Amazon.com

Based on a novel by Alexandre Dumas, Queen Margot concerns the events behind infamous Massacre of St. Bartholomew in 16th-century France. Isabelle Adjani plays Margot, betrothed for political reasons to one man (Daniel Auteuil) by her mother (Virna Lisi), while she is, in fact, in love with another (Vincent Pérez). Despite the bond that grows between the reluctant couple, plots are hatching all over the castle against the royals. Adventurous, exciting, erotic, and given strong artistic credibility through its outstanding cast, the film is enthralling and visually sumptuous. Directed by Patrice Chereau, less known outside of France than is the film's producer, Claude Berri (director of Jean de Florette and Manon of the Spring). --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (44)

A French history lesson you'll enjoy
Once again, Isabelle Adjani delivers a classic performance. Only this time, so does the entire cast/supporting cast/production crew, etc. "La Reine Margot (Queen Margot)" is one of those 5-star classic films that we don't see much of anymore. This is a film that NEVER has a dull moment. Patrice Chereau didn't cut any corners in showing this extravagant (and brutal) period in French history. The plots/counter plots totally immerse the viewer, along with the meticulous attention to detail. A scene worth noting is the trail a book of falconry takes as it follows several of the lead characters. As always, Adjani and Daniel Auteuil take their roles very seriously and deliver outstanding performances. Fortunately that trait extends into the rest of the cast, especially Virna Lisi who effectively plays Catherine de Medicis. This is my all time favorite film and I could literally go on and on about it. The only complaint I have is that over 30 minutes were cut out of its original release for North American audiences. Lets hope that one day soon, a video distributor will release the full, uncut 167 minute version.

A wild ride through French history
This movie is dark, violent, bloody and gorgeous. The slaughter of the Huguenots is the backdrop for the unlikely romance between the Queen of Navarre and a Huguenot supporter. I cannot think of one miscast actor in this drama; all were superb, but special mention of Vincent Perez and Daniel Auteuil is mandatory.

Kudos also to the director for including such a unique score. The Slavic musical score is not authentic to the period, but entirely appropriate to the mood of the piece.

This film spurred me to read the Dumas novel upon which it was based "Marguerite de Valois". While the film differs in details, it captures the essence of the novel.

Do not watch this film if you cannot stomach strong stuff: blood, gore, beheadings etc. The story, however, carries interest throughout. Worth a purchase for your film library.

Slop
Visually arresting but otherwise hodgepodge compilation of events and themes.

What was this film about? Sex, death, sex, death, sex, death.

It is not about the title character unless one wants to remember her as someone picking up strangers for passionless encounters in allies or someone who embraces the dismembered remains of one of her many lovers. What a legacy!

The lead actors are stunning to look at, the sets and costumes exquisite but this film is otherwise nothing much.

Absolutly Superb
This movie stayed remakably close to the historical facts.

Classic Work Made Into Fantastic Film
Alexandre Dumas' written work, entitled Marguerite de Valois, was a better story than what was represented on film. This was so only because the things that make any written work better than its film counterparts cannot be expressed visually. Nonetheless, Queen Margot is a marvelous French adapation of the book.

The acting, especially on the part of the two kings (France and Navarre), was superb. They gave quality performances that seriously reflects the emotions the two historical figures must have felt in their struggle against the whims of court intrigue and religious strife.

Cinematography was equally pleasing with shots of French countryside and the interior of the Louvre.

The story of St. Bartholomew's Eve, and the massacre that occured on that day, was adequately visualized in this film of the end of a dynasty. ... Read more

Amazon.com

At the time of its release in 1987, this Elaine May production was bandied about as one of the worst films of the decade. It was nominated for three Razzie Awards that year--Worst Picture, Screenplay, Direction--but it still was not the nadir detractors claimed it to be. (Remember, that was the year Norman Mailer's self-indulgence spilled all over the screen in Tough Guys Don't Dance.) If this comedy had been made by unknowns, it would have simply faded into the obscurity it deserves. The fuss came about because May squandered much talent and a ridiculously large budget, rumored to exceed $40 million, returning less than half of that in ticket sales. Two artistically challenged lounge musicians (Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman) are jettisoned out of the States by their agent, who finds them a gig in Morocco. En route, they become pawns in an international power play between the CIA, the mythical emir of Ishtar, and upstarts hoping to overthrow the emir's regime. There are some humorous bits, such as when Hoffman and Beatty so badly perform their horrible ditties that audiences are left appalled. Most of the time however, we are the ones lulled into a near daze by a hokey script and boorish jokes about blind camels. If Abbott and Costello had made this flick, it might have worked. --Rochelle O'Gorman ... Read more

Reviews (68)

The Parody That Tops Them All
Sadly, "Ishtar" is a completely misunderstood movie by way of the critics. If one takes it for what it is, one will see that it is purely a parody (and a very funny one at that). Hoffman and Beatty are brilliant in their ability to act so terribly dense and untalented and play it all with a straight face. They play songwriters who aspire to be famous, and they truly believe that their songs such as "Wardrobe of Love" and "Dangerous Buisness" could be sung by Simon and Garfunkel themselves. Charles Grodin gives a brilliant performance as the butt-kissing CIA agent, and Elaine May wrote the clever script that is filled with witty remarks and totally hysterical action. "Ishtar" is up there with all the other great screwball comedies such as "The Producers" and "Some Like it Hot". I've never laughed so hard while viewing a movie before. Absolutely give this movie a chance.

Don't tell anyone, but I LOVE Ishtar
Ok, so MOST of my friends either refuse to watch the video with me or fall asleep ten minutes into it. A very few of my friends agree that this movie is so far beyond bad that it's terrific. I've seen Ishtar more times than I can remember, and every time I laugh. If you're a little quirky, and if you're willing to take the movie as a song and character showcase (forget the plot!), then you may have found a new favorite movie to torture your loved ones with.

I'm not kidding.

