Between a splashy new Andrew Lloyd Webber musical on the West End and a flashy new movie musical starring Camila Cabello, Cinderella is having a bit of a moment. But then again, when is she not? The age-old folk tale has been told, retold, and remixed so many times that there’s a Cinderella for every era and every mood—from the iconic 1950 Disney animated film that pulled from 17th-century French writer Charles Perrault to shape our modern-day image of the fairy tale princess, to modern riffs like Ella Enchanted that try to upend it. Our shared pop culture lexicon has landed on Cinderella as the ultimate symbol of conventional femininity, which, of course, makes her beloved and despised in equal measure. She’s the princess against which all princesses are compared—and to some degree the woman against which all “girl culture” is shaped.
And nowhere was that clearer than during the 1990s. Between a rom-com resurgence that kicked off with a sexy, contemporary Cinderella update in Pretty Woman, and a Disney animation renaissance filled with plucky princesses who were largely defined by the ways they weren’t Cinderella, our image of the little cinder girl was challenged and reshaped during the “girl power” era. And those cultural trends came to a head in Ever After, the wonderfully whimsical 1998 historical romance that cast Drew Barrymore as Danielle de Barbarac, a self-possessed Renaissance-era Frenchwoman the movie imagines as the “real” inspiration for the classic fairy tale. With a few savvy adaptation choices, Ever After managed to deliver an empowered take on Cinderella without throwing the storybook beats under the bus. It’s a sparkling balancing act that few other adaptations have been able to match.
The project started with future Erin Brockovich screenwriter Susannah Grant, who was then coming off working on Disney’s Pocahontas. Commissioned to write a version of Cinderella with a “Merchant-Ivory feeling to it,” Grant decided that rather than deconstruct the classic fairy tale, she wanted to “reconstruct it” with a historical bent that took out the magic and subbed in a rational romanticism characterized by using Leonardo da Vinci as the fairy godmother. Updating the story’s gender politics was, to some degree, incidental. Asked whether she purposefully wanted to create a more self-reliant Cinderella, Grant replied, “I’m not sure that was conscious—it may just not occur to me to come up with characters who can’t take care of themselves.”
Regardless, it was the logline “Cinderella rescues herself” that caught Barrymore’s eye. The twentysomething was looking to reshape her career, which had up until then been defined by child stardom, tumultuous personal problems, and a series of Lolita-style bad girl roles. Not only would playing Cinderella be a reset of her public image, Barrymore felt deeply connected to the story of a young woman who uses her own strength and tenacity to pull herself out of a toxic childhood and into a fairy tale happy ending. (“Drew had lived Judy Garland’s life by the time she was 12 and had gotten to the other side by the time she was 14,” director Joel Schumacher once put it.) Barrymore brought the project to Andy Tennant, who’d directed her in the 1993 TV movie The Amy Fisher Story. And they worked with Tennant’s writing partner Rick Parks to further tailor the script, making Danielle a little more of a rough-and-tumble tomboy and adding a subplot with some jovial Romani bandits.
Rewatching Ever After today, it’s still fun to watch Danielle wield a sword against her would-be captor or literally carry her prince to safety. But those moments of physical prowess actually stand out less than the way the film thoughtfully updates the moral cornerstone of the classic Cinderella story. One of the best pieces of cultural criticism of the past few years is a video essay from The Take that revisits Disney’s animated Cinderella and challenges our loosely shared assumption that it’s a story of a weak, passive woman who’s rescued by a prince thanks to “pure dumb luck and a pretty face.” The Take reframes Disney’s Cinderella as the tale of a woman who chooses radical kindness and compassion in the face of abuse and oppression—something the 2015 live action remake phrased as the motto “have courage and be kind.” Cinderella’s greatest strength is mental, rather than physical. Hers is the story of finding a way to maintain your humanity even in difficult circumstances you’re powerless to change. And in a world where life sometimes sucks in ways you can’t simply fight your way out of, there’s a strength to presenting that kind of fairy tale for kids too.
But whereas most adaptations demonstrate Cinderella’s inner fortitude through her pleasantly sunny demeanor and kindness toward animals, Ever After expands it into something more active and three-dimensional. Long before Danielle rescues herself, we see how far she’ll go to rescue other people. Early in the film, she disguises herself as a noblewoman to buy the freedom of a fellow servant that her stepmother (Anjelica Huston) has cruelly sold to pay off her debts. It’s a plot point that sets up Danielle’s mistaken-identity romance with Prince Henry (Dougray Scott), who assumes she’s a mysterious visiting courtier. But it’s equally a character beat that demonstrates Danielle’s bravery, compassion, and commitment to social equality. Not only does she get the prince to help her reunite her household, she inspires him to end indentured servitude as a practice altogether.
