The Scarlet Pimpernel (1999–2000) User Reviews

No Matter What Anyone Tells You, This IS a Good Film...

[amabiliscasa · 7/10 · 1 September 2003]

...if not a very good adaptation. Yes, the film deviates a little from the book, but what adaptation does not? (i.e. Sense and Sensibility, An Ideal Husband, Gone With the Wind, etc.) Some guidlines for watching this oft-critised film: do not expect a line-for-line, blow-by-blow, true-to-the-nth-degree page to film adaptation. Take the film on it's own, and enjoy it as the solid show it is. Do expect an exciting, romantic, wickedly funny trilogy. The costumes a quite good, and the music adds quite a bit, being rather good. The story of The Scarlet Pimpernel is well known, so I won't bore you by recounting what you already know, but I will say this - I and those who have watched with me found ourselves laughing at the exhanges, loving Sir Percy, and cheering on Marguerite. I have read the book, and can say that Richard E. Grant brings a vivacity and new depth to the Pimpernel, and Elizabeth McGovern, though not always outstanding, is wholly adaquate as the passionate, willful and dedicated wife of Sir Percy, Marguerite St. Just. Just watch this film, and enjoy it for what it is. I know I did.

Richard E. Grant is an inspired choice!

[Liza-19 · 8/10 · 3 September 2003]

I'll confess, I've never read the books. I have however seen several productions of the play onstage and I prefer this beautiful miniseries by far. All of the productions I've seen before cast elderly men with cute lines but no charisma. The choice of Richard E. Grant for the Scarlet Pimpernel surprised me, but he did a wonderful job with it. I was very surprised by his performance, as I'd only ever known him as a supporting/character actor (like Twelfth Night and Gosford Park).

As a life-long Elizabeth McGovern fan, I can't help but love her. She's a fantastic actress, but whoever did her hair should be guillotined. For a really beautiful woman, they hid it well under ten pounds of brown wig. It sadly resulted in her looking much older than she actually is, but fortunately this isn't the case for the entire movie (at least at the end she gets a haircut!) But her striking features still shine through and her beautiful performance far outweighs that hairstyle. She also manages her accent very well (she's originally from Illinois) But, well, I watched the whole miniseries just for her, so I can't help but think she's the real star.

Ronan Vibert is another actor I've liked for a long time, and he did a fantastic job as Robespierre. Martin Shaw's Chauvelin got on my nerves a bit, but he's fine. The big surprise was sweet little Emilia Fox in the role of Minette. I'd never seen her play a villain before, and was pretty impressed by it. All in all, I really enjoyed this miniseries, and highly recommend it.

Fun, though perhaps you should read the book after seeing the movie...

[lionesss · 7/10 · 26 December 1999]

Just so you're not put out as so many who _have_ read the book seem to be. Sir Percy was wonderfully cast (Richard E. Graves! Can you believe he was Bob Cratchit in TNT's "A Christmas Carol"?) I started giggling helplessly every time he gave that I'm-no-fop grin, and he really was a lot of fun to watch. As for McGovern, well, she's all right, but some of the dialogue she has to say! Especially in the company of Chauvelin! What happened to Lord Tony made me want to spit nails, though Ffoulkes was quite nice....What was this Minette supposed to be? (Emilia Fox looks quite different from her bit part as Georgiana Darcy in A&E's Pride and Prejudice.) It had its moments, for sure, but-- where are all those disguises that the Pimpernel does so well? It wouldn't have been too hard to do. Oh, well.

What a great mini-series!!

[mazunderscore · 10/10 · 26 June 2006]

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. T

he 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!!!

Scarlet Pimpernel- MORE PLEASE!!

[Estella · 6 February 1999]

I have watched a lot of the BBC's excellent costume dramas, and of course was not disappointed in The Scarlet Pimpernel. The acting is first rate, with Richard E Grant making a very handsome and witty Sir Percy, and dashing and sexy Scarlet Pimpernel. The locations are beautiful, the costumes breath-taking, and the sword fights amazing! I hope there is another series, otherwise I shall be ringing up the Beeb crying for more!

Makes You Want To Read!

[moonmonkey38375 · 9/10 · 31 July 2006]

When I was in high school, the A&E adaption came out. I was anxious to watch the story from seeing the previews. The movie didn't let me down. Of course, I had never seen or read of the Scarlet Pimpernel before. I loved the movie so much that I wanted to read the book because books are usually better. (That only makes me want to roll my eyes at libraries in small towns.) It took me a couple of years to find a copy. Now, I read it on-line and the books following behind. I hate that the movie has received such horrible reviews.

Even after reading the book, I think that Richard E. Grant was cast exceptionally well, perfectly portraying Sir Percy Blakeney and the Scarlet Pimpernel. I was a little disappointed in Marguerite's casting. I think the make-up artist had more of a problem than Elizabeth McGovern.