Imagine if you will Dustin Hoffman and Warren Beatty singing (badly) these super lines:

"I said come look there's a wardrobe of love in my eyes/ Come on in, take a look and see if there's something your size."

"Telling the truth is a dangerous business/ Honest and popular don't go hand in hand./ If you admit that you can play the accordion/ No one will hire you in a rock-n-roll band."

You live your life and I'll live mine, and mine will always include a copy of Ishtar.

Ishtar Was Overlooked
Elaine May's Ishtar is one of the all time grossly overlooked comedies. Dustin Hoffman and Warren Beatty are hilarious in this intelligent comedy. The solid and understandable plot never tires and this portrait of two losers is very funny. Small funny contribution by Charles Grodin.

a brilliant comedy...waiting to be re-discovered
perhaps the high concept was never accepted by the critics......a hope and crosby road movie ...with beatie and hoffman.....naive americans mixed up in foriegn intreige....a pretty girl sought after by both.....good guys bad guys......the gun selling scene which must rate as one of the funniest scenes ever filmed.....hoffman mistaken for a gun auctioneer tries to fake his way in pidgin arabic saying things like ...abdul jabar,chad gadya, an other such stuff.

buy it ,see it, youll laugh

I would buy the DVD~!
You have to bring this out on DVD

It is a milestone movie! It has to be done!!
Yes it takes great acting to come up with this totally funny Movie...
Everything that killed it when it was released only adds to the legend!!
I am having the whole neighborhood over when it comes out on DVD. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Trés belle- The perfect antidote to Summer blockbusters
"This is the first time I've seen you rent a foreign language film on your own", said my wife, knowing I usually need heckling to watch something without frequent explosions or some sci-fi "high concept". I think that after recently reviewing I, Robot, Harry Potter III and The Day After Tomorrow I needed a change of pace and watching this beautiful film was a thoroughly pleasant way to spend a Sunday evening.

This is a coming-of-age movie set in 1960s Paris about a young Jewish boy, Moses (Momo), with a rapidly-dwindling immediate family and his burgeoning friendship with local Sufi Muslim corner shop keeper, the titular Monsieur Ibrahim. The kid is charming but probably won't be changing any of your prejudices about French teenagers when he becomes the local prostitutes' favourite and romances the girl next door.

Sharif shines as Ibrahim, coming on like the friendly uncle you never had, dispensing sage advice to young Momo just when he needs it most. And although there is tragedy lurking behind both protagonists' lives, the film is never maudlin and raises your spirits at the most unlikely times. There are also many gently comic moments such as the menu Momo and Ibrahim put together for Momo's vindictive father or trying to buy a new car with cash. People in the film tend to receive their karmic comeuppance without it seeming too forced or far-fetched.

This is a moving, gentle film about the importance of friendship and spirituality. Although set some forty years ago, the message you get at the end is that these things are just as important today and the cyclic nature of history. I thoroughly recommend this film who feels they've overdosed on Hollywood lately and wants a different kind of escapism and assurance on human nature.

Sweet and engaging, but a bit too short and sketchy...
The coming-of-age movie is a really tricky thing to pull off. Most of them are either raunchy and vapid, and then others are too introspective and just cloying. Well, this lightweight of a French film, which has gotten rave reviews for Sharif's justifiably great performance, is a little bit of both and - in the end - neither. Ibrahim begins with a toe-tapping, swingin' 60's soundtrack as Moses Schmitt (Pierre Boulanger) practices pickup lines for hookers, and for a while it does seem like a New Wave-inspired flick complete with handheld camera angles and a negletive father. Schmitt, a Jew, soon picks up with the local grocer (Sharif, the title character) who happens to be a Muslim, and as their strange friendship develops, director Duperyon's adaptation reaches high for themes of clashing religion and the shared experiences of the young and old. And for the most part, Ibrahim is an enjoyable ride. I enjoyed its light feel, Boulanger's breakout performance, and the fact that the kid is the uptight cynic and Sharif's Ibrahim turns out to be the wide-eyed life-lover.

Unfortunately, though, Ibrahim just can't juggle all of its plot strands and be a truly meaningful film in the end - the neglectful father leaves and Ibrahim adopts, Schmitt's mother drops in, the new father and son take a (lazily edited) road trip...and then the movie ends in a tragedy that you'll see coming a mile away. The movie's short and harmless, by all means, but the movie just doesn't make sense in an emotional way; we never see enough of the developing friendship of Schmitt and Boulanger. And the final tragedy? Well, the dialogue is so ham-handed it seems ripped straight from a novel (which it probably was). As much as I admired and enjoyed the light tone of Ibrahim, intelligently laced with a current of sadness beneath, it never can let the two coexist and just ends up being disappointing. GRADE: B-

Awesome
Monsieur Ibraham is an enjoyable coming of age movie. It's the French version of Cinema Paradiso. The acting is superb, especially Sharif (I didnt know he jnew French) An awesome film that will put a smile on your face.

loved it - this is a true depiction of sufism
Don't get me wrong this is not a religious movie but the undercurrent of religion flows through out the movie. This is the true depiction of Islam as not taught by the Baptist church. Islam has a very soft side and we fail to see it but the movie does a wonderful depiction of Sufism. Omar Sharif does wonders with his role - you has seen the young Omar Sharif and now it is time for the old Omar Sharif. He has a class which puts him heads and shoulders above rest of the actors and this movie is no different. Pierre Boulanger has also given us an extremely mature performance. Photography is excellent. The back ground music just binds all these together. Omar Sharif reminds me of the characters from Naguid Mahfouze's books.
this is about a French Jewish boy and his adopted father (notice not adopted son) Ibrahim - from inner city Paris to rural Turkey everything is in the palatte and they mix seamlessly. I just loved it. If you have liked Cinema Paradiso then you will love this movie.

