Let's be real: Pierre Choderlos de Laclos was a bit of a genius, or at least a master of the "toxic relationship" trope way before it was a TikTok trend. When he wrote his epistolary novel in 1782, he basically handed every future generation of actors the ultimate playground. If you're looking for the cast of Dangerous Liaisons, you’re actually looking for three or four different sets of elite Hollywood royalty, depending on which era of cinematic betrayal you grew up with.
It's a weird thing. Some stories get remade and lose their soul. But this one? It thrives on new faces. Whether it’s the powdered wigs of the 1980s or the sleek Upper East Side penthouses of the late 90s, the core remains the same: two bored aristocrats (or rich kids) playing chess with people’s hearts.
The 1988 Definitive Standard
When most people talk about the cast of Dangerous Liaisons, their minds go straight to 1988. Stephen Frears directed it, and honestly, the casting was insane. You had Glenn Close as the Marquise de Merteuil and John Malkovich as the Vicomte de Valmont.
Malkovich was a choice. Some people thought he wasn't "traditionally" handsome enough for a legendary seducer, but that’s exactly why it worked. He didn't seduce women with his chin; he did it with his voice and that predatory, slow-motion way he moved through a room. Then you have Glenn Close. She didn't just play a villain. She played a woman who had spent her entire life building a suit of armor out of etiquette and lace. That final scene where she wipes off her makeup? Pure cinema.
But look at the supporting players. A very young Michelle Pfeiffer played Madame de Tourvel. She was at the height of her powers here, capturing that agonizing slow-burn descent from piety to total emotional ruin. And then—this is the part people forget—you have a baby-faced Keanu Reeves as the music teacher, Danceny, and an even younger Uma Thurman as Cécile de Volanges. It’s basically a "before they were famous" goldmine.
The Teen Revolution of 1999
If you didn’t grow up in the 80s, you probably know this story as Cruel Intentions. Roger Kumble took the French aristocracy and dropped them into a Manhattan prep school. It shouldn't have worked. It should have been a cheap cash-in on the 90s teen movie craze.
Instead, Sarah Michelle Gellar gave us a career-defining performance as Kathryn Merteuil. Coming off the heels of Buffy, she leaned into the darkness. She was sharp, cruel, and strangely sympathetic. Ryan Phillippe’s Sebastian Valmont was the 90s version of a rake—all smirks and Jaguar roadsters.
✨ Don't miss: Cómo salvar a tu favorito: La verdad sobre la votación de La Casa de los Famosos Colombia
The chemistry between Phillippe and Reese Witherspoon (Madame de Tourvel, rebranded as Annette Hargrove) was palpable, mostly because they were actually falling in love in real life at the time. You can’t fake that kind of tension. Selman Blair’s Cecile (reimagined as Cecile Caldwell) provided the comic relief, but it was still rooted in that same manipulation Laclos wrote about centuries ago.
The 2022 Reimagining and Why Casting Changed
Streaming changed the game. When Starz decided to do a prequel series, the cast of Dangerous Liaisons had to do something different. They couldn't just retread the 1988 movie because you can't out-Malkovich Malkovich.
Alice Englert and Nicholas Denton took on the younger versions of Camille and Pascal. This version focused on the "how" and "why." How does a young woman in the slums of Paris become a Marquise? It was a grittier, dirtier take. It traded some of the wit for survivalism.
We also saw more diversity in the casting, reflecting the actual demographic reality of 18th-century Paris that history books often gloss over. Kosar Ali and Carice van Houten (who we all know as Melisandre from Game of Thrones) added layers of political intrigue that weren't as prominent in the 1988 film. It was less about a bet and more about power as a tool for the disenfranchised.
Why Does This Story Keep Getting Recast?
It's the archetypes. You have the Seducer, the Manipulator, and the Innocent.
Every few years, Hollywood looks at the current crop of "It" actors and realizes they fit these roles. In the late 80s, it was the era of the high-brow theatrical powerhouse. In the 90s, it was the era of the teen idol. Today, it’s about the gritty origin story and deconstructing the patriarchy.
🔗 Read more: Cliff Richard and The Young Ones: The Weirdest Bromance in TV History Explained
- Valmont: Needs to be someone who looks like they have a secret.
- Merteuil: Needs to be the smartest person in any room, but also the most terrified of being found out.
- Tourvel: Needs to represent a morality that feels genuine, not annoying.
The One Nobody Talks About: Valmont (1989)
Technically, there was another movie released right after the 1988 version. It was called Valmont, directed by Miloš Forman. It featured Colin Firth as Valmont and Annette Bening as Merteuil.
Wait. Colin Firth?
Yes. It’s actually a great movie, but it had the misfortune of coming out one year after the Close/Malkovich version. Bening is spectacular—she’s much more playful and "sunnier" than Glenn Close, which makes her cruelty feel even more jarring. Firth is a more traditional "dashing" Valmont. If you’re a completionist, this is the one you’ve gotta find. It’s less "vicious" and more "operatic," but the performances are top-tier.
Spotting the Differences in Character Portrayals
If you watch these back-to-back, the nuances are wild.
In the 1988 film, Merteuil is a tragic figure of her own making. She is a prisoner of her era’s gender roles. When she says, "I was born to dominate your sex and avenge my own," you believe the pain behind it.
Compare that to Sarah Michelle Gellar’s Kathryn. She isn't fighting the patriarchy; she's just bored and privileged. Her weapon isn't social standing—it's reputation. One is about survival in the French court; the other is about surviving high school. Yet, the dialogue translates almost perfectly. That's the power of the source material.
💡 You might also like: Christopher McDonald in Lemonade Mouth: Why This Villain Still Works
Where to Find the Best Versions Today
If you want the definitive experience, go for the 1988 Frears film. It won three Oscars for a reason. The costume design alone is worth the price of admission, but it's the dialogue—adapted by Christopher Hampton from his own play—that really bites.
For a more modern, stylized take, Cruel Intentions is a classic of its genre. It’s flashy, the soundtrack is a 90s time capsule (shout out to "Bittersweet Symphony"), and it’s surprisingly faithful to the plot beats of the original novel.
If you’re interested in the "prequel" vibe, the Starz series (2022) offers a much longer look at the world, though it was canceled after one season, so be prepared for some unresolved threads.
Actionable Next Steps for Fans
If you've just finished one of these versions and you're craving more, here’s how to dive deeper into the world of Valmont and Merteuil:
- Read the Original Novel: It's written entirely in letters. It sounds tedious, but it’s actually like reading someone’s leaked DMs from the 1700s. It’s scandalous and way more explicit than you’d think.
- Compare the "Letter Scene": Watch the scene where Valmont breaks up with Tourvel in the 1988 film ("It’s beyond my control") and then watch the breakup in Cruel Intentions. Seeing how the same emotional beat plays out in different settings is a masterclass in acting.
- Check out the 2003 Miniseries: There is a French-language miniseries starring Catherine Deneuve as Merteuil and Rupert Everett as Valmont. It sets the story in the 1960s. It’s incredibly stylish and offers a European perspective that the Hollywood versions sometimes miss.
- Listen to the Play: Christopher Hampton’s play is the foundation for the best movie versions. If you can find a recording of a stage production (the Donmar Warehouse did a great one with Dominic West and Janet McTeer), listen to it. The rhythm of the insults is much more apparent on stage.
The cast of Dangerous Liaisons will likely continue to grow. There will always be a new generation of actors who want to play these roles because they represent the darkest, most fascinating parts of human desire and social maneuvering. Whether it’s in a corset or a crop top, the games remain the same.