so what was it with this movie? it was booed at the carnes film festival, was it not?

First of all Marie Antoinette is not esteemed highly by the French. As portrayed in the movie, she drained a ton of the nation's expenses on ridiculous non-stop partying while the rest of the common people were struggling with outrageous inflation and trying to find enough to eat for the day.

Also the movie was very drawn out and redundant, perhaps done purposefully to highlight the ironic monotony of extravagant court life.

I might look at it differently were I French, but I really liked Marie Antoinette. Not Sofia Coppola's best work, but it was wonderful to look at, and had some very interesting characters. I thought it was interesting to portray Antoinette as a girl born with a silver spoon who had been raised by maids and was just totally out of touch with the people of the "real world" whom she was supposed to protect the well being of. She had never known much of a struggle in her life before she was made queen and therefore probably had no clue why the citizens were so furious with her. I think historically, most people look at her like she was just a monster with bad intentions almost.

I thought the movie was very good, and while I can see why some would consider it drawn out, I thought it was just a very deliberately paced film. Coppola is known for doing that which is why most either love her or hate her.

As for the redundancy, I think you hit the nail on the head suggesting that it was that way to show the monotony in their daily lives.

I loved Lost in Translation, so I was really excited to see Marie Antoinette. But I think the film is a vapid, tedious piece of garbage that (whatever Coppola's intention) defends the greed and selfishness of its characters.

I was really bummed out by it.