Ma's View:
Set in a remote part of the Arctic Circle, the story traces the tensions that arise between 2 men, who man a Russian weather station, Sergei (Sergei Puskepalis), the old hand and Pasha (Grigory Dobrygin), the young college kid just working there as a summer job. The third and most powerful protagonist in the drama is nature itself - the immense and desolate landscape, the unpredictable weather and the ever present threat of polar bear attack. Throw into the mix a deteriorating nuclear power generator and it is enough to send the sanest person crazy! Sergei is used to it and gets on with the job but he makes no allowance for his young companion's lack of experience and need of support. No trust develops between the two, so that when bad news of Sergei's family arrives while he is off on a fishing jaunt, Pasha is fearful of telling him.
This is a long film, 124 minutes, allowing the isolation, boredom and the oppressiveness of the landscape to seep into the viewer's very soul through the superb cinematography and sound track of Director Aleksei Popogrebsky. Meanwhile the tension builds between the 2 mismatched men and a battle for survival ensues. The silent, stoic Sergei could be said to represent the old Russia, while Pasha, with his mastery of and yet dependence upon technology, represents the new, less resilient Russia. Leave that aside, this is a typically Russian movie, with deep undercurrents of emotion and a bleak outcome - it reduces man to a mere spot on the landscape, a creature whose life and loves are of no consequence whatsoever.
A movie not for the faint-hearted!
My score: 7.5/10
Pepe's View:
Ma had just given a wonderful description of this movie. I am not quite so rapturous however, as for me it was far too long. The cinematography and wide shots of the tiny settlement consisting of one house set in the midst of a wasteland was repeated just too many times for me. I got the idea after the second shot. It does show how nature is far more powerful than man and that our hold on this earth is transitory at best and for this and the cinematography I enjoyed the film The story however, did not grab me and I began to wish that the ship would hurry up and arrive so I could also leave this interminable experience.
My Score: 6.5/10
POTICHE
Pepe's View:
Based on a stage play by Pierre Barillet and Jean-Pierre Gredy, Potiche (Trophy Wife) is a French Farce in the great French Farce style, albeit set beautifully in the 70's. None of the characters really take themselves too seriously and although most of the subject matter deals with serious themes such as Women's Liberation, Exploitation of Workers, I found myself chuckling along with the absurdity of the situations and characters.
Catherine Deneuve once again is wonderful as the wife (Suzanne) of a chauvanistic, ruthless, although slightly ineffectual, CEO of an umbrella factory (Robert). An umbrella factory which was originally owned and run by Deneuve's father!
Deneuve is pampered and treated as nothing more than a plaything by her husband played brilliantly by Fabrice Luchini who objects if his trophy wife expresses any opinion. Their son, who, it turns out, is not really fathered by Robert is a leftie and interested in fashion and art as well. Their daughter is a chip off the old block and although none too bright (she is a woman after all) sides with her father when the crunch comes because she sees this as a way to keep her own husband from travelling away from the family.
One of my favourite scenes is after Suzanne takes over the factory while Robert recovered from a heart attack, she informs him on his return that he is no longer needed and that she has installed a TV in his bedroom so he can watch it during the day - he in effect has become Potiche.
Throw Gerard Depardieu into the mix as having a brief affair with Suzanne in the past and who is still madly in love with her, as a leftie politician and the mayor of the town and the scene is set for mayhem.
Great cinematography, beautiful design and superb acting makes this farce a delight.
My Score: 8/10
Ma's View:
Yes this is a lovely movie not to be taken too seriously - in fact, I thought for a while they were sending themselves up a little and still suspect so. These 2 iconic French film stars are cast in roles perfect for them - Depardieu as the rough diamond union activist and Deneuve the refined and lovely bourgeous trophy wife of the chauvinistic industrialist, portrayed by Fabrice Luchini with delightful petulance at times. Deneuve, in her late sixties, could pass for at least 10 years younger while time has not been quite as kind to Depardieu.
The costume department has been given full reign to create some of the more garish ensembles and hair styles of the era and the sound department has supplied very appropriate background music. Director, Francois Ozon, has re-examined the women's lib pre-occupations of the era with a deft and amusing touch. It's an improbable plot about somewhat caricatured characters but you are bound to come away with a smile on your face if only because of the absurdity of it all!
My score: 7.5/10
Based on a stage play by Pierre Barillet and Jean-Pierre Gredy, Potiche (Trophy Wife) is a French Farce in the great French Farce style, albeit set beautifully in the 70's. None of the characters really take themselves too seriously and although most of the subject matter deals with serious themes such as Women's Liberation, Exploitation of Workers, I found myself chuckling along with the absurdity of the situations and characters.
Catherine Deneuve once again is wonderful as the wife (Suzanne) of a chauvanistic, ruthless, although slightly ineffectual, CEO of an umbrella factory (Robert). An umbrella factory which was originally owned and run by Deneuve's father!
Deneuve is pampered and treated as nothing more than a plaything by her husband played brilliantly by Fabrice Luchini who objects if his trophy wife expresses any opinion. Their son, who, it turns out, is not really fathered by Robert is a leftie and interested in fashion and art as well. Their daughter is a chip off the old block and although none too bright (she is a woman after all) sides with her father when the crunch comes because she sees this as a way to keep her own husband from travelling away from the family.
One of my favourite scenes is after Suzanne takes over the factory while Robert recovered from a heart attack, she informs him on his return that he is no longer needed and that she has installed a TV in his bedroom so he can watch it during the day - he in effect has become Potiche.
Throw Gerard Depardieu into the mix as having a brief affair with Suzanne in the past and who is still madly in love with her, as a leftie politician and the mayor of the town and the scene is set for mayhem.