SHARIF STILL HAS IT IN SPADES..
Monsieur Ibrahim could have so easily been played out as a timid father-son buddy flick, but while it is not a singularly unusual tale, it does carry a decent measure of frolic and sentiment.

Sharif as an elderly Muslim immigrant grocer in Paris knocks one out of the park with his bravura performance. His charisma is infectious as he spews aphorisms left and right. And his counterpart, a young boy going astray, does a poignant turn of coming of age. As he explores his budding sexuality and navigates the trials of his first love, he comes into the sphere of the elderly grocer's friendship and some interesting interactions ensue.

The first 60% of the movie contains several small pleasures, including the boy's interaction with "worker" women , the way he and the grocer play trivial tricks on his father, his infatuation with a local girl, and his trip to buy a new car. Unfortunately, the movie pretty much loses its way after that, as the two protagonists take to the road for a trip to Turkey.

The ending is ambiguous in an unsatisfying way, and, although there is a definitive denouement, I left the film not seeming to care as much about the fates of the protagonists as I would have liked to.

Yet, for its enthralling views of Turkey and the fun histrionics of Sharif, I'd surely recommend this as a decent rental. One wonders if it would stand to a second viewing though. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

An American Classic
This film makes GONE IN 60 SECONDS seem like a movie for 8 year olds. Although sold as a "car chase movie" there is a lot more to this film than that especially its tight plot, taut direction, mis en scene, and fun. It's a thriller whose cross and double cross shenanigans are a pure delight and recall the best of the likes of Howard Hawks in the film noir forties. It rivals Jean-Pierre Melville and if Walter Hill's name was Jean-Pierre Hill from Paris it would be thought of as a classic. Hill's crime is that he's American. Culturally snobbery at work again I believe. Forget the cars for a minute, dear viewer, and let's consider the four main actors and what they do. Ryan O'Neal plays incommunicative, lonely, cold, precise, and good to look at perfectly. Isabelle Adjani plays incommunicative, lonely, cold, precise and good to look at perfectly. Which leaves the screen to one of cinema's greatest actors - Bruce Dern - to really go for it. And go for it he does. He is at his brilliant, scene-stealing, word chewing best, and is frankly rivetting and incredible fun to watch. With O'Neal and Adjani walking through po-faced throughout, Dern has a field day and is very ably helped by his cop buddy Ronee Blakly. To top the movie off, there are some of the best car chase sequences on film, as good as BULLITT. This in my view is WALTER HILL's masterpiece (he also wrote the screenplay for SAM PECKINPAH's GETAWAY in 1972). It is absolutely horrifying to me to see that Video Hound's Golden Movie Retriever 2000 give this film one and half bones which makes me nervous about many of their other reviews. I've seen this film about 15 times. It holds up. Don't deny it to yourself if you love cinema.

Gives new meaning to the term "slam bang"
Walter Hill is the doyen of American action films, hands down. 1978's The Driver is one of his best; the focus here is on momentum, pure and simple. There are great car chases and the slam-bang stuff is there in buckets--especially a great scene inside a parking garage in which the title character played by Ryan O'Neal demolishes a vermilion Mercedes Benz by screeching around corners all over the place, showing just how good a driver he is to skeptical crooks who need him as their getaway man.

A laconic flick to be sure, The Driver gives nobody names. Bruce Dern is the snartass cop who's after the driver and even recruits bank robbers to nab him. Natch, that doesn't work. You could even say this is the quintessential Hill flick (although I am very partial to Trespass), since dialogue is overshadowed by car chases and all the other stuff manipulative people (cops and criminals both) do to make their place in the world. What dialogue there is wastes no words, just like the plot wastes no time on what could be a possible romance (O'Neal and French lovely Isabelle Adjani), instead having the two of them partner up for a lot of dough--knowing glances, yeah, but no gooey stuff.

Ronee Blakley is also here in a smaller role as another great looking go-between for the driver, but she's not on screen a lot, and there's never even the faintest hint of any hanky-panky between them.

This is not only one of the best Hill flicks, but without question one of the best American action films ever made. The recent drivel, I mean, Driven, with Stallone deserves to crash and burn, while The Driver--tight as a drum and slick as greased lightning--is a red hot roadster of a film.

See it when you need a serious revving up.

Drive, he said
It's too bad director Walter Hill will likely be remembered more for providing Eddie Murphy with his first big screen showcase (in "48 Hours") than for his overall contribution to the American action film genre. Hill's tough-as-nails 1978 noir "The Driver" is arguably both his least-known and best work. Ryan O'Neal is quite effective as a dour, sociopathic "wheelman" who hires himself out as a getaway driver for assorted criminal enterprises. Bruce Dern is at his sleazy best as the cynical but driven cop on his trail. O'Neal and Dern play this classic cat-and-mouse noir scneario to the hilt (similar to Pacino and DeNiro's relationsip in 1995's "Heat"). Isabelle Adjani's icy beauty well suits her role as O'Neal's fatalistic girlfriend. It's ironic that Ryan O'Neal's best films seem to be the ones where he doesn't have to recite much dialogue ("Barry Lyndon"). Supposedly the word count for O'Neal's lines in "The Driver" totals a scant 350 (!) according to a "factoid" that prefaced a recent cable airing. Well worth seeking out.

Post-Noir Pseudo-Existentialism With Great Car Chases
It gets three stars for (mostly) the car chases and the quality of menace that O'Neal manages to put into the two unaccented words "Go Home".

You know you're in for someone's ego-trip attempt at The Great American Existentialist Film when the characters have no names, just labels -- "The Driver", "The Player", "The Cop", etc.

It becomes more obvious when every other bit of dialog is a dry, "clever" bit of cynicism.

And it's right there in your face when the major plot revelation in the film is that people don't always do what they "always do".

It's far from awful -- Hill is a decent if overrated writer/director. I mean, he's working the same vein as Leone, Peckinpah and Siegel, just not in as rich a part of the ore.

