The Affair of the Necklace: Rating: 2.5 stars

In pre-Revolutionary France, a trio of conspirators set out to defraud the Queen. Which, of course, is not a good idea.

The Affair of the Necklace (2001)
2001 · R · Drama
Reviewed October 27, 2008

The so-called “Affair of the Necklace” is a small yet strange bit of history: in pre-revolutionary France, a greedy countess masterminded a conspiracy to defraud her lover, a powerful cardinal. The fraud involved an insanely expensive diamond necklace, which the countess was to trick her lover into buying — for the queen, Marie Antoinette. Once she had the necklace, the countess could make a fortune by selling off the individual gems. It played almost like a farce, with whores dressed up as queens, secret meetings at midnight, and compromising letters between the cardinal and his “royal” mistress. The countess and her comrades almost pulled it off. Almost. But things fell apart, the fraud was brought to light, and the resulting public scandal blew up in the face of… Marie Antoinette, who was never really able to convince the French people that she had no part in the affair.

It’s a juicy bit of history worthy of tabloid gossip, and it would make a fine movie — or it should have, anyway. But right from the start, it’s obvious that this movie isn’t going to be good. The main problem, on the face of it, is casting, and the problem with the casting is Hilary Swank as the countess. I don’t know about you, but when I think “eighteenth-century French noblewoman”, I do not think Hilary Swank — Cate Blanchett, maybe, or even Gillian Anderson, but not blunt-featured, frog-lipped Hilary Swank. Not that she’s a bad actress or anything, but… no. Not a good choice. She gives it a game attempt, but she seems lost and uncomfortable in the role, and it’s impossible to forget that she’s acting. (In her defense, though, at least she doesn’t attempt an English accent.) Joely Richardson is decent as the queen, but it’s really a two-dimensional role where she is only allowed two emotions: bitchy and hissyfit. The only worthwhile performance is from Adrien Brody as Swank’s rakish husband; true to form, he throws himself into the role with relish and seems to be having a lot of fun.

This being a Hollywood movie, the story is bound to deviate from the historical record quite a bit; it doesn’t slide quite as far from the facts as I had expected it would, though, so that’s something. The problem with the plot is that the movie makes the countess into a romantic heroine rather than a pretentious con artist, and bends the facts accordingly. No longer is she the cardinal’s mistress; now she’s got a boyfriend who assists her in the con, and is (of course) the one true love of her life. Her reasons for stealing the necklace, too, are elevated from the banal need for spending money to a noble attempt to reclaim her tarnished heritage. In case these stated reasons do not tug at your heartstrings as they should, the director throws in an overwhelming soundtrack and countless slow-motion shots of Hilary Swank (which just give you a reason to stare at her frog lips) to make sure you get the full emotional effect. At its best, the film is mediocre; these techniques occasionally push it into the realm of full camp.

I’m still hopeful that someone will make a decent adaptation of this story, but I don’t recommend this movie, even to tide you over while you wait for a better version to come out. Unless you’re a die-hard fan of everything set in late-1700s France, give this one a miss.