Great cinematography, beautiful design and superb acting makes this farce a delight.
My Score: 8/10
Ma's View:
Yes this is a lovely movie not to be taken too seriously - in fact, I thought for a while they were sending themselves up a little and still suspect so. These 2 iconic French film stars are cast in roles perfect for them - Depardieu as the rough diamond union activist and Deneuve the refined and lovely bourgeous trophy wife of the chauvinistic industrialist, portrayed by Fabrice Luchini with delightful petulance at times. Deneuve, in her late sixties, could pass for at least 10 years younger while time has not been quite as kind to Depardieu.
The costume department has been given full reign to create some of the more garish ensembles and hair styles of the era and the sound department has supplied very appropriate background music. Director, Francois Ozon, has re-examined the women's lib pre-occupations of the era with a deft and amusing touch. It's an improbable plot about somewhat caricatured characters but you are bound to come away with a smile on your face if only because of the absurdity of it all!
My score: 7.5/10
THE ROUND-UP
Ma's View:
This is a harrowing true story of the round-up of civilian Jews by French police which took place in Paris in summer 1942 during the German occupation and which resulted in the extermination of 13,000 men, women and children at Auschwitz. There would have been more because the French authorities, in full co-operation with the Germans, had used their records to locate 24,000 and were disappointed that they fell short of that number - due in part to the efforts of French citizens who hid and aided the remainder to escape. Many of these people were refugees who had taken shelter in France to escape the same fate elsewhere in Europe; their poignant faith that the French government would protect them is heart-rending.
We follow the story of Joseph and his friends as their families are first held in the Velodrome d'Hiver with no water or toilet facilities in the summer heat, then moved to a transit camp and literally torn apart - first the men, then the mothers, then the children are sent off on trains. Veteran French actor, Jean Reno, plays a Jewish doctor who does what he can to alleviate the suffering, aided by a French nurse (Melanie Laurent) who herself starves on the rations allocated to her charges in order to prove to authorities that they were inadequate. Most of these characters really existed and Joseph excaped to tell the tale. He is interviewed at the end of the movie alongside the young actor who very ably played the role.
This is a very powerful and moving tale only a little spoiled by the "happy" ending - I guess they were trying to lighten it up a little.
My score: 8/10
Pepe's View:
This is indeed a gripping and not very pretty film. It is amazing that so little has been revealed of this shameful event in France's history and in the last 6 months this is the second film we have seen covering the same topic. Sarah's Key is the other.
The film is made all the more harrowing and tragic as most of the people in the film actually existed and the surviving boy who escaped actually has a small part in the film as an old man. We saw a clip online of this survivor discussing the film and the events with the director (Roselyne Bosch) and the young actor who depicted him in the movie.
Brilliant reenactment and carefull recreation of the events in 1942 made all the more chilling by the depiction of actual families - a great film which unfortunatley is spoilt a little by the romanticised ending.
My Score: 8.5/10
This is a harrowing true story of the round-up of civilian Jews by French police which took place in Paris in summer 1942 during the German occupation and which resulted in the extermination of 13,000 men, women and children at Auschwitz. There would have been more because the French authorities, in full co-operation with the Germans, had used their records to locate 24,000 and were disappointed that they fell short of that number - due in part to the efforts of French citizens who hid and aided the remainder to escape. Many of these people were refugees who had taken shelter in France to escape the same fate elsewhere in Europe; their poignant faith that the French government would protect them is heart-rending.
We follow the story of Joseph and his friends as their families are first held in the Velodrome d'Hiver with no water or toilet facilities in the summer heat, then moved to a transit camp and literally torn apart - first the men, then the mothers, then the children are sent off on trains. Veteran French actor, Jean Reno, plays a Jewish doctor who does what he can to alleviate the suffering, aided by a French nurse (Melanie Laurent) who herself starves on the rations allocated to her charges in order to prove to authorities that they were inadequate. Most of these characters really existed and Joseph excaped to tell the tale. He is interviewed at the end of the movie alongside the young actor who very ably played the role.
This is a very powerful and moving tale only a little spoiled by the "happy" ending - I guess they were trying to lighten it up a little.
My score: 8/10
Pepe's View:
This is indeed a gripping and not very pretty film. It is amazing that so little has been revealed of this shameful event in France's history and in the last 6 months this is the second film we have seen covering the same topic. Sarah's Key is the other.
The film is made all the more harrowing and tragic as most of the people in the film actually existed and the surviving boy who escaped actually has a small part in the film as an old man. We saw a clip online of this survivor discussing the film and the events with the director (Roselyne Bosch) and the young actor who depicted him in the movie.
Brilliant reenactment and carefull recreation of the events in 1942 made all the more chilling by the depiction of actual families - a great film which unfortunatley is spoilt a little by the romanticised ending.
My Score: 8.5/10
NEVER LET ME GO
Pepe's View:
Taken from a science fiction novel by Kazou Ishigwo, this movie directed by Mark Romanek, requires the viewer to go with the flow and not apply too much logic to the underlying premise. We are asked to accept that history has been rewritten and that in 1953, life expectancy in England has been extended by using clones whose organs are harvested. Isn't that a bit of a cheat? - To set a science fiction story in the immediate past means minimum research re history or imagination re a futuristic world!
We are introduced to the 3 protaganists Cathy, Tommy and Ruth as children in a "public school" from which there is no escape and which is ruled with a rod of iron to ensure that the children remain healthy and that nothing of the outside world intrudes. We gradually come to realise the premise of he film as we follow the 3 friends to the next stage of their growth in "The Cottages". Here we are introduced to the adult versions played by Carey Mulligan, Andrew Garfield and Kiera Knightly respectively.