Like Dirty Dancing before it, Ever After is a romance that’s first and foremost about moral values. “A servant is not a thief, Your Highness, and those who are cannot help themselves,” Danielle tells the dashing but immature royal before quoting Thomas More: “If you suffer your people to be ill-educated and their manners corrupted from infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded, Sire, but that you first make thieves and then punish them?” Henry falls for Danielle because of her passion and conviction, while she’s drawn to him because he not only listens to her, but changes his mind based on what she has to say. In this telling of Cinderella, the heroine’s dream isn’t just to marry a prince, it’s to reform his kingdom into a socialist utopia in the process.
Ever After offers the same mix of swashbuckling fun and social justice theming as Errol Flynn’s The Adventures Of Robin Hood, only with even more of a feminine, feminist focus. Yet the lesson never feels didactic because Tennant wraps it all up in such a whimsically engaging package. Ever After is structured more like a rom-com than a fairy tale, with extended scenes of Danielle and Henry’s courtship that makes their love story feel earned. (In this version, Cinderella goes to the ball not to meet the prince, but to reveal her true identity to him.) Scott, in particular, has a lot of fun leaning into the Shakespeare In The Park-lite of it all, with a spirited, floppy-haired gusto that sells the flirty oil-and-water romance. “Why do you like to irritate me so?” Danielle sighs. “Why do you rise to the occasion?” he winkingly responds. And what Barrymore lacks in a consistent accent, she makes up for with a beautifully openhearted emotionality and a great face for the Renaissance.
Ever After also understands that the Cinderella story is as much about toxic family as it is romance. Though the film never softens stepmother Baroness Rodmilla de Ghent’s villainy, it contextualizes the social forces that have shaped her into who she is, including the way women of the era were forced to rely on marriage as their main source of economic support. More so than any other adaptation I’ve seen, Ever After foregrounds the horror of the fact that the Baroness is a widow with two young daughters who uproots her entire life to marry a man who then almost immediately dies in front of her. (A death punctuated by an incredibly effective use of a dolly zoom.) Watching the Baroness scream “You cannot leave me here!” at her new husband’s body is genuinely wrenching, and Ever After maintains a subtle through line about the way that trauma shapes her mistreatment of her stepdaughter. The benefit of casting an actor as skilled as Huston is that she can play complex, conflicting emotional layers in between tossing off archly campy villain lines like, “Darling, nothing is final until you’re dead—and even then I’m sure God negotiates.”
Ever After is also smart about the way that hierarchies of cruelty are learned. The Baroness was taught cutthroat social climbing from her obsessive mother and is now passing it along to her own spoiled, arrogant daughter Marguerite (Megan Dodds, whose every line reading is a gift). But the movie finds hope in the idea that those hierarchies can be unlearned too—like the way put-upon stepsister Jacqueline (Melanie Lynskey) slowly starts to shift her moral compass in Danielle’s direction. It’s a nice extension of the film’s ethos that people can change, not to mention a smart way to get a little more female solidarity into a Cinderella adaptation that recasts the fairy godmother as a male artist-inventor.
Ever After also delivers a complicated answer to the question of why its Cinderella figure doesn’t simply leave her abusive environment. Part of it is because Danielle feels connected to her father’s manor and the people that work there; part of it is because she doesn’t really have anywhere else to go; and part of it is because she feels a complicated sense of loyalty to the only family she has left, cruel as they may be. Barrymore is great at playing the raw emotional yearning that characterizes so much of Danielle’s life. It was another personal point of connection for the actor, who explained in a 1998 interview, “I’m closer to my parents now, but no one in my family is really going to be there for each other. It’s too late. I thought about whether I wanted to be a really resentful person, but it’s just poison and you just have to let it go. I love them and I hope they’re proud of me, but none of us can really tolerate each other. But that’s cool. A lot of families are like that.”
Part of the reason the Cinderella story has endured is because the difficulties of its heroine’s life are so relatable—in the same way that’s true of comic book heroes like Peter Parker or Steve Rogers, both of whom have elements of Cinderella in their DNA. And when we dismiss “princess culture” as a whole, I think we’re underestimating young people’s ability to enjoy the beautiful ballgowns and handsome princes while still finding deeper emotional resonance to these stories too. What’s great about Ever After is that it updates the Cinderella story without scoffing at its fairy tale origins. A framing device featuring legendary French actress Jeanne Moreau lends welcome gravitas, but part of the self-aware fun of Ever After is that its worldbuilding feels as much like a theme park as a realistic take on 16th century France. Like Shakespeare In Love, which came out the same year, Ever After is unembarrassed to be an earnest, playful historical romance, which is a style of movie that seemed to quickly fall out of fashion in the more cynical aughts.
