Of course but I had read this information in prologue of the book so I was wondering is it true.
How they determined it I don’t know, I assume by some experts in French literature. The first book was by Victor Igo as I recall. Since Baron is from France I thought he may know more about literary significance of this book.

i've never heard of this book but ill defently look for it next time i go shopping or to the library!

See the movie first then read the book, it’s the best combination, I speak from my own experience.

My favourite book! I've read it after watching the Frears wonderful screen adaptation. I was completely ecstatic! One of the greatest French novels of all time!

Zaista remek-delo knjizevnosti!
Magnificent!

Cruel Intentions was not a very good movie but the set design in the Valmont house was breathtaking and quite accurate from what knowledge I have.

Yes I liked it but the original is always better.

too true, every house was spectacular in the original.

But of course they were French nobles. Why wouldn't they have lovely homes?

OMG your from Calgary too
lol I was going to see the ballet
but I never got the chance

I've bought it!
I'm going to begin it as soon as I finish the book I'm reading!

I loved the 1988 movie and thought it was nearly perfect. The screenplay, sets, actors all fantastic. Only the costumes were a little off. From a line uttered by Mertueil---"the century is drawing to a close," and the fact the book was published in the 1780s, one might infer that the story is set in the later 18th Century, 1770s or 80s (certainly before the Revolution). So the costumes were out of time, being from the 1730s-60s. The hairstyles again were all wrong for the period. (I think the production designer, Stuart Craig based the look of the movie on Broucher or Fragonard paintings, when he should have been looking at Vigee-Lebrun). Otherwise, it was a perfect film adaptation.

There is also a 1989 film version titled "Valmont," starring Colin Firth. If you loved the original, it's interesting to watch this 2nd remake and compare the two.

Cruel Intentions is blatantly a modern version of the same story. I think it even says so in the credits.

Cruel Intentions is based on Dangerous Liaisons.

You make some very interesting points, dear Christophe. I prefer "Valmont" and I am not entirely sure why. I think I actually prefer the actors (Colin Firth and Annette Bening) and found the costumes, hair and setting rather good. It feels less melodramatic, even a bit dreamy and well acted. I recommend people compare the two as well.

I agree, the costumes are very out of time ... I wonder if it really is a mistake or whether it is intentional. In the movie, there's merely one allusion at the time period (Merteuil whispering to Valmont that they're already at the end of the century). Thus, the action seems to be timeless, and the costumes, as you said, reminisce of painters such as Boucher or Fragonard, that embody, in a way, the XVIII century libertinage. Louis XVI era is more linked with pre-romantism and political events and less with this certain "légerté" that is typical of the early XVIII century.

"Valmont" is a very free adaptation, but I enjoyed it. That's said, the book was meant to be a denonciation of the French nobilty's depravation (even if one might be skeptical about the author's sincerity, or at leat, the way he achieved his goal ...). The movie "Valmont" is merely a pleasant story about the libertinage during the French XVIII century.

Has anyone seen Vadim's version, starring Jeanne Moreau as Merteuil ? Like "sex intentions", which I haven't seen, it unfolds nowadays (well, actually, in the 60's). Moreau is wonderful, as usual, but she outshines the other actors, even Gérard Philippe, who isn't that great. Madame de Tourvel is a total disaster. What's more, the plot does not suit with the time period ... But it's always interesting, if you liked 1988 movie to compare it with the various versions that exist.