Although they are protected from the outside world, they do watch videos, listen to current music and indulge in sex - presumably even clones have natural sexual urges?
This movie had me asking questions all the time - it did not manage to suspend my disbelief as is required of films of the genre - and left me thoroughly annoyed.
It transpires that these human sacrifices can extend their life by a few years by becoming a carer (someone who looks after the patients between organ donations). Nothing was shown of the recipients of any of the organs and thus the ethical dilemma of who is most worthy of life was conveniently sidestepped. In fact all ethical dilemmas were ignored so the movie became little more than a love triangle between Tommy and the two girls.
The ending, which has Cathy watching an idyllic country scene at sunset and having her voice over tell us the theme of the movie - in essence no one ever has enough time even though we don't take advantage of the time we have - was the ultimate in lazy filmmaking.
Perhaps it would have saved a lot of time if she had done that an hour earlier!
My Score: 5/10
Ma's View:
This overly long movie was basically a love story made more poignant by the fact that the time these young people shared was to be cut short by their awful fate - as repeat organ donors until their bodies (or spirit) gave out. Setting aside the horror factor of this science fiction "world gone mad" premise, powerful as that is, there is not enough depth to the movie. The authorities claim to have solved the ethics of the practice, they claim to have ruled out the possibility that these clones have a soul but their is no explanation or examination of these aspects. Neither is there any parallel drawn between them and the recipients of the body parts - who qualifies for these? do they have to prove they have a soul? do they have any qualms about it? Other questions come to mind - why are the clones so passive? are there none who try to run away or commit suicide or try other means of avoiding their fate? We need to know how they were being controlled.
As far as the acting goes, Andrew Garfield was the most believable of the 3 young protagonists. Kiera Knightly was as always and Carey Mulligan seems to have been chosen for the part because her standard facial expression is such that she seems always on the point of bursting into tears. Thank god for Charlotte Rampling bringing some quality acting to the screen.
Disappointing!
My score: 5.5/10
Taken from a science fiction novel by Kazou Ishigwo, this movie directed by Mark Romanek, requires the viewer to go with the flow and not apply too much logic to the underlying premise. We are asked to accept that history has been rewritten and that in 1953, life expectancy in England has been extended by using clones whose organs are harvested. Isn't that a bit of a cheat? - To set a science fiction story in the immediate past means minimum research re history or imagination re a futuristic world!
We are introduced to the 3 protaganists Cathy, Tommy and Ruth as children in a "public school" from which there is no escape and which is ruled with a rod of iron to ensure that the children remain healthy and that nothing of the outside world intrudes. We gradually come to realise the premise of he film as we follow the 3 friends to the next stage of their growth in "The Cottages". Here we are introduced to the adult versions played by Carey Mulligan, Andrew Garfield and Kiera Knightly respectively.
Although they are protected from the outside world, they do watch videos, listen to current music and indulge in sex - presumably even clones have natural sexual urges?
This movie had me asking questions all the time - it did not manage to suspend my disbelief as is required of films of the genre - and left me thoroughly annoyed.
It transpires that these human sacrifices can extend their life by a few years by becoming a carer (someone who looks after the patients between organ donations). Nothing was shown of the recipients of any of the organs and thus the ethical dilemma of who is most worthy of life was conveniently sidestepped. In fact all ethical dilemmas were ignored so the movie became little more than a love triangle between Tommy and the two girls.
The ending, which has Cathy watching an idyllic country scene at sunset and having her voice over tell us the theme of the movie - in essence no one ever has enough time even though we don't take advantage of the time we have - was the ultimate in lazy filmmaking.
Perhaps it would have saved a lot of time if she had done that an hour earlier!
My Score: 5/10
Ma's View:
This overly long movie was basically a love story made more poignant by the fact that the time these young people shared was to be cut short by their awful fate - as repeat organ donors until their bodies (or spirit) gave out. Setting aside the horror factor of this science fiction "world gone mad" premise, powerful as that is, there is not enough depth to the movie. The authorities claim to have solved the ethics of the practice, they claim to have ruled out the possibility that these clones have a soul but their is no explanation or examination of these aspects. Neither is there any parallel drawn between them and the recipients of the body parts - who qualifies for these? do they have to prove they have a soul? do they have any qualms about it? Other questions come to mind - why are the clones so passive? are there none who try to run away or commit suicide or try other means of avoiding their fate? We need to know how they were being controlled.
As far as the acting goes, Andrew Garfield was the most believable of the 3 young protagonists. Kiera Knightly was as always and Carey Mulligan seems to have been chosen for the part because her standard facial expression is such that she seems always on the point of bursting into tears. Thank god for Charlotte Rampling bringing some quality acting to the screen.
Disappointing!
My score: 5.5/10
LOVE CRIME
Ma's View:
We've been fans of Kristen Scott-Thomas for a while now and can't say we have ever been disappointed by her performance, no matter what the quality of the film. In this case, the film and her co-star, Ludivine Sagnier easily lived up to our expectations. If anything Sagnier, the younger actress, outdoes her rival, depicting such an array of emotions as her naive devotion to her boss is transformed step by step into disillusionment, determination and finally implacable hatred.
While the subject matter is somewhat light weight - 2 high ranking female executives in a power struggle that ends in a crime - the plot has enough twists and turns and the acting is so excellent as to totally absorb the audience to the last minute. Our audience spontaneously clapped at the end - a good sign! Director, Alain Corneau, who passed away before the film's release, would be well-satisfied with its reception. Although there are just a few little holes in the plot which occur to one after reflection, I have to give it a good score for sheer entertainment value.