It’s that unabashedly wholesome tone that ties Ever After to the late ’90s as much as Danielle’s body-glitter-heavy look at the masquerade ball. Yet there’s a timeless quality to Ever After too, largely because its themes remain so relevant. Barrymore still cites it as one of her favorite projects, particularly because of the way it empowered her to take more control over her own career. (She launched her Flower Films production company the next year.) And along with the Brandy/Whitney Houston TV musical from 1997, it’s one of the best live action Cinderella adaptations out there. Critics and audiences agreed at the time. Ever After made $98 million worldwide and currently sits at a 91% on Rotten Tomatoes, although it’s been a little bit forgotten by the larger culture since then—at least by those who weren’t the right age to make it a sleepover favorite. Still, with Cinderella in the zeitgeist once more, it’s an ideal time to try this effervescent adaptation on for size. As a crown jewel in the canons of both rom-coms and princesses, Ever After has a soul (and a sole) all its own.
Next time: Twenty years ago, Mira Nair’s Monsoon Wedding served up a different kind of wedding comedy.
137 Comments
I did like how one of the step-sisters went through a character arc of her own and actually turned out all right (as well as not being outright terrible to start with).I also liked the bit where the lead character was allowed by the bandits to take one thing with her when they let her leave and so … (very ingenious and lots of initiative shown there!).
They did a really nice job fleshing out the step-sisters; you can see it makes rather sense that Rodmilla would put all of her effort into one of her daughters at the expense of the other. And seeing Jacqueline endure all the abuse and learn to stand up to her mother is so gratifying.
“Of course not, Mother … I’m only here for the food.” Flawless.
Timothy West and Claire Bloom! Why haven’t I seen this yet?
I don’t know, but you definitely should! 🙂 It’s on Disney+, if you have that. It’s everything this review describes it as and more. Top-notch performances.
I may watch tonight. I usually leave my Friday viewing open in case this or Popcorn Champs makes me decide I need to watch their featured films.
See it! Super-charming, well-drawn retelling.
I love this scene so, so much.
Underscored so well by the fact that the favored daughter gets to be a peacock for the ball and Jacqueline is forced to be a horse (with a costume that nearly covers her entire face). But then, wow, is she swoon-worthy at the ball.
Also how they weren’t physically unattractive, the adaptation didn’t buy into the “beauty equals goodness” thing.
It’s been years since I’ve seen it, but this is the step sister played by the adorable Kiwi Melanie Lynskey, right?
Yes! And it was bugging me after you said this, because that name looked familiar and I couldn’t figure out where I knew it from – she played Reese Witherspoon’s hometown friend in Sweet Home Alabama, which I can’t believe I never realized before. “That Jaclyn Smith knows what she’s doing!”
She was also great in Heavenly Creatures, with a pre-fame Kate Winslet.
“Look at you! You’ve got a baby…in a bar.”
This movie is full of three dimensional characters. The evil stepmother even gets a little line about how badly she was abused as a child, and Angelical Huston sells it perfectly while never letting you lose the desire to see her downfall. Great goddamn movie.
A lot of modern Cinderella adaptations have adopted this trope: The younger stepsister is sympathetic, yet powerless, eventually becoming an ally by defying her mother and older sister.Another sign of Ever After’s influence.
Those are two of my favorite parts of the movie.
I haven’t seen this since cinemas but I remember absolutely loving it. Such a charming and fun movie.
Wow, I was going to post exactly the same thing. Haven’t seen it since 1998, but I loved it then and it probably deserves a rewatch.
It holds up. I’ve never been one for fairy tale live-action movies, and I still watch Ever After once every couple of years. And if I’m flipping through the channels and it’s on, I will watch it, despite owning it on DVD.
Same! We’ve done so many DVD culls but I know this one is still in there and one I will be happy to pull out for my kids some day.
It’s a go-to pick me up movie for me – still in the dvd case with That Thing You Do and The Mummy for when I was clocking lots of hospital waiting time last year.
Same! I’ve seen this movie so many times and always enjoy it.
Watched this movie in theaters during high school on a date. Nearly empty theater, we sat near the back row and……. watched the whole thing, enthralled. How many romcoms can say that?
Oh, I love this movie, and this is a really great piece about it.Placing Cinderella in a historical context is such a neat idea, and the movie has a really refreshing approach to the story. I love that Danielle is so pro-active, and gets herself out of almost every situation she winds up in. And I love that she’s a champion of social justice. (It always makes me so happy to know this is one of Drew Barrymore’s favorite roles.)
