Europe: 1400-1800

The two films Maria Antoinette (Coppola) and The Taking of Power by Louis XVI (Rossillini) show many similarities in the ways royal families were treated. In The Taking of Power by Louis XVI, it is very apparent how much a King is worshiped and doted on by the people working under him. He is waited on by his staff for everything he needs. In Marie Antoinette however, it is easy to feel sorry for her. Since she is a woman, she is unable to make her own decisions. Since she is royalty, she is forced into doing things she is not comfortable with. This is apparent in the scene when she is advised to speak to the king’s mistress even though she does not want to, since the mistress wants to speak to her. She is told by her advisors that it would be a good idea since it is not hard for them to replace her if the king gets the wrong impression. Also, since Marie Antoinette is a woman, the most important task for her to focus on is getting pregnant with Louis’ baby. It is also made very clear that if she does not get pregnant, she can be replaced.

In The Taking of Power by Louis XVI, King Louis is a very strong and powerful man. It is obvious that he is going to do whatever it may take to be the most powerful man in France, if not the world. In Marie Antoinette, while she is a powerful woman in theory, she does not get to experience or convey any of this power. She has a team of advisors who make all of her decisions for her and she is just the pretty face to carry them out. Louis XVI’s royalty allowed for him to make decisions for his country. Marie Antoinette’s royalty did not even allow her to get dressed by herself in the  morning.

When examining both films by Rosellini, Taking Power of Louis XIV, and Coppola, Marie Antoinette, there are a few similarities between the two films. The first I would say would be the way both Louis’s gained their power. When Louis XIV’s father died, he was too young to rule France, so Cardinal Mazarin acted as a regent for him. In the beginning of the film, we learn that Mazarin was ill, so when he eventually passed away, Louis became king. At this time, he was in his early 20s. The same turn of events happened to Louis XVI.

Louis XVI was the grandson of Louis XV and became the new Dauphin of France with the death of his father in 1765., It was in the year 1770, Louis XVI married, at the age of fifteen, to the fourteen year old, Marie Antoinette. It was until 1774 Louis would ascend the throne due to the death of his grandfather, Louis XV. At this time, Louis was barely twenty.

If you look at this, both the Louis’s were considered extremely young to be ruling France. Many people doubted their capabilities, especially when you look at the case of Fouquet doubting Louis XIV’s commitment and how he would soon grow tired of the responsibility. But if you look at Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI, the way they were depicted in the film was entirely juvenile, which I guess was a way to show how young they really were. I find that despite his age, Louis XIV was able to command and gain the respect (fear, even perhaps) of his people while Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette basically bankrupted the country through frivolous expenditures.  I feel that Louis XIV was able to take power and successfully rule, while Louis XVI fell short.

Coppola depicts Marie Antoinette as a fun, outgoing individual who tries to not focus much on politics but on being creative and tries to bring some fun into the lives of the French Royalty.  Rossellini depicts Louis XIV as a boy who at first didn’t want to have all the power. He wanted to live life as a young man for a bit.  However, he does begin to become more responsible and realizes that he must help improve France. I do see some similar traits between the two characters, but i think there are more differences between the two of them. As the female, Marie didn’t have much say in the political meetings or anything like that.  her job was to give the king a son and France their next king.  So her childish behavior did get the best of her, at least that’s what I think. Since she had so much time on her hands, she pretty much did whatever she wanted to do. She would take her friends on walks through meadows. They would rest in a hut and drink tea, do garden work, and she would read to them. Marie liked to party and gamble. To add to her childishness and immature behavior, Marie was a lose lady who had many affairs with Louis XIV.  Before Louis had matured he to liked to mess around and sleep with many women, but he was still young before he realized that he had to take responsibility and start doing things for his country and people. I do think that Marie’s gender had a big part in the differences between the two of them. Since she was the queen her main if not only purpose was to give birth to the next king of France.

Sofia Copolla’s Marie Antoinette is not similar to Roberto Rossellini’s Taking Power of Louis XIV for varied amount of reasons. While Marie Antoinette depicted the lifestyle and culture of the nobility and royal courts before the French Revolution, Taking Power focused more on the political matters revolving around the king. Despite Louis being considered childish in the beginning of Taking Power, he still assumed the reigns of control over France, took responsibility for his kingdom, and made decisions to benefit his country. A scene in Taking Power that exemplifies this is when he goes to meet with the nobility and informs them that he will be making all the decisions. He also lets them know that nobody will be able to make any decisions without his approval first, and then walks out without further explanation (like a boss). In Marie Antoinette, we see an elderly Louis XIV only making a singular decision to funnel money into the American Revolution, a decision suggested by Parliament members. An interesting side-note is that in Taking Power, Louis is seen appointing Colbert as his sole advisory, so obviously at the time of Marie Antoinette, Louis has relinquished some of his precious power for France to form a Parliament. We may not se many decisions made by Louis XIV in Marie Antoinette for two possible reasons. First, it is a movie about the life of Marie Antoinette, so Louis is not really the main focus of Coppola’s movie. The other is that France now has a Parliament, so now Louis can sit back and relax with DuBarry while Parliament makes the hard decisions. He only would have to approve of them when they came to him. The main focus of Marie Antoinette was not decision-making, but the decisions made for Marie Antoinette by everyone else for her and her finally making decisions for herself. Many people speculate that is was Marie Antoinette’s spending habits that led to France’s Revolution. Coppola’s movie shows her luxurious lifestyle, which included indulgences in material items (clothing, shoes, pastries, etc.), partying and drinking, and gambling. As a princess and future queen of France, Marie Antoinette was expected to play the proper role in society, which would include being nice to people she did not like. She was expected to speak to certain people and to do things that she would not normally do for herself, for the good of the country. Her social life helped strengthen bonds between nobility and court royalty. At the Petit Trianon, a gift for Louis XIV, she would put on plays and invite people to come watch. By inviting them, she would strengthen relationships that she was made to establish by court members. While Louis XIV was born and bred to rule, Marie Antoinette was not . Though inexperienced, she was able to sooth the tensions between France and Austria during times of worry and tension, since she was born in Austria and Dauphine of France. Both movies are very different and do not have much in common other than the fact that Louis XIV appears in both. While Marie Antoinette depicts a young woman’s growth to fit into a completely new culture and society and to one day become queen, Taking Power is all about one king’s journey to become the most powerful man in his country, and possibly the world.