Well worth seeing for the transitory fun of the story and the incredible driving sequences -- comparable to the original "Gone in 60 Seconds" or "Vanishing Point" and superior to, say "Bullitt". But most people i've known who have kept the tape, kept it they can watch that Mercedes in the garage, the chase inside the warehouse or the other driving sequences, not to revel in the story.

Somber and Engrossing, Classic Noir with a 70s Groove!
This is a true piece of american noir. It seems like a diverting little car chase movie the first time you see it, but O'Neil's stoic, nihilistic getaway driver has a way of bringing you back for more viewings. It's interesting that Ian Muldoon mentions the similarity to a Jean-Pierre Melville film in his review, because I think this movie owes a lot to Melville's LE SAMOURAI (on which John Woo's THE KILLER was also based). Just like Melville's hit man Jeff kills without conscience or reflection, yet still abides by an unbending code of honor, O'Neil's Driver is, ironically, more moral in his way than the obsessed, power-mad cop (Bruce Dern) who pursues him.

Walter Hill no frills, straight-to-the-gut style really works here. The costumes, sets, and cinematography are dark, understated, and really engrossing, especially on repeated viewings. I believe that this is a movie that grad-school film students will be watching 100 years from now. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

entertaining movie
this is one of the best movies i've seen so far this year. i hope ebert & roeper don't forget about it. has some of the best cinematography i've seen in a movie in a while. this is a really funny well-made movie.

enjoyed it
i was pleasantly surprised when i saw this film. it's a world war 2 comedy\drama in french that really entertains its audience. one of the better films i've seen so far this year. i hope ebert & roeper don't forget it.

Screwball romance worried by the rumble of approaching Nazis
An early, typical scene in "Bon Voyage" takes place in a Parisian jail in June, 1940.

A public defender has been called up for military service but tells his client it's no biggie, he'll be back on the case in three weeks.

"Not even Hitler wants war," the lawyer says. "He'll make peace. You'll see."

Ahh, nothing like the sound of famous last words, which happens to be one of this movie's many specialties.

But at least the onset of World War II helps the client, Frederic (Gregori Derangere), escape from prison. Fred's a hapless but occasionally dashing writer who's been falsely accused of murder, thanks to his ex, the silky, crystal-eyed gold-digger Viviane (Isabelle Adjani). Viviane hitchhikes from one sugar daddy to the next and has fled to Bordeaux with a cabinet minister (Gerard Depardieu), and with Frederic not far behind.

Once they reach the city, which is in chaos, they become entangled in a plot involving a rickety physicist, his endlessly resourceful assistant, an amiable ex-con, a shady reporter and several bottles of heavy water that absolutely, positively must not fall into the hands of the Germans.

Despite an obvious debt to "The Third Man," "Casablanca" and Tintin comics, "Bon Voyage" is actually more like a vintage screwball comedy that grows increasingly worried by the rumble of approaching Nazis. At times, the movie has maybe a few too many spies, politicians and scientists running in and out of the plot, but that's also part of its charm, especially when the heroes rise above their own concerns and work toward a greater good.

The movie was directed by Jean-Paul Rappeneau, whose previous film was 1995's fantastic "The Horseman on the Roof." That, too, was a love story set against the sprawling backdrop of war, with characters leaping from one tense situation right into another. "Bon Voyage" operates in more of a minor key but still offers a nostalgic ode to movies, and wars, that were seen in black and white.

Mildly amusing
The story features a large cast of intriguing characters representing multiple walks of life in France before and during the occupation, whose lives intersect in sometimes comical, and sometimes lethal ways.

The film's recipe tosses together a film starlet, an aspiring novelist, a government minister, a sexual predator, a band of thieves, an elderly nuclear physicist, his young and beautiful assistant, and a traitor who is spying for the Germans. Each of these characters brings a different story plot, resulting in a mix that touches on romance, comedy, intrigue, politics, suspence, and farce.

The result contains some mildly amusing scenes and some mildly suspenseful scenes. The film maintains an entertaining, driving pace, simply because so much is happening. The actors are consistently delightful, and their characters intriguing. However, I found it difficult to care much for any character, as the film did not spend enough time with any one of them for us to learn what drove them. It seemed as though the director intended them to be cardboard cutouts set in a toy theater.

The production quality is outstanding, with gorgeous period sets, costumes and lighting.

