WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Cody One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

gridoon2018 Even Sophia Loren's spectacular cleavage cannot sustain interest in this elaborately produced but incomprehensible, unengaging Napoleonic-period mishmash. Scripted by seven (!) different writers - presumably in seven different rooms with no contact with each other at any time. * out of 4.

rooprect I haven't read the original play nor have I seen previous adaptations, so I can make no comparisons. But I can tell you, regardless of other versions, that this is a thoroughly enjoyable film with great acting, magnificent sets, witty dialogue and an unusual theme.First let's talk about the unusual theme. This film is much like the celebrated stories of Guy de Maupassant, using an epic situation as a backdrop and instead telling a very common, human (and humorous) story. In this way, it reduces the epic backdrop to the absurd whilst focusing instead on the importance of individuals in their not-so-epic lives. In other words, this is anti-history. I know I didn't explain that very well, so I'll give you an example instead: Sergio Leone's "The Good, the Bad & the Ugly" is a perfect illustration, set against the American Civil War yet trivializing the war and instead focusing on 3 gunslingers fighting their own private war. Comedy, wit & irony are key in telling an ironic story like this, and "Madame Sans-Gêne" (as well as "The Good, the Bad & the Ugly") pulls it off brilliantly, largely due to the larger-than-life presence of Sophia Loren in the role of Catherine Sans-Gêne.There's a line early in the film where the revolutionaries are storming the Tuileries Palace, and they pass by Catherine's laundry shop asking her if she'll come along. She laughs and replies, "No thanks, I already stormed the Bastille last week!" and continues with her laundry. This is the kind of Maupassantian humour I described above, and the film is full of it.Robert Hossein delivers a marvelous performance as Catherine's husband, the handsome yet awkward provincial (a miller's son) who gets swept up in the epic and gets promoted to royalty. I've only seen Hossein in his heroic, swashbuckling roles, so it was a real treat to see him playing the role of a maladroit oaf for once. His goofy expressions, clumsy gait and general goofiness had me in stitches every time. If you're not familiar with Robert Hossein, try to imagine someone like maybe Christopher Walken playing the part of a nerd. That's the comedy I'm talking about.I give another thumbs up to Julien Bertheau who plays the "little General" himself, Napoleon. His character is a real douchebag, but you love him for it, and you may even gain an appreciation for the infamous egomaniac who was thrust into one of the most absurd situations in history (leading a nation that had just overthrown its monarchy yet was all too eager to re-create the same monarchy, only with different faces).I don't think you need to be a student of French history to appreciate this film. It tells a timeless story of the silliness of government, revolution, war, corruption & back to government ...and the loud-mouthed laundress who didn't seem to be affected by any of it. Watch it & enjoy!

dbdumonteil Catherine Lefebvre,Duchesse de Danzig ,was a pure Parisian:so casting Sophia Loren and her Italian accent is beyond me.Particularly if you have seen Roger Richebé's version (1941) starring Arletty.Arletty shone in this part which was tailor made for her:she was hilariously funny,which Loren is not.When compared to the actresses who played the part on stage (Jacqueline Maillan,Sophie Desmarets) Loren's performance is lackluster.The same goes for Robert Hossein,an excellent thespian ,but who is ill-at-ease in a comedy .Only the second part is an adaptation of the Sardou/Moreau play.The first one is filmed on location and deals with Napoleon's wars ,but as historian Jean Tulard writes,everything rings bad.This second part,which takes place in the court of the Emperor ,is supposed to be funny:I dare you to laugh once.The subplot (which involved Napoleon,Marie-Louise and Neipperg) was ruled out to make room for the ridiculous scenes with the Prussians.It's a long way from "Fanfan la Tulipe" ,Christian-Jaque's and Henri Jeanson's fans! The story was actually watered-down in the play:the historic Marechale was a crude vulgar woman whose manners beggared belief.

ouija-3 Sophia Loren is the sole star of this expensive-looking but empty costume picture, in which she plays a washer-woman with ready opinions who, after adventurous goings-on, gains status in the napoleonic times.It is such a shame to see this film that came out in the same year that Loren won an Oscar for her great performance in Two Women. In Madame, she is only used to bring in the charm (which she does, as always) and to display her undeniably shapely bosom through a constantly wet dress, as in some cheap wet T-shirt competition.Unfortunately, this seems to be the only thought that the producer or the director had in mind; the plot is very undramatically presented, the latter part of this relatively short film seems slow and the rest of the cast is wasted. The film is obviously expensive and good-looking, but the opulent sets and costumes only underline the unimaginativeness of the presentation.For those only whose interest in Loren's breasts is enough to keep them satisfied. Others avoid.