In the film, Taking of Power by Louis XIV, the director shows the audience Louis’ ideas and plot on how to take hold of all the power of his country. In the first scene that shows Louis XIV taking power, he walks into a room filled with nobility and starts to give out each other their expectations and responsibilities. From the start, I was surprised at his abruptness since I was expecting him to display some coyness as he conducted the meeting with the nobility. I was expecting him to beat around the bush with them at first and then lay down the law with them. I do not think there are many scenes in the movie where Louis was not taking power. One of the few where he wasn’t obtaining power, but flaunting it, was when he went to hunt and went to the woods with his mistress. He wasn’t gaining any power by going, but he was flaunting how much power he did have. Since he was King of France, if he wanted to go into the woods with his mistress, there was not one person there who could stop him. Louis, compared to other rulers of the age, did not use violence to obtain his power. If he did, Rosselini did not include it in this film. Louis XIV dismissed the nobles of decision making, and everything must be made through him, another ploy to have all the power. By taking away the nobility’s power, his power over the country increased and make it almost impossible for administrative decision to be made without his approval or against his wishes. It’s important to note that Louis XIV made sure that he was to keep his power by surrounding himself with his most loyal nobles. Louis’ decisions, once made, were not easily changed otherwise. That characteristic was shown when Louis’ mother protested against Fouqet’s arrest over money discrepancies. It is interesting to note that Louis’ expansion of Versailles and the wealthy Fouquet, who also used these ways to display his wealth and power, influenced changes of fashion. When other countries’ ambassadors visited Versailles, Louis wanted them to see that Versailles, in all of its splendor and vastness, exemplified that France would be and was the most powerful country in the world. His power increased among the noble courts by paying off their debts and providing apartments for them at Versailles so that they would feel like they owed him. He wanted to be a public figurehead that everyone looked to for control, power, and the latest fashion.

There are both similarities and differences in Sophia Coppola’s Marie Anntoinette and Rossellini’s Louis XIV.  The excesses of power sure did not change between the times of Louis XIV and Marie Antoinette.  Both films show the crazy grandeur of Versailles.  It is quite clear the royals lived in a reality so far removed from the normal folks that rebellion was inevitable.

But although both figures were immersed in power, Marie Antoinette did not embrace the power side of things as Louis did.  Throughout the movie, Coppola depicts Marie as a reluctant queen, one not at ease with the excesses of power.  Coming from Austria, Marie was an outsider to Versailles.  She aptly comments upon waking up one morning that the large group of people assisting her to get dressed is “ridiculous.”  Her maiden comments, “this is Versailles.” She attempts to be a different kind of queen.  Not as stuffy.  She is willing to buck the trend and applaud at the opera.

But although not completely at ease with her situation, Marie settles into the role of queen rather nicely.  The trappings of power seduce her and eventually she is spending lavish amounts of money an filling her days frollicking around in the garden with her kids.   It is not satisfying for her though.  Coppola does a good job depicting a woman who is not happy.  She sits in the tub and looks longingly out the window.  She makes here way off to a costume ball and has an affair with a soldier.  Unlike Louis XIV who was at home with his position of power, Coppola’s Marie seems always to have had enough with the whole scene.

Part of Marie’s discontent stemmed from the way females (and especially royal females) were treated.  Coppola’s Marie is not one for being pampered.  She feels the supporting cast of maidens is unecessary and a bit dumb. Her willingness to be different (like clapping at the theater) drew criticism also.  Such was not the action of a woman, even a royal.

Marie Antoinette is a film that shows ones struggle and failure to fit into a society.  Though Marie Antoinette was part of royalty, the upper-class did not like her customs as she was an outsider.  The other piece of society (the peasants) saw her lavish spending as unnecessary and irresponsible as people all over the country were starving and poor.  Both themes of the film are showing a rise in power, Louis XIV used conventional methods as a monarch and took power by force.  Marie Antoinette took the opposite approach and saw her role int he court as un-important, this caused her to live away from the palace and keep going on with her daily routine of partying and fun.  Civil unrest in the nation did not help Marie Antoinette.  As Louis XIV took power, France was a peaceful nation at the time and was just getting over civil war. On the other hand  Antoinette’s situation as Queen of France was downplayed by civil strife. This was also a time for massive spending as the French were sending aid to the American’s during their revolution to show England they are not weak. As a key figure in French society Marie Antoinette’s role in court is not necessarily powerful, but she is very influential.  Her character does not seem to understand this other society though which I feel was her downfall.  In one scene while she was in Paris after the show was over she started clapping, others just looked onto her with disgrundled at her outburst. Through her experiences I can see that if she had a better situation such as a flourishing France, she would have adapted to the customs as she grew older, but her reign and teh reign of her husband were cut short.