Resistance
It is a distinct pleasure to see Isabelle Adjani and Gerard Depardieu in a romantic film once again in which neither is forced to chase an Ex around the world or discover America. All they have to do here is look good and be themselves: which is quite a lot if you are Adjani (looking radiant) and Depardieu (looking slim and handsome in his rugged way).
Unfortunately they are stuck in Jean-Paul Rappeneau's "Bon Voyage," a beautiful though mindless enterprise, if there ever was one.
Beautiful and mindless is ok if it is well written and well thought out neither of which "Bon Voyage" is. (think "Two Week's Notice," "The Banger Sisters" or "The Matrix Reloaded" for that matter)
The film is set in the 1940's German occupied France and the design is flawless but ultimately "Bon Voyage" is a big, beautifully wrapped gift with a giant satin bow that when opened up and examined reveals nothing of substance. In fact it reveals nothing at all. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Werner Herzog's remake of F.W. Murnau's original vampire classic is at once a generous tribute to the great German director and a distinctly unique vision by one of cinema's most idiosyncratic filmmakers. Though Murnau's Nosferatu was actually an unauthorized adaptation of BramStoker's Dracula, Herzog based his film largely on Murnau's conceptions--at times directly quoting Murnau's images--but manages to slip in a few references to Tod Browning's famous version (at one point the vampire comments on the howling wolves: "Listen, the children of the night make their music."). Longtime Herzog star Klaus Kinski is both hideous and melancholy as Nosferatu (renamed Count Dracula in the English language version). As in Murnau's film, he's a veritable gargoyle with his bald pate and sunken eyes, and his talon-like fingernails and two snaggly fangs give him a distinctly feral quality. But Kinski's haunting eyes also communicate a gloomy loneliness--the curse of his undead immortality--and his yearning for Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) becomes a melancholy desire for love. Bruno Ganz's sincere but foolish Jonathan is doomed to the vampire's will and his wife, Lucy, a holy innocent whose deathly pallor and nocturnal visions link her with the ghoulish Nosferatu, becomes the only hope against the monster's plague-like curse. Herzog's dreamy, delicate images and languid pacing create a stunningly beautiful film of otherworldly mood, a faithful reinterpretation that by the conclusion has been shaped into a quintessentially Herzog vision. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Werner Herzog creates the ultimate vampire.
Nosferatu was originally a German expressionist film, much in the style of "The Cabinet of Dr. Calgari. Moody, extremley gothic, and very scary, shot in Germany in 1922. Max Schreck played the part of Nosferatu, aka Count Orlok, the ugliest, scariest Dracula in cinematic history. Orlak is tall and skinny, shriveled, actually, with elongated limbs, and long, sharp claws for hands. He is ancient as well. We have no leading man type here, a la Christopher Lee, who was actually a sex symbol back in the late sixties, or handsome Bela, Frank Langella, or more recently, Gary Oldman. Orlak is the combination of an evil old man, mixed with a rodent. His ears are batlike, his eyes, wide and scary, a beak nose, and his full lips hide long, ratlike fangs. He is bald as well. Klaus Kinski captured Nosferatu to a tee, although Klaus is well, flat out not as ugly as Schrek. the story is virtually Dracula retold, including Harker's trip to Transylvania, the Count buying Real Estate, the Count lusting after Lucy, and Lucy's sacrifice. There is a hidden eroticism in the final scene with Lucy that must be seen to be believed. Lucy, by the way, is portrayed by the ever sexy Isabelle Adjani, and she portays a perfect damsel in distress, who knows what she must do. The contrast in Lucy's beauty, compared to Orlak's hideous repulsiveness, only adds to the erotic chemistry that is on the screen during their scenes together, especially when Lucy is first confronted by the lustful old vampire, and he demands her love. During the famous, final scene, we see Orlak consumate his vampiric love, in full detail. Lucy almost seems to be enjoying it. Orlak must have Lucy, even if it means that his very existance is the price to be paid, so he enjoys his night of bloodlust, and lovemaking to the fullest. The movie is atmospheric, and well acted throughout, although the Van Helsing character seems a bit powerless. Then again, aside from Lucy's sacrificial beauty, what can stop the evil Count Orlak.....Highly recommended.

Cerebral, dream-like horror
Nosferatu unfolds like a languorous, disturbing dream. The images have an hallucinogenic, archetypal quality: mummified human remains in an ancient tomb; the figure of a woman sitting on a beach studded with tombstones; a dead sea-captain lashed to the wheel of a deserted sailing ship.

Like Kubrick's The Shining, Nosferatu is less a standard genre film than a singular expression of a filmmaker's vision. Writer-director Werner Herzog began with F.W. Murnau's expressionist classic, mixed in elements from Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, then set about creating a meditation on the vampire myth. What would it really mean to live forever, and be compelled to feed on the blood of others? What of the unspeakable boredom? The longing for companionship? For normalcy? For death? As played by Klaus Kinski, Herzog's Dracula has spent hundreds, if not thousands of years alone with these thoughts. He is the ultimate poster boy for German angst. If not for the skill of his performance and Herzog's direction, he might have lapsed into self-parody.

There are shots that all but reproduce moments from the silent classic - right down to the overwrought body language. But Herzog, Kinski, and the rest of the cast (including Bruno Ganz as Jonathon Harker and Isabelle Adjani as his wife Lucy) keep it in check and keep it beautifully stylized, so it all works.

Probably due to the involvement of American studio 20th-Century Fox, Nosferatu was shot in both English and German versions. Both are on this double-sided DVD; comparing them is instructive, since there are non-trivial differences in the visual construction of both films. Most critics agree (and I concur) that the German one is superior.

Finally, to get an idea of whether you will like this - or any - Werner Herzog film, take the Armageddon-Matrix test: if you hated Armageddon because it was empty and overblown, but kind of liked The Matrix because of its ideas, then you may like Nosferatu. If, on the other hand, you thought Armageddon rocked, but only kind of liked The Matrix because it was slow in places, then don't even think about it.

Good remake!
Remakes don't get much better that this, lets give a round of applause to the drictor, it's hard to make a remake of a classic film. So the film follows the story of the orignal, some guy goes to see Dracula, who he later bits( the guy goes crazy). Dracula later takes a ship to England and starts a rampage of death. This film does not have as much action as the first but it's still fun to wach. Make-up for Dracula rocked. Worth every penny.

The Classic Art-House Version of Dracula
For our second outing between Kinski and Herzog we find that the director has chosen to remake, or rather retell, his favorite film of all time - 'Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens' by F.W. Murnau (1922), while at the same time adapting more of the original Stoker novel into the remake, using the original name of Count Dracula (Kinski) instead of Orlok and injecting his own take on the story of Dracula (in German), which for all intensive purposes is a story about 'tragedy' and Herzog has correctly identified this main theme that would help levitate this entry to one of the all time great art-house horror films with images of Kinski's vampire often filling many film magazine pages and posters. In fact, it is Herzog's most commercial and accessible film to date. It was this telling of the Dracula story that influenced Coppola to remake the Stoker novel entirely into a film. It was not the first time Coppola had been influenced by Herzog. Coppola learned from Kinski and Herzog in "Aguirre: Wraith of God" that guerilla film making while going up a jungle river would be just what he needed for his version of Conrad's "Hearts of Darkness" (Apocalypse Now).