Some may not have liked the adaption, but that is what it is--an adaption. Maybe the original story would have been better, but I disagree. I see it as and addition to the stories-not the original, but a new adventure--exciting wonderful adventure--to add to the past stories and characters of the Scarlet Pimpernel. Altogether, it was a wonderful series that made me want more! And more!

absolute wonderful! no words to describe it!

[sleepyhead32 · 10/10 · 27 December 1999]

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!

Praises inadequate ...

[MAW-2 · 10/10 · 25 January 1999]

A stylish and witty remake of the when-ever-it-was classic. The Scarlet Pimpernel is back with swash thoroughly buckled, and tongue firmly in cheek.

Opinion of the actors, dialogue and hope for more.

[bell-5 · 10/10 · 27 February 1999]

One of the best period dramas produced for a while. The dialogue was excellent and witty. Scenery and costume seemed true to time. Altogether an excellent mini series that left you hoping for more. The actors were well cast, Martin Shaw making an excellent but likeable villain, Elizabeth McGovern a very serene Lady Blakeny and Richard E Grant as Sir Percy was just magic. My congratulations to the script writers who wrote the dialogue, the words I will remember - Sir Percy to Sir Andrew in Episode 2 "Ain't life exciting" and Lady Blakeny to Sir Andrew also in the same episode "the hypocrisy of the English tongue". Please let us hope there is more to come after all the Baroness wrote 12 books.

Not very faithful

[Sophia-21 · 4/10 · 2 March 2001]

I am not quite sure I agree with the director of this version of The Scarlet Pimpernel. I imagined Sir Percy Blakeney a very calm, seemingly lazy aristocrat. This particular Sir Percy Blakeney appears to be teeming with overwhelming energy and volatility. I did not appreciate the Houdini, James Bond, Mission Impossible style escapes that Sir Percy engineered either. In the previous versions, wit was the tool for escape, not technology. Neither were the characters of Marguerite and Chauvelin adequately portrayed. There seemed to be little energy or chemistry in the interaction between the characters.

I do not wish to assign any blame, for perhaps the reason for my dislike of this movie might simply be a matter of difference in interpretation. Had the director's interpretation coincided with mine, perhaps I might not have been irritated by what seemed to me bad character portrayals.

I much preferred the version from 1982. Anthony Andrews was quite efficient as the imperturbable, calm fop. So were Jane Seymour and Ian McKellen. In my opinion, the style of this period piece seems to have been lost with this latest adaption. I recommend sticking with the previous versions, either the one from 1934 or the one from 1982.

hilarious, fun movie!

[digger_c · 17 May 2001]

Well I knew this wasn't going to be faithful to the book -- and it definitely wasn't! -- but who cares, movies rarely are anyway, and I was expecting it to be unfaithful to the book. I thought it was hilarious!!! It's just a fun movie, so I suggest that you shouldn't take it seriously and condemn it as sacrilege just because it's a different take on the legendary Scarlet Pimpernel. Richard E. Grant is just hilarious as Percy -- he plays him as a foppish dandy, and it is the funniest thing. I didn't see what was so bad about Elizabeth McGovern. I loved the great one-liners between Percy and his wife. "I know he loves me!" LOL!!!

Thoroughly enjoyed this trio (saw other versions)

[aleen_o · 10/10 · 15 June 2004]

I so thoroughly enjoyed this trio of vignettes by A&E with BBC that I went out & bought all three, unprecedented for me! (Egad, I'm rhyming like the Pimpernel!:)

A long-time BBC/PBS aficionado, I've seen other Pimpernel versions but liked this trio the best. (One with Brit Leslie Howard was also good, but more formal/stylized & lacking modern film technology.)

I looked up Richard E. Grant & Elizabeth McGovern's other films, too, after enjoying these so well. In the mood for courage with style? The Pimpernel is the original James Bond, from 1792.

There's also a movie about the ahead-of-her-time female authoress, Baroness Emmuska Orczy, with a similar theme to Madame Marguerite/Lady Blakeny's traumatic childhood in those turbulent times of revolution in both America & Europe...so apparently her historical romantic action dramas had a touch of autobiography.

Aren't there more?

[munchkin4880 · 10/10 · 20 August 2006]

I swear I saw more additions then the three that I see. I love these stories and I remember watching more on TV then what I have been able to fine. We have the 1st one, where his wife finds out who he really is. Then we have the 2nd one where Percy and his wife go to Paris to rescue the french girl who is in hiding. And then we have the 3rd one where they rescue the heir to the French throne. I have looked for them online, but don't see them anywhere. I know there are at least more. One where his wife dies in child birth, and I think there are more. Does anyone else know what I am talking about? And if they do, can they help me find them? please email me at [e-mail]

Marriage isn't a word, it's a sentence.

