalist and we see the corruption of the press, how they create news rather than report on it, how controversy, even when based on lies, sells. Sound familiar? Yes, you could easily shift the setting to the 21st century and it would be incredibly accurate.

So what we have is a study on the media and how its as bad in reality in the 21st century as it was in a fictional novel set in the 1820s.

Unfortunately, this great examination and condemnation of the media doesn't go anywhere. Rather than continue to stick the knife into the media, the second half of the movie follows a more subdued, less pointed, course. It ends up more a Machiavellian period piece than an evisceration of the media. It's also drawn out unnecessarily.

The ending is reasonably profound and uplifting though.

So a bit disappointing in that it got my hopes up by the halfway mark and then disappointed me but still quite interesting regardless.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Classic novel with unnecessary smut
gandalf3211 April 2022
A classic novel, but filmmakers chose to show MANY graphic sex scenes and a close up of a penis. It's hard for me to understand why a close up of a penis is necessary for a classic novel like this.
20 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
I did not lose my illusions
searchanddestroy-121 September 2022
I was a little scared before watching this film; I was scared to get bored, because romance in costume is not my stuff. Speaking of costume movies, this is not BARRY LYNDON but a captivating French film, which could have been made seventy years ago by an Albert Lewin, starring George Sanders, except maybe that the lead character here is not as nasty, selfish, cynical as Sanders was in his films, and mabe not only in his films... This is the itinerary of an idealistic young man, not naive but ambitious, who tries to survive in the Paris jungle: journalism, theater, publishing, politics, a cruel, superficial, cynical, rotten, insecere, opportunist world where sharks spread everywhere. I guess Claude Chabrol could have made it too, and I think Xavier Gianolli is an authentic heir ofChabrol. It is brilliant, sensitive, bittersweet and full of details of the atmosphere of this period. Adapted from Honoré de Balzac, this would be great if this kind of films could be made about more novels from Balzac or even Zola, why not? This is millions of times better than stupid French comedies for red necks where you need someone near you to tell you when to laugh. It is after all a rise and fall scheme, which makes it more interesting.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Terrific Period Piece
evanston_dad30 January 2023
I started to read "Lost Illusions" once and didn't get very far. Not that I thought it was bad, but rather that I just wasn't in the mood for Balzac's style of writing just then. I'll probably revisit it some day.

So I can't speak to how good an adaptation this movie is, but man is it a good movie in its own right. I love stories about women in big dresses and men in cravats exchanging significant glances in drawing rooms, which is pretty much all this movie is. The young actor Benjamin Voisin carries this movie admirably on his slim shoulders, and the whole thing is a scathing indictment of the relationship between journalism, wealth, and power. It's eye opening, not necessarily because it's surprising, but because it makes Paris of the 1800s relevant to the world of 2023.

And I don't think I've ever seen a more effective and artistic closeup of male genitalia in a film before. The juxtaposition of a fistful of money against a male penis says in a single image what Balzac spent pages and pages communicating to his readers.

Grade: A.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Precious illusions
Horst_In_Translation21 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
"Illusions perdues" or "Lost Illusions" is a relatively new French French-language live action film, but boy it took long to get here. I mean it premiered already back in 2021 and now it is January 2023 and finally it is here in Germany and also Germany is right next to France, so yeah I would not have expected it to take this long, especially because the film was a big success in France. With audiences I am not sure, but I guess there it was as well because the room was more packed here during my screening than I expected, but in terms of awards, it scored really big. This won the César for Best Picture even. And took home more categories that night. The writer and director is Xavier Giannoli who started shooting short films in the first half of the 1990s, so now it is roughly his 30th anniversary as a filmmaker, so good for him that this film here maybe brought him his brightest hour so far. We will see what ensues over the next years and if he maybe even manages a transition to Hollywood. What is maybe not working in his favor is that this film was not selected to represent France at the Oscars, so no immediate Hollywood stardom for him. He will be fine with that though I am sure given the movie's other accolades. Giannoli is also one of the writers here and nobody should be surprised. He usually wrote the stuff he directed. He is not the only writer though and apparently he collaborated with Yves Stavrides on the screenplay. Now if you think an Asian former child actor having a big comeback this year is the only thing that stands out in 2022/2023, think again. Apparently, Stavrides' last writing credit is from 25 years ago, still comfortably over 20 years before this film here premiered, and the stuff he wrote back then, especially in the 1980s, really did not receive a particularly positive reception. So what a comeback for him and as interesting as it may seem how Giannoli's career is going to progress now, the same can be said about Stavrides. The third writer is a certain Honoré de Balzac. You may have heard the name. Even I have and I am not an expert on (French) literature. It's okay if you cannot immediately mention what he wrote. Neither can I. But I guess this big name being the one in charge of the base material here helped the film become such a success.