My score: 8.5/10
Pepe's View:
Great entertainment and very little more sums up this film completely. The acting is fantastic, the direction taut and develops just the right amount of tension while allowing us to really care about the characters.
I particlarly enjoyed the implication at the end that the new "boss" Isabelle, played superbly by Ludivine Sagnier, will have to watch her back as her young eager male assistant knows a little too much about the crime. The cycle of revenge, intrigue and ambition is set to be repeated.
Kristen Scott Thomas as the senior executive Christine who uses her young protegee once too often as she ruthlessly maintains power is as always superb. The crime, which I won't reveal as it would be a spoiler, and the way it is cleverly covered up and the innocent party is implicated, creates riveting entertainment as it is so well handled.
My Score: 8/10
We've been fans of Kristen Scott-Thomas for a while now and can't say we have ever been disappointed by her performance, no matter what the quality of the film. In this case, the film and her co-star, Ludivine Sagnier easily lived up to our expectations. If anything Sagnier, the younger actress, outdoes her rival, depicting such an array of emotions as her naive devotion to her boss is transformed step by step into disillusionment, determination and finally implacable hatred.
While the subject matter is somewhat light weight - 2 high ranking female executives in a power struggle that ends in a crime - the plot has enough twists and turns and the acting is so excellent as to totally absorb the audience to the last minute. Our audience spontaneously clapped at the end - a good sign! Director, Alain Corneau, who passed away before the film's release, would be well-satisfied with its reception. Although there are just a few little holes in the plot which occur to one after reflection, I have to give it a good score for sheer entertainment value.
My score: 8.5/10
Pepe's View:
Great entertainment and very little more sums up this film completely. The acting is fantastic, the direction taut and develops just the right amount of tension while allowing us to really care about the characters.
I particlarly enjoyed the implication at the end that the new "boss" Isabelle, played superbly by Ludivine Sagnier, will have to watch her back as her young eager male assistant knows a little too much about the crime. The cycle of revenge, intrigue and ambition is set to be repeated.
Kristen Scott Thomas as the senior executive Christine who uses her young protegee once too often as she ruthlessly maintains power is as always superb. The crime, which I won't reveal as it would be a spoiler, and the way it is cleverly covered up and the innocent party is implicated, creates riveting entertainment as it is so well handled.
My Score: 8/10
AN ORDINARY EXECUTION
Pepe's View:
A film based on the last days of Stalin was difficult to pass up so it became another of our French Film Festival selections.
Marc Duigan directed this movie based on his own novel and managed to imbue the film with incredible tension. Anna, a young, beautiful and talented doctor who is happily married has a rumoured secret gift of healing using her hands. This makes her immensely popular with her patients and arouses jealousy in her colleagues.
When Anna is summoned by Stalin himself and told to use her powers to ease his suffering because all his previous doctors had been thrown into prison, she is drawn into his world and we see some of his sinister thought processes. Anna is played beautifully by Marina Hands and Stalin is played wonderfully by Andre Dussollier so that we actually feel some sense of empathy with him while recoiling from his ruthlessness and callousness.
Anna, at Stalin's "suggestion" as to how keep their healing sessions secret, agrees to leave her husband although she is not sure where she wil live. Stalin using a peculiar logic tells Anna that he is unable to provide her with an apartment as that would be using his position to provide advantage for friends and so he would be corrupt. He has an easier solution - have the husband arrested so Anna can continue to live in their appartment.
The tension developed as Anna is continually summoned to Stalin's chambers knowing that at any time and for any reason she could herself be imprisoned or worse gives a wonderful snapshot of the fear, mistrust and evil of Stalin's regime.
This is a great movie which left me stunned.
My Score: 8.5/10
Ma's View:
Yes, at any moment you felt that Stalin could extinguish her life just as readily as he would crush a cockroach - the moment she could no longer relieve his pain would be her last. Marina Hands captures perfectly the anguish of a loving wife forced to pretend to her husband that she is having an affair with a 'high official' in order to protect him, then hearing Stalin read aloud the report on his torture which revealed that indeed he knew nothing. The atmosphere of tension and suspicion in the whole society is vividly depicted - in her workplace, she is threatened with reports and blackmailed for sexual favours; in her apartment building, neighbours threaten to report the noises of physical pleasure coming from her apartment as she and her husband try to conceive a child. What an incredibly stressful life - no wonder she could not conceive.
A great movie, extremely well done.
My score: 9/10
A film based on the last days of Stalin was difficult to pass up so it became another of our French Film Festival selections.
Marc Duigan directed this movie based on his own novel and managed to imbue the film with incredible tension. Anna, a young, beautiful and talented doctor who is happily married has a rumoured secret gift of healing using her hands. This makes her immensely popular with her patients and arouses jealousy in her colleagues.
When Anna is summoned by Stalin himself and told to use her powers to ease his suffering because all his previous doctors had been thrown into prison, she is drawn into his world and we see some of his sinister thought processes. Anna is played beautifully by Marina Hands and Stalin is played wonderfully by Andre Dussollier so that we actually feel some sense of empathy with him while recoiling from his ruthlessness and callousness.
Anna, at Stalin's "suggestion" as to how keep their healing sessions secret, agrees to leave her husband although she is not sure where she wil live. Stalin using a peculiar logic tells Anna that he is unable to provide her with an apartment as that would be using his position to provide advantage for friends and so he would be corrupt. He has an easier solution - have the husband arrested so Anna can continue to live in their appartment.
