Reviews (14)

The Triumph of Love
This movie starts out a little slow but you quickly become engrossed in the performance of the main character played by Mira Sorvino and later by the excellent work of Ben Kingsley. It is an adaptation of a play first performed in Paris in 1732 about a princess who is smitten by a young prince that just happens to be the rightful heir to the thrown. I don't want to give away too much, but this is a charming and delightful comedy and you will find yourself thoroughly entertained and should leave the theater with a smile on your face.
There are a few spots where the editing of the film was less than perfect, but that does not take away from the superb performances of these Oscar winning stars. If you are in the mood for a good laugh this is definitely the movie for you!

Great performance of a Marivaux play...
This is the kind of play you usually see only on college campuses. It's an eighteenth century romantic comedy in which crowns are at stake, women dress up like men, an old philosopher with a servant named Harlequin and who hates women and love as a central tenant of his philosophy goes batty but remains likeable. The choreography, staging, direction and, above all acting are great. Mira Sorvino and Ben Kingsley are hilariously intelligent, and Fiona Shaw is perfect and sympathetic. There are a few questionable whimsical touches and some point, about the time Sorvino's character admits "I've lost track of my own plot" the story begins to drag a bit. But all in all, it's quite funny.

Pointless and Stupid...a Waste of Time--1 Star is too many
I had to watch it twice to get through it. At first, I thought, "how sick is that! She's "leading on" all three people, tricking that poor woman into thinking she's a man!" I thought it was cruel, and stupid, and sick.

The second time, I managed to gut it out all the way through, and thought, "wow, that really WAS cruel, stupid and sick." I realize it was a fictional story (which is probably a good thing for the Princess because we all know that would never work in the real world, 18th century OR 21st century), but I found it to be a complete waste of time. The Princess' remorse doesn't even save her in my eyes, she just shouldn't have done it. The only saving grace for this movie is that it can keep you hanging on, waiting to see the whole situation blow up in the Princess' face.

I can say, I think the period costumes seemed very well done, and the actors did a good job with what they had to work with...an otherwise pretty lousy story. Call me old fashion, I still like movies and stories where people do the right thing for the right reason.

Give It a Pass and Be Glad You Did
I rented this DVD because I wanted to watch a romantic comedy and I love period pieces. Thank goodness, I didn't buy it. Although it is a period piece (albeit not a good one), it's certainly not a romantic comedy, though it does aspire to be.

THE TRIUMPH OF LOVE is based on a play written by Marivaux during the eighteenth century. Although playgoers during the eighteenth century might have tolerated something as simplistic as THE TRIUMPH OF LOVE, I think twenty-first century film aficionados usually demand more.

I hesitate to even mention anything about the plot of THE TRIUMPH OF LOVE because it's certainly not going to sound as trite and simplistic as it really is. Believe me, the plot is thin, very thin. In fact, if the plot of the film were much thinner, it would cease to exist altogether.

A terribly cast Mira Sorvino plays the Princess of the Realm, but she has one huge problem-she's not the rightful heir. The Realm really belongs to Prince Agis (Jay Rodan), the son of the man the Princess's father killed. Although this may seem like the Princess's biggest problem, it really isn't. She's fallen desperately, madly and hopelessly in love with Agis, but...he can't stand women. Well, the Princess has an answer to that little dilemma, or so she thinks. She simply disguises herself as man (much like Gwyneth Paltrow did in SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, but far less convincingly) and gains access to Prince Agis's palace (an Italian villa, really) and to him. While he buys her "mannish" behavior, his benefactor, the philosopher, Hermocrates (Ben Kingsley) and his dour sister, Leontine (Fiona Shaw) do not, but for far different reasons. Hermocrates can see immediately that the Princess is a woman despite her manly attire (really, one would have to be blind not to see it) but Leontine, in what might be the film's only comedic moment, still believes she's a man and, predictably, falls in love with the Princess, herself.