[Sylviastel · 10/10 · 20 November 2018]

Richard E. Grant played the title character in this series based on the classic novel. The episodes are predictable where Sir Percy and his wife played by Elizabeth McGovern are in peril in saving and rescuing others like the king's son; an aristocrat's daughter and others. They filmed the entire series in the Czech republic. Richard E. Grant has the charm and ability to make you believe in him. The costumes and art direction are first rate. Guest performers like Suzanne Bertish in "The Kidnapped King" was sensational among others.

How to do heroes...

[poe426 · 8/10 · 7 February 2013]

Richard Grant, with his irreverent poetry and in-your-face attitude toward the villains, is absolutely, 100% perfect as THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL. The production values are likewise outstanding in this mini-series. If there's one complaint I have, it's that the initial episode lacked one all-important ingredient: SUSPENSE. At no time did we ever really get the impression that Percy was in any real danger; the lack of suspense therefore works against the idea of a man who must remain masked lest he risk his head... (And, not to nitpick, but I must admit that the fact that EVERYONE speaks with an English accent sorta threw me: time and again I found myself hoping someone would silence the arrogant Brits looking to kill our hero... and then I would realize that they were supposed to be FRENCH... A minor quibble, perhaps, but a quibble, nonetheless- like white men in blackface or "Romans" and "Greeks" who speak with English accents in teleseries after teleseries...) A great show. Too bad it didn't last.

Great Grisly Fun

[jackbuckley · 8/10 · 7 October 2018]

Just finished watching the first 2 episodes of this miniseries on a dvd bought from a discount bin in a local mall bookstore. Has taken me over a year to get around to watching it. Glad I finally did! I recall seeing these 2 episodes on TV many years ago. I remembered little, but certain moments seemed vaguely familiar. I enjoyed it as a tale of adventure right out of the history books. The French Revolution long of special interest to me. I thought it conveyed the horrific atmosphere of those turbulent times quite well. The popular-in-its-day guillotine-dance that was featured prominently in Episode 1 was quite chilling to watch. Something very disturbing about it to me. Richard E. Grant was fun and compelling to watch, quite adequate in the role of the aristocrat-saving faux fop. Speedily paced though occasionally confusing, though never fatally. I actually didn't mind the lack of disguises. Sometimes in stories such as these, the use of disguises can be tedious. The cold-hearted bloodletting, though gruesome, appeared accurate and looked authentic. Episode 2, set in the Vendee, especially well-done, I thought. Didn't realize there are 4 more episodes. I'd like to catch them sometime, too. The only jarring note was the presence of Ms. McGovern, of later Downton Abbey fame. She seemed too American for a Frenchwoman. Eventually I came to like her in the role but not the best casting. In short, I gave it 8 stars. I've never read the book, but I think this series is well-done, giving the subject matter the old college-try--and succeeding nicely!

One of the stupidest films ever made...

[LadyLizo · 1/10 · 27 March 1999]

Before I start to tear apart this movie, mark you--I LOVE THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL. That story is one of the best romantic adventures ever written. The movie staring Jane Grey is very good and the musical on Broadway is the hottest thing there. So, I thought when I heard that this film was coming out that it would be great since it was a BBC film.

To my surprise, it was a weak, totally stupid story that UTTERLY failed in capturing the gorgeous tale.

There were no exciting escapes with daring disguises. There was no deep love that made your heart flutter as Percy left the room and Marguerite sighed as her husband was leaving her again.

All it had was a confusing plot and a lot of out-of-the-blue sex and violence.

Sink me! What a horrible movie!

dreadful

[SeattleMovieLover · 5 March 2004]

I love the story, but barely recognized it under the laborious plot derivations and bad dialogue. What were they thinking? These poor actors did a fine job with the terrible material that they had. A nine year old would do a better writing job. I was saddled with this horrid thing when I purchased a DVD collection of period pieces. Why on earth did Percy never get into disguise? That was a significant part of setting up the story. They put him in some stupid kind of Zorro face mask. WHAT?!?! I was sorely disappointed after my delight at anticipating a new version of this lovely story. The characters engaged in behaviors that were, frankly, beneath them. Percy's character was written so poorly - he is supposed to come across as a consistently ridiculous character to everyone, except when he is functioning as the Pimpernel. This is an essential element of his disguise! They completely missed the mark here. Also, the marriage between Percy and Marguerite is so poorly written. You don't have a clue about their animosity for each other. You just see that they seem to despise each other from the get go and there is no HINT whatsoever as to what brought them together in marriage in the first place. A well-written Pimpernel story will show you the prior evolution of the marriage through dialogue. These actors had no opportunity to tell you about their relationship - you are left thinking they hated each other from "I Do." Frankly, "The Matrix" had a better love story!" Don't waste a minute on this - watch any other version.

