ThiefHott Too much of everything

NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

iatheia I have read almost all the books by now, and have seen the musical production in two different languages. I absolutely adored everything that I have been acquainted previously. But lately I've been running out of resources to sustain my fancy. I still have couple of books left, but they are either in transit or they are the sequels which I am not in a hurry to read. So an idea dawned on me - Sink me! There are movies which I have not watched! Thus, I must watch them immediately.The first five minutes of these series were... acceptable. In fact, I quite enjoyed the variation of the reason for the denunciation, however different it had seemed. It went all downhill from there, though. Chauvelin was too... foppish? And, I daresay, too old for this role. Not nearly that dark and dashing figure with his dreadful either-or. (And what was that with random bed scene featuring him? It was way too creepy - wasn't his only love the Madame Guillotine, and his only interest - his job, and his only obsession - Sir Percy?) Marguerite... Prettiest woman in France? Cleverest woman in Europe? I think not. Although, whatever compelled her to break into the study of Sir Percy I haven't the faintest idea. And whatever my Lord Tony has done to deserve this death? Yes, every member of the League did pledge his life to Sir Percy, but he would have never endangered any of them nor would have run away like a coward when his dear friend faces mortal danger. And if by any means he had to mourn his companion, he would have done that, mourn, not just move on as if nothing had happened. Which brings me to another point, Sir Percy. His portrayal was most dreadful. He was neither a lazy fop, nor a gallant and elusive hero who is a master of transformations. Nor did he care too much about cravats (his pronunciation of that word alone made my ears bleed) And with his own hands he had never killed anyone. So what was that with him randomly walking around and slaughtering people?The costumes were just too flashy for that time period as well. This is post-revolutionary France we are talking about! Not pre-revolutionary. People in dresses like that stand out in a crowd quite easily. It was all just... gah!Although, I must admit, after I watched other parts my opinion did change slightly. Watching it as a separate work, independent of Scarlet Pimpernel series, it was tolerable. Just your other average hero in the mask. But for what they tried to pass it, it is still miserable.

maz underscore I have always been interested in the time of The French Revolution and have always found the story of The Scarlet Pimpernel to be awfully dramatic and romantic. The first episode aired in Australia in 2000 and I remember being glued to the television, something which was quite unusual for me at that time. Richard E. Grant is amazing in the Role of the dashing Scarlet Pimpernel and of course as the arrogant upper class Sir Percy Blakeney. His charm is very endearing indeed. He is exactly the right actor for the role!Give this mini-series a chance to charm the pants off you! I have been unhappy with the other comments on this page!GREAT MINI-SERIES!!!

sleepyhead32 The Scarlet Pimpernel was a wonderful movies!! It's got love, action, and most importantly, plenty of humor. What more can you ask! Richard E. Grant was great as Sir Percy Blakeney (aka the Scarlet Pimpernel). The rest of the cast was wonderful as well! I have never read the book nor heard of it until i saw this movie. Therefore, I don't know what close the movie was to it. However, I trust that the book is as wonderful as the movie! The only thing that I thought wasn't so great was Sir Blakeney's coolness toward Lady Blakeney (Elizabeth McGovern). He seemed too cool and aloof towards her and seems to be constantly trying to embarrass her in public. It was as if he barely knew her. However, the movie was still great and I still give it 10 stars! In fact, I would give it 11 stars if I could!

ynque This is by far the most repulsive and atrocious version of The Scarlet Pimpernel ever to be devised. As a Pimpernel fan, I was sincerely offended by what they did to the characters--but this atrocity is not worth watching, even if you aren't familiar with the story.Percy Blakeney, for example, would never stab people in the back just to get down a hallway. Chauvelin would never have a string of women in his bed. Marguerite never had an affair with Chauvelin, nor Armand with Minette, whoever the heck she is. Chauvelin would not randomly shoot Tony in the head. Chauvelin's name is not, nor has it ever been, Paul. They have completely eradicated any reference to the Pimpernel's disguises, replacing them instead with James Bond-esque gadgets and gizmos.As to the film itself... The makeup is horrifying. The women look like clowns. Elizabeth McGovern's beauty mark wanders around her face at random. The poor, pitiable actors have no script to work with, so it's not really their fault that their characters are as thin as wet tissue paper. The dialogue... oh, the dialogue. The dialogue is unbearable. And whoever is responsible for all those little captions at the bottom of the screen should be forced to watch this movie as penance. (I counted 13 location captions in the first half-hour before I gave up. As if we can't figure out that the body of water between England and France is the English Channel.)The film--if I can bring myself to call it that, since it's really just videotape with a filter--is absolutely without redeeming value. Do not waste your time and brain cells on this rancid drivel--instead, go watch the 1982 Anthony Andrews/Jane Seymour version, or the 1934 Leslie Howard film, or indeed ANYTHING but this one.