Start the Revolution Without Me (1970)

"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.

In mid-16th Century France, a Duke brings his pregnant wife to the village doctor where she delivers twin boys--but the dotty nursemaid and the exasperated doctor mix the babies up with the newly-born twin boys of another couple, a peasant farmer and his wife, with each couple getting one correct child and one wrong. Thirty years later, the two sets of mismatched twins meet, but not before the peasants stage a revolt against bumbling King Louis XVI. Filmed entirely on location, this Bud Yorkin farce looks almost too good, too authentic for the pratfalls and slapstick nonsense which he stages on opulent castle grounds; the historic minutiae dwarfs the loosely-hinged plot, which isn't fully thought out to begin with. Worse, Gene Wilder and Donald Sutherland fail to become the Abbott and Costello team the filmmakers probably hoped they'd be. Wilder sticks to his short-fuse mania and gets off some big laughs, but Sutherland's preening fop/subdued street fighter never quite emerges as a three-dimensional character. Yorkin overdoses on swashbuckling action, a handful of riffs on Dumas, and some playful girl-ogling, yet at the expense of developing these characters (even the sequence where the peasant brothers are mistakenly brought to the castle falls flat on a narrative level, with a ruse about a violin case that feels pretty fatuous). However, there are several witty verbal duals which are smartly executed, and from a technical stand-point the film is keenly-judged--from the locations to the costumes to the music. But once the viewer realizes the movie is just a series of blackout sketches, the trimmings seem rather lofty and the frenzied footwork seems much ado about little. ** from ****

Two sets of twins are mis-matched at birth. One set belongs to a royal family, and one set belongs to a peasant couple. Just as things begin to get interesting for the royal brothers, the peasant brothers trade places with them. The peasant brothers join the revolution while their idiot twins sit around eating and failing to notice the French Revolution which is going on all around them. This work has heart yet never takes itself too seriously, making for a level of enjoyable chaos suitable for an entertaining 91 minutes. Unfortunately, this movie died upon release only to become a Rocky Horror Picture Show of its own among the college crowd.For some reason, this movie reminds me of Cheech and Chong's the Corsican Brothers. I can't help but associate the two, since they do have the same feeling. Gene Wilder turns in his usual wonderful performance and Donald Sutherland actually manages to carry off the comedy. The plot is littered with small holes, but the story is rather irrelevant. This work is more for the comedic effect than anything else, and it holds up well throughout. That having been said, let me also point out that this movie was nominated for best story written for the screen by the Writers Guild.This work is great fun to watch and a MUST SEE for any Gene Wilder fan! He plays two parts and therefore gets loads of screen time.It rates a 7.8/10 from...the Fiend :.

The movie was made in about 1970, so this is an early Wilder vehicle. Also starring Donald Sutherland, it's quite simply both dreadful and technically inept. At about that time, the British movie industry was turning out garbage such as "Holiday on the Buses", Steptoe and Sons" etc, i.e. TV spinoffs. This ranks only slightly above that in terms of production values. All outdoor scenes are looped, and badly looped at that - I wouldn't bet the farm that it was the original actors voicing over. The direction seems to have been minimal, and in some scenes it's painful watching Wilder basically running unchecked - I consider that the director's fault, not Wilder. Sutherland is completely miscast. The usual collection of British bitpart suspects are there, Spinetti, Fowler, etc. Absolutely dire.