I love that we have a lot more foundation for the step-mother’s cruelty, and furthermore how it fleshes out the rest of the household with rather a bit more than “spiteful step-sisters who are mean because.” And I love how much the romance between the two leads is earned – and that, as Caroline says, Henry falls for her because of her intelligence and passion.
Also, it has a great sense of humor. Henry’s parents in particular – with their mutual acknowledgment that neither of them wants to be in this marriage – is often a great source of laughs. As is Leonardo da Vinci, who is a delight.“I will simply deny you the crown and live…forever!”
“I shall go down in history as the man who opened a door.”
Sixteen-year-old me swooned at the following exchange from Ever After:Danielle: “It is not fair, your highness, you have found my weakness, but I have not found yours.”Henry: “Well, I should think it was quite obvious.”
Dead. I died.
It was funny to see Dougray Scott go from this performance to a supremely misogynistic villain in Mission Impossible II a couple of years later. Range!
I remember watching this on TV in the early 2000s, and all I remembered was the scene where Henry is supposed to marry the Spanish princess, and I remember childhood me thinking that the entire movie was just like this, one failed wedding after another. I think that could be a fun spin on the trope. 27 Dresses but it’s 27 Princess. LOL. Still one of my favourite films!
That wedding scene is adorable, not just in how Henry starts being only worried about himself and his situation, and then pivots to realizing both he and the Spanish princess aren’t on board with this. I love it.
I loooove the Spanish princess. The way she just sobs and sobs, not even a smidge of a stiff upper lip. And she’s so determined to make Henry understand why, even though she doesn’t speak any “French.” Duty be-damned, she wants her sweet balding courtier! They’re so cute together! I really hope after her parents were done blaming each other, they bowed to the inevitable.
I am a fan of the school of thought that Cinderella’s kindness has been unfairly maligned over the years. (In addition to the video above, this point recently appeared in a very good article in Slate: https://slate.com/culture/2021/09/ted-lasso-and-cinderella-the-apple-tv-show-and-amazons-movie-differ-on-the-importance-of-kindness.html .)That being said, if one reads enough of Grimm’s fairy tales, one soon tires of the idea that the best sort of woman is one who is both kind and beautiful and who cares about anything else. The original Disney Cinderella is not bad for being good, but her goodness is a bit one-dimensional. Ever After strikes a good balance; Danielle is unambiguously kind and decent, but as an intelligent, adventurous woman, she has more going on than only kindness.
One of the reasons Cindarella works so well in “Into the Woods” (the stage version) is because Cindarella has a moment of doubt early on – “What’s the good of being kind, if everyone is blind, always nice Cindarella, kind Cindarella, Nice, Good, Kind, Nice-”. And she is literally slapped out of it by a step-sister. She isn’t just a default nice person – she is making a choice to honor what her mother taught her. She then gets another choice in “Steps of the Palace” where she thinks through what her options are with the Prince. The original Disney is more of a “nice people get rewarded” message, but in ITW, it is the CHOICE to be kind that is rewarded.
And, you know, the birds fucking love her.
Yea I am in the camp of not bashing Cinderella for her kindness, but definitely in the camp of “she got out of an abusive situation by sheer luck and having a pretty face”. Which is why I love Ever After. Danielle was incredibly kind, and she stood up for herself and what was right. The disney live action remake kept the one-dimensional Cinderella and still had that “some day someone is going to save me so I’ll just take this abuse with a smile” aspect.
I always loved Ever After, but I also have a real soft spot for the live action one.
The Lily James one? Yeah it isn’t bad.
It’s enjoyable, but the best part is the visuals. “Sumptuous” is the word that comes to mind thinking of the colors and textures in that movie. Plus the dress! To me, a not insignificant factor in a Cinderella adaptaion is The Dress. Both the 2015 Cinderella and Ever After succeeded in that category. (I don’t think this is spoiler-y, but one of the more disappointing things to me about the Kay Cannon Camilla Cabello version that just came out is The Dress is a little sad trombone – especially for an adaption in which Cinderella wants to make dresses?!)
This is absolutely my guilty pleasure movie. If others find it too saccharine or cannot suspend disbelief in the Drew’s wavering accent, I cannot blame them but yet, this is something I can watch endlessly and enjoy every single time. It is lovely and fun and the world feels right at the end of the movie.
Why on earth would this be a “guilty” pleasure?! This movie is delightful!
Must be Catholic
Why the hell are you in the greys?
