Story of greed, immorality & jealousy. The main character is "bad", but the rest of the characters who are supposedly of higher morals are just as bad.

This is a much better film than the critic/audience scores might suggest. Admittedly, the protagonist was mis-cast - he needed to be more charming to make his seductions and manipulations of the influential and intelligent society women more credible, but he got other aspects of the scoundrel character right. I am reminded of an opera I attended in Seattle where the audience heartily booed the bass because he was the “bad guy,” instead of applauding him for his excellent singing. The film, for the most part, is faithful to the novel and like the novel does not preach or moralize. This can make us somewhat uncomfortable, particularly in view of the ending, but the idea that scoundrels can attain great wealth and power, while leading what seems to be happy yet loveless lives, being at heart, misogynists, although set in 19th century France is not entirely irrelevant to 21st century America. The film is not great, has some limitations that underlying the novel it is based on, but it has pretensions to being a serious art film. It is a period piece, and the costumes, cinematography, and acting are all very good… and art should make us uncomfortable at times. Forget the critics, read the novel, see the film, and form your own opinion.

Criminally and thoughtlessly ejected. Pattinson and his female co-leads fit their respective roles like gloves. The story is obviously doubling as a rapturous character study.

Trash. Unless you are really attracted to its lead you won't get it at all.

You never believe for one micro second, that any of these beautiful, upper echelons Parisian society wives, would soiled their reputations... with the jamoke portrayed in the movie. Robert Pattinson character is overly awkward, unsympathetic, empty of charm, with zero charisma, (his perpetual facial expressions, are as if he is smelling something stinky... perhaps his acting).

I'm sure there's a deep character study in the books....here in this adaptation, not the case.

(5.0 out of 6)- originality When we see we can get back on our feet fast by the help of those to pick us up when we are down to get us out from low places and into high places. When we see we can't keep what's within to let out when we see how fast we get in with those. When we see we are fast with our words when charm, our deep thoughts & embrace infactuates others that keeps us in. When we see time is changing to only be in the right place & time to act fast in a fast paced booming markets that takes us places and transfor places to know we are going places. When we see others are fast at working, others fast in thinking, and others fast in connecting with others when people work fast when there is plenty to do. When what others wish not to do, others are fast in seeing who we are to know what speed they need to go. When we see going too fast it catches up with us when it slows us in our tracks. When what gets our mind flowing in fast places is knowing we are going somewhere in the high direction. When what we see not to lose we we act fast when we get in another way. When what others wish to keep out others act fast when our life & job is at stake to stay in. When we don't see what gets those in high places we see it's those that are behind them propelling them in fast places. When such places we see we are in, we see they are a time of fast change from what gets us around faster to conduct business or for leisure or what gets us in higher places when those below are fastly rising in wealth, class, and sex. When other things we see don't come fast enough when the mysterys of health brings those closer in death in what we don't know why such things happen. When what we wish to move faster we see our way into those hearts, roles and responsibilities when others are in for something's and others are in for others. When what others see to get in we see what gets them their faster when respectable titles leads to progress. When what we hear, see and know we move fast when what places we can't go we bring those in to the changes. When what others see to enjoy we see faster way in doing things when there is much more in stake when business & politics are involved. When we see others are more invested in fast reform and others wish to keep something's still when we wish to be in high places for long. When what others see gets them in faster higher places are by taking those down that are much slower & higher places to know what we are getting into. When what others see we are in they see us slower then we write when times are changing fast and the fight for power & control is at stake. When we see we move fast in gaining influence with others to see we remain in such places. When we don't see what others see in ourselves we see we move nowhere when others move faster to push out in any place we go. When we see others move faster when they in with the right people when they don't see their way out when they inherit fortunes. When we see that moving faster then we can handle we try to balance all we are in with, but don't see we are on our way out when what we use to get in others use to get in as well when we are not wanted. When we see our way in when we see how low such place out feels like to know we move fast with others. When we see that we have moved into the beds of so many, taking down reputations as we go without them seeing, to know how fast we would work to get out from low places to be high places all in to get what we want. When we don't see what moving fast we get into to know what getting ahead means when what we take down, naturally they try to move as fast as we do to take down as well when business & politics is as competitive as love & war.