It's been quite a long time since a period piece was really triumphant here at the German Film Awards, but good for France that they make them on a level for it to happen in their country. They are ahead of us anyway in so many departments when it comes to film-making. "Lost Illusions" is a really long film. It runs for pretty much 2.5 hours, almost exactly to the second. The good news is that it really does not feel this long. It definitely did not drag or at least not too much. I liked the watch. This also had a lot to do with the actors. The cast is really good here, strong ensemble with some sublime moments. The one who admittedly impressed me the least was lead actor Benjamin Voisin and his newcomer award at the Césars may have been a bit exaggerated. I assume a nomination like the one for Salomé Dewaels would have been enough and maybe such a nomination would already have been too much too. I personally always adore Gérard Depardieu and it was nice to see him here, even if his role was rather small. The movie "1900" was one of my final watches from the old year, so I am seeing him in quite a few projects now. This is not finished yet. Really curious when a few days from now he will be here in person to present his newest film, almost half a century after the aforementioned "1900" now. Vincent Lacoste is surely seen as one of France's rising stars now, maybe already before this film. I am not sure if I have seen him in anything else. He was good here though. Winning the supporting actor award still may have been a bit too much. The nomination would have been sufficient. Physically he reminds me a bit of Frederick Lau.

The maybe biggest name (aside from Depardieu) we have in this film is Xavier Dolan if we look at his successes as a filmmaker especially. It is not too usual that a man who has become a successful director keeps acting after his breakthrough behind the camera, but Dolan does and maybe the reason is also that he basically started acting and directing at the same time and it was never one or the other for him. He may not be seen as a child prodigy anymore, but still very impressive career for his age. There is also some special component to his character as we understand towards the very end because he is the one that gives us the narration and tells us about the main character's fate from beginning to end. The narration is very frequent early on, then vanishes a bit in the middle part(s), but towards the end he is back again and the voice-overs become quite a thing again. Still fairly unusual. Narration is something we do get here and there in non-documentary films too, but here it was really a vital essence from the film. I liked it. On the female side, there are a few successful and established actors in here too. Cécile de France and Jeanne Balibar have had prolific careers for decades and they were both nominated for a César too for their roles in this movie. Neither won though. I guess the former is the more famous and popular actress from the duo, also thanks to her name. Another good performance. Or two good performances I should say. I just wish they could have stopped in telling us constantly how beautiful de France is. Or her character, but you could see it was also meant to describe the actress. I have to dig fairly deep to mention things about this film that I did not like a lot, let alone did not like at all. I think the revelation towards the end was maybe too much and it was such a twist and did feel fairly rushed. It was a pretty slow film before that, so it did not feel too coherent. At least, we finally understood why Balibar's character is early on described as crucial for the main character's life and progress.

I have not read de Balzac's base material, so I cannot say to what extent there are differences and parallels if we compare book and novel. It is not necessary anyway to know the book in order to appreciate the film. Doing the latter is not hard at all. This also has to do with the costumes and make-up and sets. This is where the film delivered for sure. Among these, you will maybe even find the movie's biggest strength. Another strength would be the elaboration on the press. How it is so hard for a writer to truly make an impact without being led (and/or fooled) by others. The main character wants to succeed there, but the reality is that he then becomes a critic basically, but writes articles that suit the plans of those who want to destroy or praise a play, a book or whatever. So it is his own creation indeed what he gets to paper, but it is not necessarily what he really thinks. That is kinda sad, even if this approach is not shown as being as despicable as I perceived it. I wonder why. The next step then is basically paid audience members who react in a certain way during theater performances that can ruin a cast member's career. Or even worse if we look at what happened to the girl in the end. Of course, she was sick before that already, but even without having a flower book written about her, she is the one who was best for the main character. Maybe he realizes this too quickly. She also has some of the more memorable quotes, like when she tells the main character that she is not smart, but she is sure that he will have a good career or also when she almost begs another character to not take her man away from her. The rich aristocrats did not have good things in mind for him and yet this is where he felt he would belong. His reputation and his last name were always incredibly important to him and he takes the chance immediately when he can become one of the big names and even the French king back then could have played a role in that.

All this came with a bitter prize, namely that he stops writing critically about aspects that the rich do not want to hear about. He pretty much agrees hoping he could become one of them and this way he also loses his friends like Lacoste's character. Who may have been his real friends, even if toward the end they also do not go easy on him at all. As a consequence, he is all on his own then. His girl is gone too and he is as low as he was when he started. The only thing he still had going for him was his youth you could say. So there could even be a sequel, but of course there won't be. Without the literary work this is based on, chances might have been higher. It is a serious film for the most part, but you will also at least smile on a few occasions during the watch here. One character fascinating in a bizarre manner was the guy who pretty much directed the crowd and who saw himself as some kind of conductor even as a consequence and it was also not really possible to get too close to him. The protagonist tries to hit him towards the end when he realizes what the man did to the only character truly faithful to him, but he is kept away from bodyguards. Yep, seems they existed back then already. Or it was one of their jobs perhaps or they were just nearby and surely they were bigger and stronger than the main character. Not that a lot is needed for this. Oh yeah, and as for this bizarre guy I just talked about, his ideas of technology linked to sound/noise were also kinda fascinating to watch. I mean we do have a modern version of that still today in the 2020s if we look at "applause machines" that are heard during sitcoms for example. They have been used for a long, long time. But let's not go too deep into detail there now, instead stay with the overall basics of this film. I like the outcome. I was not blown away and it was not a superb watch, but seeing it (once) is worth it. Maybe the small screen is enough too. I give "Illusions perdues" a thumbs-up.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A well adapted great story
teresa_rosado10 September 2022
A young provincial aspiring poet. A marquise patron married to a much older man. A grocer's editor who can't read or write. An unscrupulous journalist at a time when freedom of the press was confused with lack of ethics.