The usual Kinski/Herzog display of frustration is more subtle in this film than all the others probably because the beautiful Isabelle Adjani keeps Kinski distracted long enough for him not get angry with Herzog's cruel daily shoots to 'get it right' and deliberately making the actors and actresses angry for their performances. Here everyone just looks deathly sick and move extremely slowly. Even Adjani looks paler than Kinski at times. For some reason this has given Herzog a more controlled approach to this film with certainly less improvisation and 'on the spot' acting than any of his other collaborations with Kinski. Here we see a mix of Herzog's favorite - Tarkovsky's slow shooting style while cutting in shots of water (Herzog uses a bat in slow motion) and some sort of strange cinematic art house presence that we would see in many of Andy Warhol's productions. Herzog also gets the lighting just right and the cinematography is sublime - watching Kinski materialize from the darkness is again some of the most memorable images in art house cinema ever. Herzog also brings coffins en masse for display. Black coffins play a major role in the design throughout the film. Later on during a plague thousands of rats covering a city become central to Herzog's eye for capturing horror (a formal dinner takes place among hundreds of rats because the diners have the plague and wish to make the best of it before they die) - again extremely visionary and talented. Adjani puts on an amazing performance while remaining stunning under all the white. In one classic scene where she is confronted by Kinski she looks and acts more scary than Kinski almost performing him off the screen. The ending is an erotic take on the original film with Kinski touching Adjani all over, but the acting is excellent. The final twist comes as a shocker and is a bit funny. The end scene is like something out of a great Western and looks spectacular. Also the strange atmosphere of holiness is found throughout this film more than in any other Herzog/Kinski collaboration. The use of Orchestral sounds makes it all the more eerie while at the same time retaining that spirited electric connection to the presentation of madness that Herzog and Kinski are so well noted for.

'Nosferatu the Vampyre' is probably one of the most original art house horror films ever made even though the subject matter has been beaten to death, however it still ranks up there as one of the best versions of Dracula you can see. The DVD transfer is good and crisp. The aspect ratio is 1.85:1 and there are a lot of extras including director's commentary. By the way you can get the Kinski/Herzog box set of 6 films for a few quid extra than this stand alone DVD. Go look for it.

Belief and Science Clash
Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979)

Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht directed by Werner Herzog, is really a color remake of the 1922 film Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens directed by F.W. Murnau. There are a couple of name changes: Count Orlok became Count Dracula; Jonathan's fiancée Nina became Jonathan's wife Lucy. The original film was silent and in black and white, where the 1979 version is in color and is in German with English subtitles.

However the plot is close to Bram Stoker's book on Count Dracula which has a very similar plot line and story. F.W. Murnau bought the movie rights to the film; however these rights were owned by Bram's widow Florence and she refused to allow the use of the name and storyline. Even though Murnau had changed the major names of the main characters (Count Dracula, Thomas and his wife Ellen) and location enough similarity remained that Florence took the case to court and in July of 1925 the German court ordered all the copies of the movie destroyed. However a few copies did manage to survive.

While the film starts off slow it shows spectacular scenes of an ocean voyage, and waterfalls experienced during Jonathan (Bruno Ganz) Harker's journey to Count (Klaus Kinski) Dracula's castle. The contrast with his return trip is startling, since he was healthy when he started, but on the return is very sickly and barely alive. The Count's journey is very stark, his companions' death and rats board another ship, which glides into port with no one left alive on board except the rats. As the rats depart the ship one reminded of the story of Ben, where the rats were everywhere and out of control.
An interesting dilemma in this film is the direct confrontation of belief in the existence of the supernatural and sacramental with belief in the rationale of science. Science was believed to able to explain away rationally anything that happened out of the ordinary. Yet here it could not produce an answer for Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) Harker. The way that this was shown was that after consulting with the town physician, Lucy broke and crumbed the Eucharist around Jonathan to keep him locked into a chair in a corner all night, while she became the sacrificed lamb to save him from the Count and death. While she did this out of her love for Jonathan, her sacrifice resulted in the final demise of Count Dracula and her own death. Yet Jonathan in essence lives on to carry the legacy of the living dead, alive yet not fully. The last that is seen of Jonathan is when he is released from his imposed prison, by the removal of the broken host around him, he declares that he has much work to accomplish he mounts a horse and rides off. ... Read more

Description

An aging private detective on the trail of a serial killing femme fatale becomes convinced that the she is his long-lost daughter and helps her evade capture by the police. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

24 Minutes are missing
Too bad that 24 minutes from this outherwise phantastic movie are missing!
I was searching for a DVD version of it for years.
Michel Serrault and Isabelle Adjani are great and this is maybe their best movie!
Dont buy this DVD, as important scenes are missing making the movie and the characters difficult to understand, wait for the real complete version.

Excellent film, flawed DVD
Mortelle randonnée is a better and more subtle film than some reviewers have suggested, and is certainly more worth watching than the Ewan McGregor version of Marc Behm's novel The Eye of the Beholder.

The problem with this DVD, however, is that it is a cut version of the original European theatrical and broadcast versions, with several sequences missing and other sequences trimmed: about 12 minutes are missing, I'd guess. (This is the first time I've come across a DVD that supplies less than the theatrical release, but I suppose it happens all the time.) The biggest cut is the murder of the man at Baden Baden: other cuts include references to that murder, including a very important tv news report on the murderess, with more information on her past. Also missing is a montage of crimes carried out with the hitchhiker she picks up, and -- crucially -- a shot at the end of the film showing the Eye's daughter's gravestone, with name and dates.

Don't let these caveats put you off: Mortelle Randonnée is superb, with Adjani and Serrault (actors I can't stand, incidentally) both excellent. Lively cameos from Jean-Claude Brialy and, especially, the first actress I ever thought of as beautiful, Stéphane Audran, here playing a 'remarkably ugly' woman. France's bleak industrial landscapes are also, thanks to Pierre Lhomme's cinematography, remarkably ugly in this film, especially set against the picturesque rendering of Brussels, Rome and the Midi.