New take on The Pimpernel - not bad!

[spamalot-67962 · 8/10 · 31 March 2024]

I've been a fan of the Anthony Andrews and the Leslie Howard versions of The Scarlet Pimpernel, so was curious to see this version, which I only just discovered existed.

I very much enjoyed Robert E. Grant's interpretation of the Pimpernel - sexy, dashing, just foppish enough to throw off suspicion - a real human being. The script, and likely the director, however doesn't allow for the initial underlying tension of love versus suspicion between Percy & Marguerite, so disdain, anger and anxiousness are primarily seen between them. Additionally, I missed the dashing and clever escapes and disguises that are part of the Pimpernell's story and character.

The makeup, sets, and costumes are basically accurate for the 18th century, but the makeup artist completely ignored enhancing and using the natural beauty of Elizabeth McGovern's eyes & eyebrows by thinning her brows to a pencil li e & slapping makeup on them. I kept noticing this poor makeup job and it was annoying.

McGovern's performance is realistic and passable, but lacks the passion and suffering that Marguerite experiences due to Percy's behavior, and then the excitement and anxiety of discovering his secret. The script doesn't really support this, either.

I enjoyed the Minette & Robespierre characters & performers, & was pleased to see Suzanne Bertish in one episode. Chauvelin's character needed to be directed, performed and/or written with greater tension, especially in scenes with Marguerite, his former love. Percy's SP team are given fairly short shrift as characters, except for a couple of Frenchmen.

Despite the flaws I mentioned, the series was entertaining and original in it's storylines and Grant really holds his own. I could mention other positives and negatives but do not want to add further spoilers.

I still enjoyed the series and would have liked to see several additional episodes beyond what was actually created, for further character & plot development.

This is SACRILEGE!!!!!

[ynque · 1/10 · 11 October 1999]

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.

Severely lacking in the necessary dash and wit, but will do if you've never seen the other versions or read the book...

[Islandia · 3/10 · 8 October 2002]

Having read the books and seen the 1982 Anthony Andrews/Jane

Seymour version, I have to say that this is not good at all.

According to the books, Percy is supposed to be a seemingly

foppish aristocrat when he's being Percy, and witty and clever

when he's being the Pimpernel, but here he just looks bored as

Percy and mean as the Pimpernel. Marguerite is supposed to be

the most beautiful woman in Europe, not a tired and frumpy-looking matron (she looks middle-aged, probably due to

bad make-up). Richard E. Grant has done much better things, and

Elizabeth McGovern's acting is uninspired and flat. The wit and

dash of the books and the Andrews/Seymour film is here replaced

by brawn and flashy editing that just don't make the cut.

I might add that to a person who hasn't seen any previous version

or read the book, it would probably look ok.

Frightful

[iatheia · 2/10 · 1 November 2009]

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.

They call this 'The Scarlet Pimpernel'?

[Old_Chook · 2/10 · 29 May 2004]

I don't know why they even kept the name. How they could call the series 'The Scarlet Pimpernel' after they deviated from the novels so much, I wouldn't have a clue. The character names are the only things they kept, and even then they changed a few of those, and mixed them up, and changed Percy's relationships with them. Admittedly, I only watched about two hours at the most of it, but that was enough for me to realize that the series was nothing like Baroness Orzcy had portrayed her characters, and probably would have been rolling around in her grave when it was filming and airing. Poor lady. I hope that when the next person wants to make a movie/series of the book they don't ruin it as completely as this series did.

A bit disappointing.

[Rahne · 3/10 · 28 April 1999]

As someone who has read all of Baroness Orczy's books and seen most of the movies based on them, I must say that the 1980's version, with Anthony Andrews and Jane Seymour, was better than this. It was better written and stuck more to the spirit of the story than this one, which seemed to go out of its way to involve people getting shot. This new adaptation is less light-hearted, yet does not have as much depth, either. Although there is some good acting, the actors did not have much to work with. Nice costumes, though.

There IS something good about this programme

[fionapymont · 9 August 2003]

Robespierre.

The Incorruptible is class in a glass.

Ronan Vibert's marvellous portrayal is the main reason I watched all this series.

Apart from Robespierre, I also liked Chauvelin and Monsieur Foumier.

I tend to agree that Margeurite was somewhat miscast, and that many of the female characters were often badly dressed, made up and coiffed.

Talking of which, Robespierre really DID own a cauliflower wig a la Salieri in Peter Shaffer's 'Amadeus'! AND a stripy jacket in that precise colourway.