<3 <3 <3
Protestant bias
Baptists have their own stores of guilt, mostly about dancing and sex, but it can slip into other things.
They fear having sex standing up will lead to dancing.
By the way, because Disney now owns 21st Century Fox, Ever After is now streaming on Disney+, despite not being a Disney movie.
I did enjoy it, and I love nearly everything Drew is in. However…I could never get past the fact it is set in France but everyone has British accents (some if which were terrible),
Definitely avoid all European historical dramas from the 60s.
But English accents are the standard “not US” accent! I love how HBO’s Rome has everyone speak in English accents despite being set before English even existed. But maybe it was the influence of BBC’s I, Claudius from the 1970s?
That and the boobies
And wieners.
The British always like to imagine/cast themselves as Romans so that’s probably part of it as well.ETA: The unconscious assumption that using one’s natural American accent ruins the verisimilitude of historical dramas is kind of fascinating, considering how, e.g., the modern American accent is about as close (if not closer) to Shakespeare’s as a modern English accent.
Eh, there are accents in the Midlands, northern England and Scotland that are still pretty close to how (we think) Shakespeare spoke, far closer than the standard American accent. There are just a few artefacts in the American accent that have disappeared from RP (if they were ever there to begin with – remember he was from the Midlands and would have had a completely different accent to, say, Queen Elizabeth).
I watched this movie on a date in high school, and I just watched it a month ago with my youngest daughter. Totally holds up.
the Brandy/Whitney Houston version is good too?
Slightly different tone, but yeah – definitely worth a rewatch (also on Disney+). It’s bright and fun, and I love the casting in it, especially how they don’t care about race in it at all. Victor Garber and Whoopi Goldberg have a Pilipino son? Sure! It has a more straightforward version of the story than Ever after or the new one on Prime, but it’s a fun, frothy musical. The three results are all different enough from each other to stand on their own, I think. Obviously, ymmv, but I could happily do a Cinderella marathon of all three on a day where I wasn’t feeling well (if I didn’t have little kids who don’t care when I’m sick).
Could also do a marathon of all the Rogers & Hammerstein versions (Julie Andrews, Lesley Anne Warren and Brandy).
I don’t think I like those songs enough to hear them 3 times in a row, but yes, definitely could. What I love about fairy tale adaptations in general, though, is that those bare bones of a story have so little in the way of actual characters that someone can take them in a ton of different directions, and I really enjoy seeing what different storytellers do with that same starting point.
Yes!
Putting Drew Barrymore in it is always doing it right. I have spoken.
I really think they should’ve gotten someone else for her role in………Nope. I got nothing.
The thing is, even if she’s “wrong” for a role, she’s nonetheless a delight to see.
Music and Lyrics comes close. She’s perfectly pleasant in it, and she and Hugh Grant are even believably chummy together, but they have precisely zero romantic or sexual chemistry.
I have always suspected that Hugh Grant might be a fire hydrant somebody stuck a toup on.
Music and Lyrics comes close. She’s perfectly pleasant in it, and she and Hugh Grant are even believably chummy together, but they have precisely zero romantic or sexual chemistry.What’s funny is Music and Lyrics is billed as a rom-com, but the “romance” is so inconsequential. The engrossing story is Hugh Grant getting his groove back. It’s kind of like The Color of Money but songwriting instead of pool playing.
Exactly, you could cut the romance out of the movie and it would hardly change. And as I said, Grant and Barrymore actually have decent platonic chemistry—it’s just that neither look or act remotely interested in having sex with each other.
Amen! I love her always and forever! Take my money!
Behold: Baroness Rodmilla de Ghent! Now that’s how you write a Big Bad! Ever After endures because it delivers not only a great hero but also a great villain.As the article points out, Rodmilla isn’t “evil” because that’s in her nature; she has been warped by societal expectations and limitations, her own mother, tragic circumstances, and her survival instincts. She both hates and loves Danielle, not for Danielle herself but for the parts of Danielle that remind Rodmilla of Danielle’s father, who Rodmilla genuinely cared for but who she ends up resenting for his premature death. And Rodmilla almost wins! Her villainy isn’t the fluky or incompetent kind; in fact, her plan unfolds nearly to perfection. She comes to within a glass slipper of putting Marguerite on the throne. Crucially, though, making the evil stepmother more sympathetic doesn’t make her any less of a bad guy. Rodmilla’s cruelty is suffered by not only Danielle but also Rodmilla’s natural daughters, staff, and anyone else she can use and abuse. Rodmilla is absolutely monstrous, and her comeuppance is all the more satisfying because of that.