Wildly over-rated, incredibly disappointing
There's a great film struggling to get out of 'Mortelle Randonnée' (aka 'Deadly Run'). Unfortunately, it's Emil Jannings' 'The Last Laugh,' the plot of which the anti-heroine steals as an imaginary childhood for one of her false identities when she catches a glimpse of it on TV (the film is silent and the lover she tells the story to is blind). The scene underlines the movie's big problem - some clever ideas that just don't pay off.

The rave review on the cover from Time Out's Geoff Andrew - never one to let the facts get in the way of a good quote - should have been the giveaway: 'Mortelle Randonnée' isn't half as good as it thinks it is. Sadly, it isn't even much of an improvement over many a straight-to-tape cable filler. The premise is good: Michel Serrault's emotionally damaged private investigator covers up the serial murders of an even more damaged young woman he convinces himself is his long-dead daughter. Unfortunately, the tone and execution are not. As the broad score makes abundantly clear, this is a clumsy black comedy which only thinks it is subtle. Serrault has his moments but seems hell-bent on undermining his performance with inappropriate and self-indulgent moments of playing to the gallery while an uninspired Adjani is just a vacuum: she may be meant to have no true identity, but surely she's not meant to be so overwhelmingly bland? Both have been much better before and since.

Things do improve in the last third with some intriguing moments that, once again, never really pay off - a shame because the final scene is genuinely impressive and could have been so much more had there been some emotional link to the characters. But sadly, the much-criticised remake, 'Eye of the Beholder,' is actually a much better bet despite a miscast Ewan McGregor (too young for the central conceit to work but good nonetheless), and if you're intrigued by the premise is the one to go for. If only this version had been as good as it thinks it is...

The transfer is okay, although blacks are a little soft. Extras are limited to filmographies and a very, very brief trailer. ... Read more

Description

Quartet is the story of a girl who, adrift with her feckless husband amidst the glitter and literati of Paris in the 1920's, is entrapped by a rich and sybaritic middle-aged English couple.Far from the wistful and melancholy of this autobiographical novel by Jean Rhys (Wide Sargasso Sea), the film is full of intense confrontation dazzlingly acted by Alan Bates, Maggie Smith, Anthony Higgins, and Isabelle Adjani, who won the Best Actress award at the 1981 Cannes Film Festival for this performance.The characters do not act out their passions exclusively in the usual seedy cafTs and louche hotels of Rhys's Parisian novels, but as well in smoky jazz haunts and lavish nightclub settings of an Ivory film.Nevertheless, in theme Quartet remains one of the Merchant Ivory team's darkest-and most compelling-dramas of relationships dangerously intertwined. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

an overlooked Merchant/Ivory treasure
Since its release in the early 1980s, Quartet hasn't been remembered as much as some of their other films. Thats a shame because Quartet is one of their finer works. A very engrossing drama about mind control and deceit. As one would expect from M & A, the attention to detail in recreating the roaring 20's is fabulous. Alan Bates does a wonderful job as H.B., the controlling maniac disguised as a gentleman. Maggie Smith is heartbreaking as the passive wife who tries desperately to cling to her husband despite his infidelities. But its Isabelle Adjani who steals the show. Her character's development from innocent, to arrogant, to ignorant makes Quartet memorable. ... Read more

Reviews (20)

A Classic, Period!
One of Isabelle Adjani's best qualities is that no matter what character she plays, she's always convincing. 1988's "Camille Claudel" is probably her most passionate, convincing performance. From the film's moving start, to its tragic end, there is never a dull moment. Easily handling a full range of emotions, Adjani manages to charm us, sadden us and even frighten us. This is a long movie but never once did I tire of it or lose intrest. Before this movie, I had no idea who Camille Claudel was. After seeing it, I was moved to find out as much about her and her sculptures as I possibly could. Along with Adjani, Gerard Depardieu deserves credit for his outstanding performance as Rodin. Production values are meticulous right down to the smallest details. While several great movies come out every year, very few "classics" manage to break through. "Camille Claudel" is one of those who thank God, managed to do so.

Good!
Camille Claudel is a must-see. There are various topics in it that make this film interesting: the struggle of women artists of that time; the influence of Rodin on her artistic and personal life; her father's support and insight for his daughter; insanity as product of social misconception on females' role in the art world.

Great acting and a superb story. The only drawback is that it seems to be told entirely by the 'pro-Claudel's side of view'. In spite of that, this is still a movie that has depth and gives an accurate picture of that passion and conflict for being a fine artist.

Passionate, Creative and Tragic, A True Art Movie
I began watching this film on a late night of insomnia....it didn't help me to sleep and that's a good thing!

Isabelle Adjani artfully plays real life French sculpturess, Camille Claudel. She displays pure emotion and passionate reactions such that she is completely believable as the tragic yet talented Claudel. Claudel becomes Auguste Rodin's assistant and eventual lover/muse. They fight and compete for fame together and seperately with Claudel always the more talented but underscored by Rodin's jealously and fierce connections to the art world. In the end Claudel succumbs to a broken and ravaged heart betrayed in many ways by her one true love, Rodin.

I recently returned from a trip to Paris and having seen first hand the sculptures created by Claudel and Rodin I am even more impressed with this tragic story of talented yet conflicted artists. To see the obvious gentleness with which Claudel can carve marble and to feel the warmth that stems from a slab of cold stone left me mesmerized by her talent. Rodin appears clumsy and inept next to her creations despite his world reknown fame. I will always wonder what a woman of her talent could have created had she been alive today and not under the influence of an egotistical maniac!

'Camille' est magnifique!
As a French major, this is an excellent film. The language is clear (the nudity is a little inappropriate for some ages, though). I've seen this film twice some months apart and each time it was certainly engaging.

The pace was a little frustrating near the end, but considering the topic at hand (the demise of a promising artist), it is understandable. What does make an impression are the images. Many of the scenes have almost a photographic quality - very nice cinematography. The relationship between Camille and Rodin is very full of little nuances that keep the viewer engaged, too.

