Lee Eisenberg It was inevitable that there was going to be a movie like "Start the Revolution without Me". Directed by Bud Yorkin, producer of "All in the Family" and "Sanford & Son", it depicts two pairs of brothers (peasants and aristocrats) getting switched at birth and playing a role in the French Revolution while practically everyone in the palace is plotting against everyone else.The movie is based on some of the notable French novels dealing with the era. "The Corsican Brothers" also got adapted into a movie by Cheech and Chong (it was probably the lowest of their movies). This one also reminded me of the 1988 comedy "Big Business" starring Lily Tomlin and Bette Midler. But whatever the case, Gene Wilder and Donald Sutherland put on fine performances. I especially liked Wilder's neurotic peasant who's grown up as an aristocrat. A good time for all. And the ending? You'll have to wait and find out.The rest of the cast includes Hugh Griffith (Ben-Hur), Jack MacGowran (The Exorcist), Billie Whitelaw (Hot Fuzz), Victor Spinetti (A Hard Day's Night), Ewa Aulin (Candy), Murray Melvin (Barry Lyndon) and Orson Welles.

Scott LeBrun "Start the Revolution Without Me" is an engaging, silly historical spoof done in the best tradition of the genre. Well worth a viewing for those who enjoy the work done by Mel Brooks and the Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker team, it stars Gene Wilder and Donald Sutherland in what is a classic comedy plot. Two sets of identical twins, one pair born to a nobleman, the other born to a commoner, are mismatched. Many years later (in 1789, as if we could possibly forget the year), the two pairs switch places as the French Revolution is about to take place.Directed with a light touch by Bud Yorkin, and wittily written by Fred Freeman & Lawrence J. Cohen, this comedy wasn't always terribly funny for this viewer, but it *was* quite likable, and had some inspired moments. Certainly Wilder and Sutherland are great fun together; the latter unfortunately doesn't get that many opportunities to do comedy. Obviously a lot of care (and money) went into the costumes, production design, and location work, so the movie has just the right look. It gets off to a solid start as Orson Welles, playing himself, educates us on this little slice of history that has often been overlooked. This is paced quite well and has good energy.Wilder is once again brilliant at doing that kind of comic freaking-out that he perfected over the years. He and Sutherland receive very strong support from a supporting cast including Hugh Griffith as the doddering King Louis XVI, Jack MacGowran as resistance leader Jacques, Billie Whitelaw as a slutty, conniving Marie Antoinette, Victor Spinetti as the dastardly Duke d'Escargot, and lovely young lasses Ewa Aulin and Helen Fraser as Christina and Mimi, respectively.The ending is unfortunately a little abrupt, but it does work in some amusing last second twists.Seven out of 10.

Bogmeister France - 1789! The king is befuddled. The queen is aroused. The duke hatches a new plan. The peasants are near revolt. And just when it looks like things are normal, here come the Corsican brothers! Or is it really them? Perhaps they are actually filthy peasant swine. Perhaps, when two sets of twins were mismatched at birth, things took a really strange turn in Europe's history. When things can't seem to get much stranger, who else would show up but 'The Man in the Iron Mask?' And just who the hell is Orson Welles supposed to be in this picture, anyway? (Oh, wait, he calls himself Orson Welles...I see, aha!).I've long thought this to be the perfect period comedy and wondered why it didn't have universal appeal. Perhaps it's difficult for many viewers to fully embrace an old style costumed spectacle as debacle - events taking place about 200 years ago have the smell of a historical lesson and moviegoers tend to avoid classes when picking out a film. But what if a film throws out much of what we think as historical in favor of a hysterical plot playing on the age-old tensions between the poor and the rich? (the peasantry & the aristocracy). Most of the actors here are usually winking slyly during their performances - they're not really immersing themselves in the period. The exception may be Spinetti as the villainous d'Escargot; he does seem a product of his time while everyone else concentrates on making the gags and clever dialogue as rich and enjoyable as possible. But even this works in the film's favor: the villain is played kind of straight (if you don't count his very odd attempts at metaphor), stuffy and consumed by his plots and intrigue, as the others sort of roll their eyes at the absurd turns in the story.But why is this perfection? The reason has to be Gene Wilder. Wilder had many great comedic roles in his career but this is my personal favorite. He plays two characters in this one (as does Sutherland, almost as great), an arrogant 'aristo' and a sneaky but timid peasant. Wilder's Philippe de Sisi, the high bred one, has to be seen to be believed. Born a peasant but raised as 'superior,' Philippe is prone to wild mood swings and berserk rages. He's quite insane and Wilder turns him into the craziest, most spellbinding character ever committed to celluloid. Very early in the film, the audience begins to wonder what nutty monologue or wacky stunt the unpredictable Philippe will pull in the next scene. It's probably this performance that made Mel Brooks realize Wilder would be the ideal lead actor for all his films ("Young Frankenstein," etc.).The rest of the cast in this revolutionary comedy are top notch, as well. Sutherland, as mentioned, is terrific - his two characters were both meant to be nobility - he has that aristocratic air down pat. All the others also understood the sly, sometimes subtle farcical elements of this piece. Many of the confrontational scenes, with the eccentric turns of phrase, are instant classics - it's a shame not more film viewers are aware of them. The sets and costumes are great - much of this takes place in the palace of King Louis and everything looks quite authentic. I also don't have any problems with the ending as some others do. It just delivers on the already fantastic absurdity we've come to realize the entire film is embedded with.

barbarella70 Funny film features Gene Wilder in one of his very best performances. He and Donald Sutherland score as both sets of identical twins but no one can match the comedic intensity Wilder brings to the role of the pompous psycho with the dead stuffed hawk on his arm. It's a great gag and ranks with his best work -The Producers, Young Frankenstein, Blazing Saddles- and even some of the film performances of Peter Sellers -Dr. Strangelove, his Inspector Clouseau in The Pink Panther series. It's a good time!