The tension developed as Anna is continually summoned to Stalin's chambers knowing that at any time and for any reason she could herself be imprisoned or worse gives a wonderful snapshot of the fear, mistrust and evil of Stalin's regime.
This is a great movie which left me stunned.
My Score: 8.5/10
Ma's View:
Yes, at any moment you felt that Stalin could extinguish her life just as readily as he would crush a cockroach - the moment she could no longer relieve his pain would be her last. Marina Hands captures perfectly the anguish of a loving wife forced to pretend to her husband that she is having an affair with a 'high official' in order to protect him, then hearing Stalin read aloud the report on his torture which revealed that indeed he knew nothing. The atmosphere of tension and suspicion in the whole society is vividly depicted - in her workplace, she is threatened with reports and blackmailed for sexual favours; in her apartment building, neighbours threaten to report the noises of physical pleasure coming from her apartment as she and her husband try to conceive a child. What an incredibly stressful life - no wonder she could not conceive.
A great movie, extremely well done.
My score: 9/10
SPECIAL TREATMENT
Pepe's View:
We chose this movie from the wonderful films showing as part of this year's French Film Festival for one reason - Isabelle Huppert. Isabelle Huppert is Alice, a high class prostitute who role plays and adopts a persona according to the fantasies of her clients. When beginning a "session" which always comprises 10 "treatments", Alice discusses dispassionately with the client what their needs are and what role she will be required to play and therefore what the fees will be.
However, she is tired of her life and professional calling and seeks psychiatric help.
The director/writer Jeanne Labrune then leads us on an exploration of the similarities between the two professions - both dispassionately deal with clients, negotiate fees, have a minimum number of sessions, offer "therapy" and solace to their clients and so on.
However, this is not very subtly handled - more labouring the point actually.
One of the psychiatrists, Xavier, played by Bouli Lanners is also tired of his profession and when his marriage starts to fall apart he tentatively investigates the services offered by Alice. She tries numerous characterisations with him to no avail until one character reminds him of his wife and he realises he is still in love with her and should try to mend his marriage. This parallels a scene where he provides great solace to one of his patients without actually saying or doing anything - Alice similarly does nothing for him sexually and almost accidently makes him realise the solution to his unhappiness.
This is an interesting film - one that is none too subtle and we never really feel great sympathy for the two leads.
Huppert is as usual first class but this is really a film that left me unsatisfied.
My Score: 7/10
Ma's View:
Yes, spot on Pepe but I liked the parallels between the two professions and the way both the psychiatrists and the prostitute were so business like with their clients and both so intent on plowing their money into antiques. It was interesting to see the psychiatrist with a problem of his own and I was expecting Alice to show herself to be better adjusted to reality than he was. I'm so glad that they did not have her "find herself" by helping out the "good" doctor who really was too saintly to be real but the happy ending did not really gel with the rest of it anyway. A very interesting movie, very well acted and filmed but a storyline that was strangely unsatisfying.
My score 6.5/10
We chose this movie from the wonderful films showing as part of this year's French Film Festival for one reason - Isabelle Huppert. Isabelle Huppert is Alice, a high class prostitute who role plays and adopts a persona according to the fantasies of her clients. When beginning a "session" which always comprises 10 "treatments", Alice discusses dispassionately with the client what their needs are and what role she will be required to play and therefore what the fees will be.
However, she is tired of her life and professional calling and seeks psychiatric help.
The director/writer Jeanne Labrune then leads us on an exploration of the similarities between the two professions - both dispassionately deal with clients, negotiate fees, have a minimum number of sessions, offer "therapy" and solace to their clients and so on.
However, this is not very subtly handled - more labouring the point actually.
One of the psychiatrists, Xavier, played by Bouli Lanners is also tired of his profession and when his marriage starts to fall apart he tentatively investigates the services offered by Alice. She tries numerous characterisations with him to no avail until one character reminds him of his wife and he realises he is still in love with her and should try to mend his marriage. This parallels a scene where he provides great solace to one of his patients without actually saying or doing anything - Alice similarly does nothing for him sexually and almost accidently makes him realise the solution to his unhappiness.
This is an interesting film - one that is none too subtle and we never really feel great sympathy for the two leads.
Huppert is as usual first class but this is really a film that left me unsatisfied.
My Score: 7/10
Ma's View:
Yes, spot on Pepe but I liked the parallels between the two professions and the way both the psychiatrists and the prostitute were so business like with their clients and both so intent on plowing their money into antiques. It was interesting to see the psychiatrist with a problem of his own and I was expecting Alice to show herself to be better adjusted to reality than he was. I'm so glad that they did not have her "find herself" by helping out the "good" doctor who really was too saintly to be real but the happy ending did not really gel with the rest of it anyway. A very interesting movie, very well acted and filmed but a storyline that was strangely unsatisfying.
My score 6.5/10
MY AFTERNOONS WITH MARGUERITTE
Ma's View:
Pepe didn't see this one due to a hockey meeting - and he missed a beauty!
This is a delightful story of Margueritte (with 2 t's because her father couldn't spell), a 95 yo lady who shares her passion for literature with an illiterate odd-job man, Germain, a gentle giant whose childhood bereft of affection has not taken from him his love of humanity. Gerard Depardieu is tailor made for the role, immediately winning our empathy and affection with his bumbling attempts to help, console, or cheer up his friends who for the most part make fun of him. Flashbacks to his childhood show that it has always been so - he bears the brunt of his single mother's resentment, his teacher's mockery and his fellow students' jokes. The one bright spot in his life is his girlfriend, Annette, who loves and accepts him just as he is; she wants to start a family with him but he feels himself unworthy to be a father, probably due to never have known his father, nor experienced a loving parent-child relationship with his mother.