One of the best moments, which is fleeting but, as always, Angelica Huston sells the hell out of it, is when Rodmilla casually mentions how her mother never found anything clean enough and would make her scrub her skin until it was raw.
Also from the Baroness: “How can anyone love a pebble in their shoe?”
OUCH. I felt that from the top of my head to the soles of my feet.
Can we just double down on that one line of yours “making the evil stepmother more sympathetic doesn’t make her any less of a bad guy”. I wish so many more projects and stories would understand this, as it is also part of the strength of this year’s Cruella. You don’t have to make them into the greatest person ever to be sympathetic, they can still be cruel and monstrous without losing that element where you understand where, why and how they became that way. In fact, doing so makes them work so much more. It’s why there are so many male villains who are adored, but are still monstrous (Hannibal Lector, the Mads Mikkelson variety, anyone?).
Yes! That’s why I love The Joker in the Dark Knight Series. Yes he is evil and the bad guy, but you get just enough of a backstory to make him more sympathetic. Although part of me almost wanted him to win. 😂
Yes!! She IS this movie for me. Her eyebrows and the subtlety with which she can move them are inspirational.
Great movie. My sister quotes this one at me all the time. I don’t mind.Also unironically love the trope of everyone having English accents in a movie that takes place in France.
France? I haven’t seen this, so forgive me if there is an obvious explanation, but why would Leonardo Da Vinci be in France instead of Italy?
What, a guy can’t travel?
He really was! He spent his last years in France as a guest of the French king and is even buried there!
Yup. It’s a great bit of alternate history – if you know any French history of that period.
Yeah, the dates don’t quite line up. Henry presumably is the guy who became Henry II, and while his father Francis I is indeed the guy who invited da Vinci to France, da Vinci died the same year Henry was born, while the movie has him alive when Henry was a young man.
OK, if we’re gonna do ‘Alternate History vs. Reality’:
Henry’s mother was Claude, not Marie
Henry married Catherine de Medici (You should look up Catherine, she was profoundly evil)
Henry and Catherine and 4 sons, all of whom died without legitimate issue, so the crown passed to Henri of Navarre (the prince in Shakespeare’s ‘Love’s Labours Lost’) who became the first Bourbon king.
I find it interesting in the film that the Revolution still happened, although the Valois line still exists (the Grimm brothers call the woman they’re talking to ‘Your Majesty’ and she hasn’t been beheaded)
And to go further into film, Henri of Navarre (Protestant) was married to Henry and Catherine’s daughter Margot(catholic) which sparked the infamous St Bartholomews day massacre and is the subject of the famous 94 French film La Reine Margot.
Margot (Marguerite) is also the Princess in ‘Love Labour’s Lost’. Most of the people in England, especially those at court, would have enjoyed Shakespeare’s satire of what was to them a current event.
The Jean-Luc Picard school of British Frenchness.
The live action Disney remakes they’ve been putting out the last few years should really take a page from this movie. Nobody needs a complete remake of a classic animated film with some more contemporary references thrown in. But taking these stories and filtering them through a more “adult” story (not in the sense of corny double entendres but in a more grounded, character-driven way) opens up a lot more possibilities.
Honestly, the live action Cinderella from Disney is probably the best of them. It’s not even close to being a shot for shot remake but it is also just… a simple Cinderella adaption that doesn’t get caught up in trying too much to be “modern.”
I agree, but I have to admit – I love the live-action Cinderella. I think that has more to do with Kenneth Branagh’s direction than anything else. He always seems to see things in a Shakespearean way, and in this movie, it’s clearly more about using tremendous visuals to heighten the fairy-tale aspects of the story.Cate Blanchett is a delight as the evil stepmother – her costumes alone are worth the price of the ticket. Sandy Powell really did a magnificent job with the costuming in general – I know the blue ball gown was kind of controversial because it made Lily James’ waist look so impossibly small in photo stills, but it worked a lot better in motion after you’d seen her in so many other costumes where you could see how slender she was. The way that dress appears to sway so effortlessly is just a master-class in costuming.What the 2015 version lacks in the fleshed out characterizations of Ever After – a movie I’ve owned for years and may now have to pop in the DVD player – it just makes up for in being a visual delight. (Oh, and I love Nonso Anozie as the Captain of the Guard, too!)
Speaking of Game of Thrones actors, the 2015 version also added a nice little character arc for Richard Madden’s Prince Kit. He felt significantly more like a real person than most Disney princes.
He was a nicely humble prince – he didn’t need to be taken down a notch like Prince Henry. Henry had more of a development arc from spoiled brat to Prince Charming, but the Disney adaptation was simply a lovely fairy tale – Ever After was more about making Cinderella a real young woman. Kit could be a little bit more fairytale as a result. (And let’s face it – Richard Madden LOOKS like a Disney Prince come-to-life.)Honestly, I’d happily watch both back-to-back in either order. They’re both lovely movies in their own individual manner.