It's good movie to watch

I am surprised by the negative reviews of this film. Like Age of Innocence, this film portrays true love thwarted by society and how we can become victim to the roles we are forced to play. Robert Pattinson, the son of pig farmers, an ex soldier, poor, ill who is picked up the demi monde who use him. Discovering how he is being manipulated and disrespected, he fights back using his limited resources. A simple man who would prefer enough money to live and domestic contentment, he ends up becoming a dominating bastard, unable to be with his true love, to the admiration of those who wouldn't have him be anything else. Pattinson is a sensitive and vulnerable performance is obviously flying under the radar for those viewers who also would prefer a villain to a human. Brilliant direction illuminating the pitfalls of masculinity and success and the costs incurred.

Elegance, affluence & seduction; based on French author Guy De Maupassant's 1885 novel of the same name, Bel Ami is the story of a base-born handsome scoundrel who uses ruthless cunning and sexual manipulation to beguile influential woman and climb the societal rungs of 1890's Paris. Sophisticatedly written, prudently characterized and sharply penned, Bel Ami loses very little in its English translation but rather in its far too tame and somewhat hollow layering. Directors Declan Donnellan and Nick Ormerod fail to capture the requisite weight and significance of the swaggering protagonist's actions, but perhaps that's because the stunning social climber is portrayed by Robert Pattinson, Left penniless after serving three years in Algeria, Georges Duroy (Robert Pattinson) is determined to crawl his way out of the Parisian gutter to which he is slumped. Bumping into an old comrade-at-arms turned La Vie Francaise newspaper political editor Charles Forestier (Philip Glenister); Duroy is invited to an intimate upper-middle class dinner and introduced to three women with whom he attempts to entangle with his unyielding powers of sexual persuasion. Forestier's empowered and candid wife, Madeline (Uma Thurman) quickly declares that she is unlike other women and her interest lies in the prospect of his intellectual accomplishments. The proper wife of newspaper boss Virginie Walters (Kristen Scott Thomas) whom he hopelessly infatuates and the wide-eyed Clotilde de Marelle (Christina Ricci), whose husband's eternal absence is never ending and her young daughters affections towards Duroy or as she names him Bel Ami is genuinely heart-felt. An ever resourceful and adept manipulator, Duroy uses his cruel gifts to exploit each woman in turn. As the amorous Clotilde supports him both mentally and financially, lovesick Virginie passes insider secrets from her husband's corrupt closed-office meetings and sharp Madeline's writes his prose for his articles. But it is not until Charles Forestier's health fails that Duroy finds opportunity. Propositioning Madeline, Duroy offers a mutually beneficial marriage that sees him ascends to the prestigious post as social king and the undisputed chief editor of the paper whilst she retains her social station and through him gets to voice her own political prowess, a rarity for women. But life and marriage is not easy. Discontent to continuously spoon feed the almost illiterate Duroy and let him continue his affairs but denied the same the courtesy, the strong willed Madeline brutally rebuffs his claim to male superiority and blatantly fans the flames of jealousy. Enraged, Duroy revisits old friends orchestrating a plan to discredit Madeline, prove his own worth and secure his position in society. Will Duroy's greedy aspirations to succeed land him back in the gutter? Which of his women will he hurt, shun or trap? And will any forgive him in the end to find true happiness? Unlike 1988's Dangerous Liaisons where John Malovich's naturally predatory sexuality drips from every minute expression, Robert Pattinson's obvious self-consciousness translates to little more than a repetitious petulant glare. Although looking very much the part, culturally and personally Pattinson doesn't have the ability to convincingly capture the confident essence of this character. Like Bel Ami, Pattinson leaves the heavy lifting to his supporting ladies. Confused accent aside, Thurman is a cold-as-steel standout. Ricci is engaging as the woman who forgives Bel Ami all indiscretions. Thomas's overt doting wonderfully teeters on silly and although in a small role Tena leaves a big impression as a brash and vulgar discarded whore of Bel Ami's early exploits. The Verdict: With the films weakness residing in its lead, choppy structure and clumsy treatment of its central characters, it finishes lifeless and forced. The chic and ornate production design persistently tries to sweep us away but the befuddled handling of the key elements keeps us grounded in modern sticky cinema sets. Published: The Queanbeyan Age Date of Publication: 01/06/2012

Flat and monotonous.

Bel Ami is a movie about 3 women who are only attracted to Robert Pattinson because he's, um, Robert Pattinson. That's all. His character has no personality or charm. Nothing. He meets Christina Ricci's character in one scene. There's no sexual tension or anything. In the next scene, she tells him she'll come to his bedroom later.... OK, WHAT?! This is a flat, dull, badly directed costume drama with an equally flat performance by Pattinson whose only job is to give smoldering glances at women.