Germain leads a simple life, growing vegies, doing odd jobs, going to the pub, taking care of his mother (even though she upbraids hims still!) and passing his afternoons in the park where he is on first name terms with the 19 pidgeons. It is here he meets Margueritte, played by 96yo Gisele Casadesus, with the consummate ease of the veteran actress that she is. Margueritte is an elderly lady whose work as a scientist has taken her all over the world and as she shares her love of literature with Germain, his vision and understanding of the world begins to expand as does his confidence and belief in his own worth.
The only fault I could find in this movie is the age difference between Germain and Annette - she seemed far too young for me to believe she would be madly in love with this fat, balding 50 something labourer - and Departdieu actually looks older than that. She looked no more than 25.
Nevertheless, this is a truly delightful, heartwarming story.
My score: 8.5/10
Pepe'sView:
I finally caught up with this movie on 25 April and I am so pleased I did. This is a wonderful gentle loving movie. The director, Jean Becker, has imbued every scene with incredible tenderness that the beauty and gentleness pours from the screen enveloping the cinema. There is not a scene in this movie that jars and the performance of Gerard Depardieu is absolutely wonderful. Margueritte is also perfect in the role and given her age is a living treasure.
The story follows Germain as he is the brunt of jokes by almost everyone in the town until he meets Margueritte in the park and she begins to share her ove of literature and wisdom with him. Although he cannot read himself he is able to visualise the scenes in the novels being read to him. His mother treats him woefully and his girlfriend who loves him wants him to father her child but at the beginning of the film he is afraid because he is unsure what sort of a father he would make. By the end of the film, he has been given confidence and been shown respect by Margueritte and increasingly by his friends so that he is excited when he is told that he is to be a father.
Yes, this is a feel good movie - but one with such class and sensitivity that I am happy to admit that I left the theatre with a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye.
My Score: 9/10
Pepe didn't see this one due to a hockey meeting - and he missed a beauty!
This is a delightful story of Margueritte (with 2 t's because her father couldn't spell), a 95 yo lady who shares her passion for literature with an illiterate odd-job man, Germain, a gentle giant whose childhood bereft of affection has not taken from him his love of humanity. Gerard Depardieu is tailor made for the role, immediately winning our empathy and affection with his bumbling attempts to help, console, or cheer up his friends who for the most part make fun of him. Flashbacks to his childhood show that it has always been so - he bears the brunt of his single mother's resentment, his teacher's mockery and his fellow students' jokes. The one bright spot in his life is his girlfriend, Annette, who loves and accepts him just as he is; she wants to start a family with him but he feels himself unworthy to be a father, probably due to never have known his father, nor experienced a loving parent-child relationship with his mother.
Germain leads a simple life, growing vegies, doing odd jobs, going to the pub, taking care of his mother (even though she upbraids hims still!) and passing his afternoons in the park where he is on first name terms with the 19 pidgeons. It is here he meets Margueritte, played by 96yo Gisele Casadesus, with the consummate ease of the veteran actress that she is. Margueritte is an elderly lady whose work as a scientist has taken her all over the world and as she shares her love of literature with Germain, his vision and understanding of the world begins to expand as does his confidence and belief in his own worth.
The only fault I could find in this movie is the age difference between Germain and Annette - she seemed far too young for me to believe she would be madly in love with this fat, balding 50 something labourer - and Departdieu actually looks older than that. She looked no more than 25.
Nevertheless, this is a truly delightful, heartwarming story.
My score: 8.5/10
Pepe'sView:
I finally caught up with this movie on 25 April and I am so pleased I did. This is a wonderful gentle loving movie. The director, Jean Becker, has imbued every scene with incredible tenderness that the beauty and gentleness pours from the screen enveloping the cinema. There is not a scene in this movie that jars and the performance of Gerard Depardieu is absolutely wonderful. Margueritte is also perfect in the role and given her age is a living treasure.
The story follows Germain as he is the brunt of jokes by almost everyone in the town until he meets Margueritte in the park and she begins to share her ove of literature and wisdom with him. Although he cannot read himself he is able to visualise the scenes in the novels being read to him. His mother treats him woefully and his girlfriend who loves him wants him to father her child but at the beginning of the film he is afraid because he is unsure what sort of a father he would make. By the end of the film, he has been given confidence and been shown respect by Margueritte and increasingly by his friends so that he is excited when he is told that he is to be a father.
Yes, this is a feel good movie - but one with such class and sensitivity that I am happy to admit that I left the theatre with a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye.
My Score: 9/10
THE AGE OF REASON
Pepe's View:
Sophie Marceau as Margaret, portrays a high powered executive who is turning 40 and totally focussed on her professional life and lover. When a notary from her childhood village turns up at the office with a bundle of letters, she is perplexed and annoyed at this interruption to her schedule. The letters turn out to be written by Margaret herself at the age of 7 (the age of reason) and given to the notary with instructions to deliver them to her 40 year old self.
The letters confront Margaret with her provincial childhood which she had tried to hide from her present role, even assuming a completely different history and name and they reveal all her hopes, dreams and aspirations for the future.
Directed by Yann Samuell, this film had so much promise and is directed with great skill - the scenes of the past are interwoven beautifully - but unfortunately it seemed to slide into romantic idealism. The scenes where she relives her love of her childhood and in particular her love for her childhood sweetheart, while lovely, dwell far too much on the romantic. The letters keep coming and eventually she contacts her childhood sweetheart and invites him to meet her in a tourist cave to see if their love could be reignited.
