I haven't seen DL yet, but I'm curious if it's as enjoyable as Valmont. There's something comedic in Valmont, and I'm hearing DL is much more along the Cruel Intention lines. I love the characters of Valmont and Merteuil in Valmont, are there any similarites between those in DL?
So shines a good deed, in a weary world...
I love both these movies. I loved them both because they were different takes on the same story. Both were quite enjoyable. The most memorable character for me is not one I see mentioned here. It was Henry Thomas(?) the guy who played Cecille's young lover. For some reason his acting stands out in that part to me.
No. DL was always more fluent for me and I have fond memories of J. Malcovich.
But it's a nicer period piece regarding the looks.
I liked them both, but I'm giving the slight edge to DL. Valmont is more lighthearted and comedic, but I've found that to be at odds with a movie where a plot for a 30-something year old man to essentially rape a 15 year old girl for petty revenge is at it's center. DL is hard-edged, the main characters Merteuil and Valmont are equally horrible people, so I felt that fit the tone of the movie better. I do think that Uma Thurman was a bit too tall and mature looking for the role of Cecile, but I think that Valmont's Meg Tily was a bit too vacant for the role of Tourvel. While Colin Firth is better looking, I think that Malkovich was more believable as someone smart enough and vicious enough to be equals with someone as devious as Merteuil...and it's his wit and intelligence that are his main weapons, not his looks. And his motivation to help Merteuil with her plan to ruin Cecil made a lot more sense in DL. Firth just seemed to be led around by Benning in Valmont, not really a true battle between two evil equals like it is in DL.
shareBoth were good but DL, indeed darker, was slightly better. I prefer Firth as Valmont but Close as Merteuil.
shareI know this is 10 years late, but to me, both films are good. Each one has its good and bad points. But I like them both.mi have to admit, John Malkovich as Valmont....I was ready to start licking the TV screen.
I could have been killed, and you're drinkin'!
Hee Hee, made you look!
All opinions are valid, of course, but the tone of "Valmont" is just wrong. After watching DL first, seeing this is like watching a comedy version of "The Silence of the Lambs". It depends on how you approach the story and what tone you think suits it better. I personally think that DL captures the almost satanic nature of Valmont and Merteuil, whereas "Valmont" does not.
"Valmont" is a romantic tale, DL is a sinister tale of depravation.