“And what Barrymore lacks in a consistent accent, she makes up for with a beautifully openhearted emotionality and a great face for the Renaissance.”I haven’t seen this but this review is a great push, and I love this last point about Barrymore’s face, never made that connection but it’s so obvious now.
Yes! I always liked how lovely the portrait that sparks the story is, because I find that oftentimes in movies with a conceit like that, the picture or book or what-have-you feels forced. I never realized that it works so well because Drew has a good face.
It’s a take on this painting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Scapigliata
It’s absolutely true. Art made for movies can be so icky but the portrait at the end is fantastic. I want a deep dive on who did that.
Almost skipped this article because I haven’t seen the movie (and this subgenre isn’t usually my thing) but this sounds like a good movie with a surprising amount of depth and character work. Also, I really liked this piece, which connected to a set of characters and movies with which I’m much more familiar:
Part of the reason the Cinderella story has endured is because the difficulties of its heroine’s life are so relatable—in the same way that’s true of comic book heroes like Peter Parker or Steve Rogers, both of whom have elements of Cinderella in their DNA. I’m mad now that I never thought of Peter Parker or Steve Rogers as Cinderellas before, when they totally are.
First DVD I remember purchasing… And it’s still here in a folder….
I love this version. I have seen is so many times with my kid. This version popped into my head while watching the current amazon version. I will never no love the scene where she tricks the highwaymen and carries off the prince on her back. This is probably my favorite version of the tale.
I unashamedly love this movie, but one thing that always makes me laugh is that it’s set in France, but everyone speaks with a dodgy British accent.
Would you want it dubbed into French? Or done in a dodgy California girl accent.
Best. Movie. Ever. I had the biggest smile on my face reading this article. Truly the best Cinderella adaptation by miles. I find it a travesty that this doesn’t have the cultural power or nostalgia as The Princess Bride which imo is a complete “dasmel in distress” story and isn’t nearly as innovative or entertaining.
Yeah I’ve always strongly suspected that the reason The Princess Bride has done so well is because they framed the entire story from a male POV. Grandpa reading the story to his grandson. Men and boys would not have watched it if it had opened on Buttercup and Wesley’s story.
I never thought about that but you’re totally right. It’s just layers of different dude perspectives to get to the kernel of what, as AmaltheaElanor points out, is a very passive female character. I still love parts of that movie, especially Inigo Montoya, but it definitely promoted the then-prevalent idea that the best way for girls to be valued by boys/men was to be surpassingly beautiful (and specifically white, slender, and blonde). It’s become hackneyed to call out that kind of thing, I guess, but it and similar cultural juggernauts really influenced me and others who were young when it came out.
“(and specifically white, slender, and blonde)”Ffs. Really?
The fact that they jerked the fairy tale out of the The Princess Bride and left out all the ‘real world’ stuff is why I find that movie so disappointing. It’s ‘nice’, and that’s all.
I know it’s considered a classic, but I have a hard time with the fact that pretty much the lone female character in The Princess Bridge spends most of the movie being a helpless mcguffin.
Eh I’m OK with it. She shows moments of bravery and even attempts an escape. However, she’s a sheltered lady of the manor. It would have been completely unrealistic for her to bust out martial arts moves or know how to sword fight. Not every female character has to be physically kickass in order to be a strong female character.
Liar! Liar!
LIAR!
I’am not a mcguffin, I’m your wife!
I mean, everyone is making excellent points, but…it’s The Princess Bride? People are capable of not loving The Princess Bride? Why it’s…it’s incon——trovertibly an excellent movie!
Have you read the book?
I’m shocked that this trash, terribly acted, confusingly accented, smug film merited a positive review.
Poor, poor you, finding out that not everyone likes the same things.
Must come as quite a shock to you.
Super snark great job! I’m aware that not everyone likes the same things, but I’m still shocked that a reputable site like AV Club is waxing nostalgia for this unflushed turd.
If you look at the comments, you can see that you are vastly in the minority.
Yah know, there are shows and movies that others love that I can’t stand, but I don’t go into articles about those things and whine about how much I hate, say, Downton Abbey. I let others have their joy while I find mine elsewhere.
That you’re shitting on a movie beloved primarily by women I won’t draw any conclusions from, because that would be rude.