From a novel that emphasizes on the lack of love and the triumph of the cynicism, this movie decides to focus exactly on that that it doesn't have.The excess of romance was nonsensical, and the heart of the novel faded between the scenes of tears and eternal vacuum stares from Pattinson. The natural charm from Bel Ami wasn't credible and was replaced with pure clumsiness. A rushed ending and a innecesary heart-to-heart scene eclipsed the triumph of the lack of values that was the main point of the story.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, is what I wanted to do a lot during the film. This movie is about as exciting as watching grass grow and watching grass grow is boring as hell. Bel Ami is an unengaging, dull, bland, boring, extremely forgettable, and cheerless snooze fest from start to finish. What were the directors trying to accomplish by making this? What was the point they were trying to make? Why was this even necessary? These questions went through my head as I was watching this bore fest of a motion picture. Since I am a film fanatic, I decided to watch this for the hell of it because I like to watch different movies from time to time and hardly anybody even heard or seen it. I am certainly glad most people didn't see it because it is absolutely terrible.The story was not interesting at all, the characters are bland and one-dimensional, the dialogue is uninteresting, and most of the acting is terrible. The score in my opinion, only served to try to keep the audience awake because it was really loud and the filmmakers knew they had a snooze fest on their hands. Robert Pattinson keeps picking mediocre movies to be in and this one was certainly no exception. He is stiff and wooden throughout the whole film and he made for a really uninteresting main character. The movie's main focus seemed to be him being a womanizer and sleeping with a bunch of women and none of the sex scenes served no purpose to the story or the plot and it made it feel like a softcore porn. The story of Robert Pattinson trying to become a journalist became a bore right from the start and it later became sidelined to him having marriage issues and I couldn't wait for the movie to finally end. There are things that happen with little to no motivation at all and by the time those "things" happen, you are already bored out of your mind watching it. The only aspects I could possibly complement are the costumes and Uma Thurman and Christina Ricci trying their best to work their way through this crappy material, but those things aren't even enough to bump it up to one star for me. In the end, I am done talking about this film and I wish I could erase it from my mind forever.

Robert Pattinson in 19th century Paris might sound like a dream come true to some; but if the audience expects to do anything more than just oogle at the beauty of that scenario, then they will surely come away most disappointed. The story is about a cad, down on his luck until a chance meeting presents him with a golden opportunity. Pattinson sleepwalks his way through a gauntlet of bedroom scenes with various cast members, as his character proves more and more repulsive. I found it difficult to identify with, or champion, any of the characters; which in my mind always makes for a lacklustre story. Christina Ricci's character came closest of all to winning me over, but they are all game players in a rather tedious and childish game. I side with the critics on this one. Pattinson needs more than just a pretty face to carry a film. His weaknesses are heavily exposed by this script, which limply slips right off his shoulders.

Watching this movie was a mistake. I was either bored or confused.

Intriguing but a useless concept. I guess I was expecting a better storyline for the era that it was in.

WOW.....WOW.....WOW....WOW....WOW....SO SO SO SO BAD....MAN THIS MOVIE IS JUST SO COMPLETLEY DREADFUL 2 WATCH, MAN THIS IS SUCH N AWFUL MOVIE 2 WATCH, ITS GOT A GOOD CAST THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE BUT I THINK THAT THEY WERE ALL WASTED THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE.....I FEEL LIKE THIS MOVIE WAS RUSHED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT, IT IS SUCH AN AWFUL MOVIE 2 WATCH.....I THINK THAT CHRISTINA RICCI WAS ABSOLUTLEY BRILLIANT THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE BUT THIS MOVIE IS SO SO SO SO SO BAD, ITS GOT A REALLY REALLY WEAK SCRIPT THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE. IT IS SUCH AN AWFUL MESSY WEAK MOVIE 2 WATCH, ITS GOT A GOOD SOUNDTRACK THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE, BUT MAN THIS IS SUCH AN AWFUL MESSY MESSY MOVIE IT IS SO SO SO BAD, IT IS SUCH AN AWFUL MOVIE 2 WATCH, IT IS SO SO SO SO BAD, JUST AVOID THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS IT IS THAT DREADFUL MOVIE 2 WATCH, IT IS SO SO BAD IT IS SUCH AN AWFUL WASTE OF A MOVIE......

Wow this is a piece of junk as well as Pattinson's acting

It's esoteric and psychological. I dig it.