The homonymous film adaptation of one of the most celebrated novels by Honoré de Balzac (Illusions Perdues, 1837), an integral part of the writer's comédie humaine, invites us to witness the decline of Lucien de Rubempré, played by the young actor, Benjamin Voisin, who I already knew from SUMMER 85 (François Ozon, 2020), so it didn't surprise me that he managed to take such a long and intense story upon his shoulders.

In LOST ILLUSIONS (Xavier Giannoli, 2021), Lucien de Rubempré (Voisin) dreams of becoming a recognized poet, arriving in Paris eager to make his literary talents known. However, the illusion is quickly replaced by the temptation to indulge in the easy life of a sensationalist journalist.

Throughout the film, the dialogue with the present is evident and we can easily see that the director intends to bring to the 21st century a veiled critique of the journalism that is practiced today, superficial and not very rigorous, as well as a society dominated by greed and absence of moral values. As the book says, "both the political law and the moral law were disowned by everyone; opinions belied by conduct and conduct by opinions".

As for Julien, even involved in the nastiness of Parisian society, still has a certain naivety, which leads him to be entangled in a web of Machiavellian plans that manipulate his destiny as if he were a puppet.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
It's a perfect harmony between modern image and old story.
aleshkevichalyona22 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The most faithful adaptation I've ever seen. What you notice first is openess of the director to the viewers. All human sins that are delivered directly is what you expect from Balzac.

Modern adaptations are seeking to complecate some ideas and find something up-to-date neglecting the spirit of the original source and focusing much on a modern viewer while the original novel was written for the needs of the 19th century society. The film "Lost Illusions" shows these ideas in a way the original novel does. Perhaps, it's a flaw not to care about the audience but for me it works perfectly as the respect for the author.

Every time the idea of corrupted society is announced in the movie, you feel how how illusions are dissolve.

The voice-over narration works perfectly because then we understand how unrealible the protagonist. Only due to the narrator's voice it is become possible to criticize everyone including Lucien. He is not seen as a positive hero. We may sympathize him or criticize - that is something that arises our aesthetic response. Such a voice makes morality criticism not so dull. Moreover, it creates a sense that everyone is aware of being corrupted and immoral. It's like everyone knows a secret but no one discusses it.

The only thing I would like be improved is Lucien's evolution. It was too obvious thing to draw eyelines as a symbol of acceptance by higher society, however it was not the only turning point in the change of his personality. May assume that it's due to the lack of experience of a young Benjamin Voisin.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Cinema Omnivore - Lost Illusions (2021) 7.5/10
lasttimeisaw6 February 2023
"Like any story of a rural youngster trying to make good in a major city, where Lucien aspires to pursue his vocation and earns his footing, the ups-and-downs of navigating a path through a classist, venal society (here a 19th-century Paris) are full of revelations, compromises and traps. Lucien's rapport with Mme. De Bargeton sours when his low-born status gets him shunned by the snooty silk-stocking crowd (among which, Balibar's imperious Marquise d'Espard is the class act, frictionlessly conveying veiled contempt and darting dismissive glances with such indelible finesse), his integrity disintegrates in the course of earning his name through yellow journalism, his genuine love with a plebeian stage actress Coralie (a voluptuous, plump-faced Dewaels) is doomed by malady and profligacy."

-
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
INNOCENCE LOST TO HIGHEST BIDDER
haldunarmagan21 January 2023
Xavier Giannoli's adaptation of Balzac offers a masterful period piece set in Paris in 1820s following the steps of young Lucien who dreams of being a famous writer. As he struggles through artistic merits, class discrimination, sexual awakening and corruption, also he faces the manipulation of art, media and finance. The lost of innocence goes along with story of Lucien (brilliant act by Benjamin Voisin) which puts one's mind so many references to current media world. Winner is the highest bidder whether it happens to be art and entertainment or simple news. Art directing is wonderful so are the main cast. The voiceover narrative in this movie becomes a perfect choice. Fake news, fake applause! "Illusion perdues" unfolds many storylines related to past and present, and deserves to be seen again and again.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed