m_cepoi To all those who lashed out at the film here: yes, the film gives sometimes the impression of being a bit pretentious, but whoever comes with such harsh criticism should also provide his own scale of values. So what is yours? What do you consider to be a really good film? OK, I understand, their should be 10 lines of text, and some egos need a place to show off, but frankly, who cares? The further one goes into details, scrutinizing it, the more looses the good impression that the film leavesIn these times, when the world is invaded by Avatars, even this sentimental film is an achievement.dixi

seawall runner Beautiful film to be enjoyed for what it is - a lovely way to spend an afternoon at the cinema. Sweeping vistas of the province of Quebec, beautiful shorelines, spectacular forests and yes there's a love story in there as well. There are some historical inaccuracies, true. If you want a documentary, look elsewhere.For pure entertainment value, the film delivers. Beautiful costumes, a nice story, good acting, a number of tears at the end of the film.Beautifully done. A nice 'first date' movie, or a nice mother-and-daughter film.

private_54 This is, literally, one of the most uselessly complex and "I-want-to-make-my-way-into-cinema-history" movie ever produced. I cannot think foreigners will see this movie and understand THAT as an accurate review of what happened to my country. I left the theater 38 minutes ago, and I am still shaking with anger.First of all, cut the all-charm hero who's good at everything and the tough and revolutionary woman who dears go against armed guards by punching them in the face. I do not buy. I got nothing against Noémie Godin-Vigneault, she did a worthy job, but her character's flawed. Cut also the dull love story, absolutely unimaginative. The secondary characters, like Marie-Loup's father, like Voltaire and France Carignan, Marie-Loup's daughter. They deserve credit. And finally, how dare did they destroy one of the finest North American piece of history by wanting to copy the "historical-moment-in-a-love-story" like Titanic and Pearl Harbor did. Historical values are not even respected. 4 years passed between the capitulation of Quebec and the Treaty of Paris. 4 years. Well, it seems nobody aged a day. Please, before or after seeing this movie, ask for a French Canadian, for the REAL version of what happened. That way we can keep our dignity intact.

August1991 Ultimately, this movie is a Brazilian soap opera. There are intrigues and billets-doux. The pop theme, recorded by an orchestra in Prague, is good but over-used. At least seven or eight crescendos cover various characters when they either grasp each other, look at each other or wistfully stare out windows while thinking of each other.I didn't mind the historical and geographical inaccuracies. The need for financing seems to have motivated scenes of Pitt and Voltaire. (Was the inclusion of Franklin a failed attempt at American financing?) In fact, these scenes were not necessary since the movie used symbolism. The basic facts arguably fit the presentation. A case can be made that New France was abandoned by France, abused by the Catholic Church and strung up by England. Marie-Loup, get it? In the movie, she is illiterate but very articulate. Indeed, everyone spoke with modern international accents from mouths with white straight teeth. (So what! It's only a movie!)Jean Beaudin made "J. A. Martin Photographe" which was both a beautiful and sensitive movie with Monique Mercure in the lead. She's in this one too but her presence only hearkens to the past. Despite its flaws, I enjoyed "Nouvelle France" but I'd probably enjoy any movie about the history of northern North America. If you have no interest in such history, this movie will be a convoluted Brazilian soap opera.