A very thin plot isn't the only thing wrong with this film by far. Director Clare Peploe (wife of Bernardo Bertolucci) seems intent on proving to us that she's an "arty" film director of the first order. Not so. At least not yet. She actually shoots the movie as though it were a play and, from time to time, we see shots of a very twenty-first century audience watching the eighteenth century characters. While some people might find this innovative, I found it annoying, distracting and just plain silly.

The dialogue is terrible. Really terrible. There's absolutely nothing funny, or even romantic about it. More often than not, it falls flatter than an airy soufflé that's had the oven door slammed shut.

Ben Kingsley and Fiona Shaw do their best to rescue this trite bit of nonsense, but, for the life of me, I couldn't understand why they were in it in the first place. I guess the script must have been quite deceptive. Mira Sorvino is pretty, but surprisingly terrible in her role. Jay Rodan is adequate, but the best thing that can be said about him is that he's very good looking.

THE TRIUMPH OF LOVE is trite and, at two hours, way too long. I found myself dozing off several times even though I watched the film during an afternoon on which I was quite well rested, or at least thought I was.

Some films have magic and some simply don't. Peploe certainly didn't find the magic formula with this film. I would suggest giving it a pass and being glad I did. I don't even know why I gave it two stars instead of one. I suppose because the cinematography was nice. All in all, I think this story would have been better done as a book, where the characters and situations could have been endowed with a little more depth.

Shakespearian in spirit
Doubtless the title of this movie will ring a bell with those who remember the short-lived Broadway musical of the same name, which featured Susan Egan, F. Murray Abraham and Betty Buckley. Based on an early eighteenth century play by French playwright Marivaux, this work can quite easily be compared to Shakespeare in its plot. A young and beautiful princess (sometimes called Leonide, but not here) has fallen in love with the rightful heir to the throne--and her sworn mortal enemy--Agis. Agis has been kept secluded from the outside world by his aunt and uncle, both of whom are serious, strict philosophers who have no time or patience for anything that does not have to do with logic and thought. This, of course, includes love. In order to get close to her beloved, the princess must first get through to both of these characters. She does so by first posing as a young man called Phocion; she succeeds in seducing Agis's aunt, Leontine, but cannot fool her brother, Hermocrates. The Princess then passes herself off as a young woman named Aspasie and works her way into his heart, while still diligently pursuing Agis. As with all plays like this, things are bound to come out, and they do.

The casting in this film was all first-rate, particularly that of Mira Sorvino as the scheming Princess. The costumes, scenery, and music add a whimsical touch to an already whimsical story. One must applaud the creativity of the director/screenwriters, in choosing to make it appear as though this is not a movie, but a play performance captured on film. Highly recommended. ... Read more

Reviews (23)

CAPTIVATED BY ROUGH MAGIC
Can't believe so many professional critics heartlessly trashed this gem! As an art historian and world traveler who is especially fond of Mexico, I find 'Rough Magic' gorgeous, delightful, amusing, and romantic -- in all, utterly captivating, with flawless attention to every detail from first frame to last. Since purchasing this film recently I've watched it at least a dozen times. Bridget Fonda and Russell Crowe are a dynamic and delightful duo -- hope they'll team up for another movie. I had never seen Jim Broadbent ('Doc') before and would like to see more of his work; my lands, even the dog was well-cast! My advice: ignore the critics and follow your heart to a refreshing treat for the eye, for the soul.

Run Away If You Love Good Movies
I got Rough Magic through the Inter-Library Loan System. I can only grovel in relief I didn't pay money for it. This movie tells the story of Myra Shumway, played by Bridget Fonda, a magician's assistant who, through a series of events too boring to detail here, flees to Mexico with a roll of film containing a photo of a senatorial hopeful (her fiance) killing a man. (And don't ALL ultra-rich prospective senators choose shirttail poor, tough talking, thieving magician's assistants to marry?) Russell Crowe is Alex Ross (no relation to the famous comic book artist of the same name), a newspaper stringer detailed to find her.