Ma’am, I get that I’m in the minority of people commenting on the review of this old crappy movie; it kind of selected for people who remember it in the first place and care. I just happened to have been partnered with someone who loved it and had to endure it a number of times; no doubt I’m an outlier.And I was never judgmental about people enjoying a tacky, schmaltzy garbage movie; I was simply voicing surprise that the AV Club, which I have read for decades and have viewed as a strong arbiter of good taste, was singing the praises of garbage.Please feel free to enjoy whatever the hell you watch. I didn’t draw any conclusions about the character faults of you or anyone else who love this trash, so please spare me your judgment.
Are you sure you aren’t just bitter about the ex that enjoyed it? You have added nothing to the conversation outside of calling the movie garbage on repeat. Not everything needs to be your cup of tea, but you know you can skip the comments section and move on with your life instead of continually trashing something others find joy in.
Yeah I’m surprised it’s remembered so fondly, when I saw it in the cinema I thought it was fine, nothing special. The ‘empowerment’ in it struck me as very shallow. But maybe it’s worth a rewatch, it sounds like it’s aged better than some of the other films of the late 90s.
I’m surprised it’s remembered so fondly, when I saw it in the cinema I thought it was fine, nothing special.I found it (at the time) charming, and MUCH better than it needed to be. Better than I expected.
Her whole empowerment story is just because she read one book that is mentioned a dozen times for basically no reason at all.
Chiming in here to say again how much I love this column. Sometimes it leads me to movies I never bothered with, and in this case reminds me that I’ve seen a movie once, loved it, and somehow never saw it again.I think it might be one of Barrymore’s best. I’m usually bothered by the fact that her acting style doesn’t seem to have changed since she was in E.T…. but in this movie it (finally, to me at least) translates into a charming performance.
Definitely watch Santa Clarita Diet, she has a whole range of acting skills there and the whole show is hilarious (and deeply missed).
I think that bit about her acting style having not changed since E.T. is pretty spot on, but when things line up right (like here, and in Santa Clarita Diet) her enthusiasm is just so damn contagious that you can’t help but get sucked in.
Oh, I should say – I really enjoyed Barrymore -and everyone – in Whip It. Barrymore was only in a small part (and she directed) but she was fun, and the whole movie was a goddamn delight.
I LOVE LOVE LOVE Whip It!Such an awesome cast, and so much fun, with so much heart, it made my outta shape forty-something ass get back on old-school roller skates.
If you want to see Drew Barrymore at the absolute peak of her charm, see Olive the Other Reindeer.
I remember we watched this movie freshman year high school when my history class talked about the Renaissance.
Shout out to this column and Popcorn Champs for being easily the best things on this website. Consistently great insights and writing. Well done again
My favorite Cinderella adaptation for sure. One of my favorite Drew Barrymore movies, too.
I hope when people are done with the wretched recent version (Camila almost made me pine for the days when Madonna tried to act), they seek out this much better tale.
It looked so bad. Hulu is really alienating me between ads for that and ads for Dear Evan Hansen
Unfortunately, it has Drew Barrymore. Terrible actress sporting and even worse “accent.”
LOVE this movie, and love this take. You hit on all my favorite elements of it and I learned some great new context and backstory. 10/10
Really like this movie.
while she’s drawn to him because he not only listens to her, but changes his mind based on what she has to say.
So, like a typical marriage?
Typical?
Like Shakespeare In Love, which came out the same year, Ever After is unembarrassed to be an earnest, playful historical romance, which is a style of movie that seemed to quickly fall out of fashionAnother in that same style is A Knight’s Tale (2001), which remains fun & delightful.
I haven’t seen this since it was in theaters, and I loved it then.Clearly, I need to give it a re-watch, because just reading this article made me misty-eyed remembering how awesome this movie was.I LOVE that she picks up the prince and carries him.
Thank you for highlighting this extremely emotional, funny, well shot, ensemble film. It is perfect and a huge favorite of mine. For me the perfect movies to go with it are Emma (with Gwyneth Paltrow), Sense And Sensibility, Secret Garden from the early 90s, Mask of Zorro. Throw in the 10th Kingdom and Anne of Green Gables and these all go together in a beautiful tapestry.
Long time fan of the column, I think I’ve been reading since literally day 1. A while back I started making a letterboxd list of every movie you covered and realized that I should probably share it with you! https://boxd.it/bjSmy
“And along with the Brandy/Whitney Houston TV musical from 1997, it’s one of the best live action Cinderella adaptations out there.”I agree with both parts of this statement! Love both of these versions! For different reasons but in equal measure.Thank you for keeping this column going! I love every entry! Even if I have varied feelings about the movies I can see how each one has had an effect on our culture and on me
Cinderella: Portrait of a Princess on Fire!