It seemed to me that the premise is that we all have childhood dreams of what life will be like, and what we will achieve with our lives but the reality is very different for most of us. This idea was worth exploring but unfortunately the movie seemed to be afraid to confront this real issue. The ending of the movie was particularly disappointing in that, after Margaret had rejected her boss and her lover for all they stand for professionally, she is then miraculously reunited with her lover and they, it would seem, live happily ever after, Margaret using her skills to help underprivileged children while her lover continued his high powered career.
A movie that promised so much but delivered so little due to a confusion of themes.
My Score: 7/10
Ma's view:
I would have to agree. Sophie Marceau is gorgeous but a little one-dimensional and her English lover a little bit the same. The concept certainly had potential - how can we be true to our best selves in this cut-throat commercial world? Unfortunately, the letters from the 7 yo Sophie were somewhat unrealistic both in content and presentation i.e. it was hard to accept they could be written by a 7yo. On the positive side, they did evoke some lovely scenes from a childhood when all dreams seemed possible of fulfulment and it was heartwarming both for her and the viewers to discover that her childhood friend had stood firm in his values and pursued his dreams. The ending tried to have a bet both ways and would have been more satisfying and more French had she walked away from her current relationship as she did from her job to become the person her 7yo self had imagined she could become.
My score: 7/10
Sophie Marceau as Margaret, portrays a high powered executive who is turning 40 and totally focussed on her professional life and lover. When a notary from her childhood village turns up at the office with a bundle of letters, she is perplexed and annoyed at this interruption to her schedule. The letters turn out to be written by Margaret herself at the age of 7 (the age of reason) and given to the notary with instructions to deliver them to her 40 year old self.
The letters confront Margaret with her provincial childhood which she had tried to hide from her present role, even assuming a completely different history and name and they reveal all her hopes, dreams and aspirations for the future.
Directed by Yann Samuell, this film had so much promise and is directed with great skill - the scenes of the past are interwoven beautifully - but unfortunately it seemed to slide into romantic idealism. The scenes where she relives her love of her childhood and in particular her love for her childhood sweetheart, while lovely, dwell far too much on the romantic. The letters keep coming and eventually she contacts her childhood sweetheart and invites him to meet her in a tourist cave to see if their love could be reignited.
It seemed to me that the premise is that we all have childhood dreams of what life will be like, and what we will achieve with our lives but the reality is very different for most of us. This idea was worth exploring but unfortunately the movie seemed to be afraid to confront this real issue. The ending of the movie was particularly disappointing in that, after Margaret had rejected her boss and her lover for all they stand for professionally, she is then miraculously reunited with her lover and they, it would seem, live happily ever after, Margaret using her skills to help underprivileged children while her lover continued his high powered career.
A movie that promised so much but delivered so little due to a confusion of themes.
My Score: 7/10
Ma's view:
I would have to agree. Sophie Marceau is gorgeous but a little one-dimensional and her English lover a little bit the same. The concept certainly had potential - how can we be true to our best selves in this cut-throat commercial world? Unfortunately, the letters from the 7 yo Sophie were somewhat unrealistic both in content and presentation i.e. it was hard to accept they could be written by a 7yo. On the positive side, they did evoke some lovely scenes from a childhood when all dreams seemed possible of fulfulment and it was heartwarming both for her and the viewers to discover that her childhood friend had stood firm in his values and pursued his dreams. The ending tried to have a bet both ways and would have been more satisfying and more French had she walked away from her current relationship as she did from her job to become the person her 7yo self had imagined she could become.
My score: 7/10
PRINCESS OF MONTPENSIER
Ma's View:
We were very excited to be going to see a French period drama since we love such things in English so we were a not a little disappointed by this overly long and not very interesting love story set in 1562 during the wars of religion between Catholics and Protestants. Directed by Bertrand Tavernier and based on a novella (i.e. short novel!) by Madame de Lafayette, the movie tells the story of a young noblewoman, forced to marry the Prince of her father's choice and abandon the young man she loves passionately. She is torn between duty and desire but gives in quite easily in the end, influenced it seems by the romantic poetry she has been studying with her tutor (who is also in love with her).
The costumes are magnificent, the French scenery also and the historical background well-handled but none of these were enough to sustain interest during the 139 minutes of this movie which started at 8.45pm! Not sure if historical dramas are a French forté!
My score: 6/10
Pepe's View:
Why is it that directors and screenplay writers have come to the conclusion that more is better? This movie was at least an hour too long. Coming as it does from a short novella, I think I could have read the whole novel in its original form in the same time it took to watch this incredibly boring movie.
A period drama set in France at the time of the Protestant wars did not even have the advantage of being factual. It is simply a story set in an historical perspective. The costumes and setting are magnificent but the story is a 15th century soapie. I did not care at all about the characters who fought, contrived, argued and plotted to win the hand of the Princess. The princess, played by Melanie Thierry, was cast I began to think simply because of her amazingly blue eyes (probably coloured contacts anyway) as her ability to successfully portray the princess was negligible.
This was a singularly disappointing movie - so much so we chose not to see the other late night period offering at the festival - Nannerl, Mozart's Sister - as I don't think that period drama is the forte of french cinema.
My Score: 5/10
We were very excited to be going to see a French period drama since we love such things in English so we were a not a little disappointed by this overly long and not very interesting love story set in 1562 during the wars of religion between Catholics and Protestants. Directed by Bertrand Tavernier and based on a novella (i.e. short novel!) by Madame de Lafayette, the movie tells the story of a young noblewoman, forced to marry the Prince of her father's choice and abandon the young man she loves passionately. She is torn between duty and desire but gives in quite easily in the end, influenced it seems by the romantic poetry she has been studying with her tutor (who is also in love with her).