That bare description of plot sounds like it could actually make a decent romantic screwball comedy. Any idea can be well or poorly done, right? Unfortunately, Rough Magic goes straight for "poorly," not even stopping at "well." The script is trite, the pacing slow, the direction amateurish. Myra's surrogate father figure, her boss at the beginning of the movie, looks and acts like an overdone, overage, overweight Mandrake the Magician. Myra's soon to be ex-boyfriend, the wannabe senator, is a raving loonie who plans to have their marriage in a museum dedicated to his family's uranium business. No, I'm not kidding. When asked, "Why not a church?" he enthuses, "This is a church! A church of atomic science!"

Myra herself is impossible to like, a compulsive thief with a smart mouth (as smart as this script can make it, anyway) who constantly lies to everyone around her - even when there's no logical reason to lie. Bridget Fonda once again proves her inability to turn in a decent job of acting. I hate to say that, it sounds meanspirited. I'm sure she's a very nice person in real life, but the God's honest truth is she's not much of an actress. Even Russell Crowe, my favorite actor, with a vein of talent deep and wide running through his soul, is unimpressive as Ross. His character is vague, unaffecting, and Russell endows him with a mushy, obviously fake New York accent. Or maybe it's Chicago. Hell, Boston. It's so inconstantly applied it's hard to tell. Almost as if, realizing he was involved in a piece of forgettable, poorly produced trash, Russell decided not even to try.

There's zero romantic chemistry between the two main characters. Fonda and Crowe move - lethargically - through the motions of flirting and finding each other attractive. And it's not believable. Obviously the only reason this is happening, these two people are falling in love, is that the script requires it.

After 30 minutes or so, I just couldn't hack it anymore and stopped the tape. The person who had Rough Magic before me also stopped it less - MUCH less - than halfway through. I know this because someone was not kind, they did not rewind. I did, of course - thus readying this piece of dreck for the next unsuspecting victim. Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.

No Nogs Allowed
Another splat of evidence that Bridget Fonda Makes No Dogs.

The heart, the heart! Yes, Russell Crowe is in flying pre-fame hunkamundo form here; this cannot be denied. But the whole experience of this movie is charming (in the best sense of that word).

Leave this world behind, and fall into Peploe's magical realism mystery tour through even *your* cynical cardiac organ. A lark.

Not Your Usual Movie
Not your usual movie - and the acting talents of Bridget Fonda and Russel Crowe contribute quite a bit to the unusual characters they play. She can turn someone into a pig and he is a private investigator that gets caught up in her magic. Of course Russel has his charm and charisma that works her over throughout the movie. He's arrogant and determined, but also warm and devoted. Bridget plays a woman in control - but doesn't realize she needs all the help she can get. She's an adorable mate for Russel's character.

Ridiculous plotless Magic
I must admit that I saw this terrible movie based solely on the fact that some parts of it were shot in my home town. Yes, I'm mexican, and in the small town I live, we don't get to see much films shot, let alone foreign films with stars like Bridget fonda (back then none knew much about Crowe, one of my favorite actors nowadays).

The point is that since the movie didn't have any publicity around here I didn't know anything about the story or so, thus, I had absolutely no expectations on the film except seeing my town in the movie. Actually I saw it on video, since it never came to theaters around here.

My God! this movie was a shame! You feel shame when you see a movie as bad as this, specially because the way they portray Mexico. Well, actually that's only a minor grip, because in my opinion, the movie lacks a plot, the acting (even coming from Crowe and Bridget Fonda) is plain BAD, the editing, rythm, camera direction and direction in general, are abysmal. What happened whit this movie?

This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The movie never feels in a "fantasy-like" set (or even magical one), although there are things like this really stupid scene where a guy is transformed into a sausage or something alike! what's with that? What's this? Sabrina the Teenage Witch? There it would fit, here just feels like "oh, that's... huh... yeah... funny?... weird? what was this movie again?".

If you want to give it a shot rent it first, please, before buying it! ... ... Read more