The costumes are magnificent, the French scenery also and the historical background well-handled but none of these were enough to sustain interest during the 139 minutes of this movie which started at 8.45pm! Not sure if historical dramas are a French forté!
My score: 6/10
Pepe's View:
Why is it that directors and screenplay writers have come to the conclusion that more is better? This movie was at least an hour too long. Coming as it does from a short novella, I think I could have read the whole novel in its original form in the same time it took to watch this incredibly boring movie.
A period drama set in France at the time of the Protestant wars did not even have the advantage of being factual. It is simply a story set in an historical perspective. The costumes and setting are magnificent but the story is a 15th century soapie. I did not care at all about the characters who fought, contrived, argued and plotted to win the hand of the Princess. The princess, played by Melanie Thierry, was cast I began to think simply because of her amazingly blue eyes (probably coloured contacts anyway) as her ability to successfully portray the princess was negligible.
This was a singularly disappointing movie - so much so we chose not to see the other late night period offering at the festival - Nannerl, Mozart's Sister - as I don't think that period drama is the forte of french cinema.
My Score: 5/10
LOVE LIKE POISON
Ma's View: The French film festival has just finished so we have a stack of blogs to do.........
The French title of this movie is "Un poison violent" from the words of a song by Serge Gainsbourg and both song and movie examine how physical passion comes into conflict with spiritual faith. Director, Katell Quillévéré, has handled this delicate coming-of-age movie with great finesse, aided by her young lead, Clara Augarde, who captures the confusion and intensity of Anna, just 14 years old and home from her Catholic boarding school and about to take her confirmation. Anna's mother and father have recently separated and the mother is emotionally fragile and very dependant on the parish priest, a family friend. Anna misses her dad and helps to care for her aging paternal grandfather, meanwhile pursuing her friendship with Pierre, a neighbourhood boy who is sweet on her.
All of these characters interact with Anna in different ways and offer conficting advice and values at a time when she is already confused and unsure of how to proceed. As Anna prepares to undergo the sacrament of confirmation when she must renounce the pleasures of the flesh and pledge to devote herself to spiritual growth, her burgeoning sexuality is awakened by Pierre, played with just the right amount of tentative confidence by Youen Leboulanger-Gourvil (and he can sing too!). Acting honours also go to Michel Galabru, who plays the grandpere, a dyed in the wool anti-cleric! How I loved the scene where he makes the priest skedaddle out of his room with his tale between his legs!
Enough said - a lovely, lovely movie with a beautiful soundtrack handling the topic with delicate precision!
My score: 8/10
Pepe's View:
This was the first movie we saw of the 2011 French Film Festival and one of the best. The performance of Youen Leboulanger-Gourvil as the young boy who is exploring his new found feelings of sexuality and passion is perfect. The performance of the lead, played by Clara Augarde, is also perfect as she shows us the confusion of a young girl seeing conflicting aspects of love all around her. On the one hand the church tells her to be pure and chaste, on the other her much loved Grandad (who almost steals the movie) demonstrated to her a much more sensual, romantic natural love while her parents who were once in love are now out of love. Meanwhile, her mother is attracted to the parish priest and then her young friend in the village gives Anna a taste of passionate love.
This is a beautiful, slow moving revealing movie in the best tradition of French cinema. My only objection is the English translation of the title. The original French title is "Un Poison Violent" which is far truer to the theme of the movie.
My score: 8/10
The French title of this movie is "Un poison violent" from the words of a song by Serge Gainsbourg and both song and movie examine how physical passion comes into conflict with spiritual faith. Director, Katell Quillévéré, has handled this delicate coming-of-age movie with great finesse, aided by her young lead, Clara Augarde, who captures the confusion and intensity of Anna, just 14 years old and home from her Catholic boarding school and about to take her confirmation. Anna's mother and father have recently separated and the mother is emotionally fragile and very dependant on the parish priest, a family friend. Anna misses her dad and helps to care for her aging paternal grandfather, meanwhile pursuing her friendship with Pierre, a neighbourhood boy who is sweet on her.
All of these characters interact with Anna in different ways and offer conficting advice and values at a time when she is already confused and unsure of how to proceed. As Anna prepares to undergo the sacrament of confirmation when she must renounce the pleasures of the flesh and pledge to devote herself to spiritual growth, her burgeoning sexuality is awakened by Pierre, played with just the right amount of tentative confidence by Youen Leboulanger-Gourvil (and he can sing too!). Acting honours also go to Michel Galabru, who plays the grandpere, a dyed in the wool anti-cleric! How I loved the scene where he makes the priest skedaddle out of his room with his tale between his legs!
Enough said - a lovely, lovely movie with a beautiful soundtrack handling the topic with delicate precision!
My score: 8/10
Pepe's View:
This was the first movie we saw of the 2011 French Film Festival and one of the best. The performance of Youen Leboulanger-Gourvil as the young boy who is exploring his new found feelings of sexuality and passion is perfect. The performance of the lead, played by Clara Augarde, is also perfect as she shows us the confusion of a young girl seeing conflicting aspects of love all around her. On the one hand the church tells her to be pure and chaste, on the other her much loved Grandad (who almost steals the movie) demonstrated to her a much more sensual, romantic natural love while her parents who were once in love are now out of love. Meanwhile, her mother is attracted to the parish priest and then her young friend in the village gives Anna a taste of passionate love.
This is a beautiful, slow moving revealing movie in the best tradition of French cinema. My only objection is the English translation of the title. The original French title is "Un Poison Violent" which is far truer to the theme of the movie.
My score: 8/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