This is a great film for pleasure, an art classroom or a history class. Obviously, francophiles would love it, were they to see it!

Good Movie
I saw the movie on cable and it was a fascinating story about the sculptress Camille Claudel and her lover Renoir. She was a talented artist in the beginning with ambitions. Then she gets involved with Renoir, a womanizing artist and a married man. She forgets herself in his world and when he doesn't choose between her and his wife, she leaves feeling as if he is at fault for her waning popularity. Claudel was a talented artist of her day when women were considered second-class citizens and encouraged by her father to be the person she was. Unfortunately, she came across disappointment and mental distress when her relationship with Renoir ended. While she was his mistress, she wasn't herself, and without him, she lost her spirit. Her brother, who was considered the troublemaker, made himself a well-known person in diplomacy and literature. The movie examines the close relationship between Paul and his sister. It was sad that her relationship with her mother was never restored. She always felt she was a threat to her because of her work. Her father was supportive through and through. What disappointed him was the daughter that changed into someone else's shadow. Camille was a gifted woman of her time. Had she kept her sanity and let go of the demons, she would have maintained high status as Collette. The movie was a very interesting movie to watch. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Diabolique is Jeremiah Chechik's 1996 revamped version of the 1955 French film noir tale of two teachers at a boys school conspiring to kill the headmaster (played in the remake by Chazz Palminteri of Jade and The Usual Suspects). The three assemble an intriguing triangle of revenge and deceit as the headmaster's abused and humiliated wife and mistress team up to get even. Mia Baran is the fragile wife with a delicate heart condition, portrayed by Isabelle Adjani (Queen Margot), and Sharon Stone (Basic Instinct) is the plotting, contemptuous mistress. Together they set out to wreak an unfortunate revenge, but as the story reveals itself, miscalculations abound as hidden agendas and secret lives are unexpectedly exposed. Chechik's new look and timeless setting give film noir audiences something neoteric and seducing to play with. A welcomed change to the film's story line is the fresh addition of Kathy Bates as a daunting private detective. Fans of Stone's will not be disappointed with the latest version of her "I-could-give-a-damn smoldering broad" technique and anyone not yet familiar with Chazz Palminteri will love watching him succeed as the ultimately despicable headmaster. --Michele Goodson ... Read more

Reviews (21)

Avoid the Hollywood remake and watch the original instead!
Why am I even writing this review? Why are you even reading this review? This pointless film is a perfect illustration of why we should never bother with Hollywood remakes of their superior European counterparts. This 1990s update of the French classic thriller is dull and boring and utterly conventional. If you watch it, you will instantly have that "deja-vu" feeling of having seen this sort of production countless times in countless Hollywood B-grade movies.

The original Diabolique, in the 1950s, was considered the best Hitchcockian thriller at the time not done by Hitchcock himself. High praise indeed. It is more suspenseful, more cinematographic, and better paced than the Hollywood update. There is really little reason to see the Hollywood version when the original is still around (heck, go rent/buy the Criterion DVD of the original!).

Is there anything worthwhile about the Hollywood version? Well, if you're a Sharon Stone or Isabelle Adjani fan, I suppose you might like this film somewhat. And it's in color and you don't have to read subtitles. But really, don't waste your time.

Thumbs Up For Diabolique
Despite criticism that the film is monotonous and boring, I rented the video and was pleasantly surprised. Sharon Stone seems to be getting better every film she does. The chemistry between Stone and Isabelle Adjani is great. Chaz Palminteri is the perfect bad guy and Kathy Bates was a great detective. Listen close, Bates has some of the best lines. I really enjoyed my first viewing. I liked it enough to watch a second and third time!! Big thumbs up to the entire cast for a job well done. I would recommend this movie to anyone.

Feeding the male libido
This is a sexploitation thriller but not all that bad, mainly because it is played somewhat tongue-in-cheek so that the plot absurdities might be overlooked in the interest of high camp, or at least in the interest of a mild diversion, and also because the women are diabolically diverting each in her own way.

Especially effective in a satirical performance is Sharon Stone as Nicole Horner, a duplicitous siren teaching math at a boy's boarding school. (Just the thought conjures up visions of a vampish Mary Kay Letoureau, although director Jeremiah Chechik studiously avoids that angle.) Her partner in crime is French actress Isabelle Adjani who plays Mia Baran, an ex-nun who is the owner of the school unhappily married to (after being seduced by, it appears) the school's sadistic task master Guy Baran played with a steady macho malevolence by Chazz Palminteri. Adjani, whom I recall (vividly) from Truffaut's L'Histoire d'Adele H. (1975) in which she played Victor Hugo's daughter Adele, obsessively in love with an English army lieutenant who didn't want her. The masochistic persona employed there is revisited here as Mia is used by both her husband and Nicole Horner, who is also Guy's mistress.

Coming lately onto the scene is Kathy Bates as a man-despising, middle-aged, slightly butch Nancy Drew who doesn't let a partial mastectomy slow her down as she sleuths about looking for clues. She has some fine one-liners, but perhaps the best in the film comes from Sharon Stone. Two of the school's middle-aged bores have just come upon Stone and Adjani in the courtyard. Stone's ever-present cigarette inspires this from one of the men: "Don't you know that second-hand smoke kills?" Sharon Stone maneuvers past him, blows smoke in his face, and replies, "Not reliably."

This is a remake of Les Diaboliques (1955) starring Simone Signoret which I have not seen. My guess is that the French version played it straight and made the ending at least plausible. Here we have not only a ridiculous ending but a plot in dire need of a plot doctor. I have also not seen the TV version, Reflections of Murder, starring that quintessential sex-kitten (and personal favorite) Tuesday Weld.

Bottom line: see this for Isabelle Adjani, whose over the top performance is garnished with an au naturale glimpse, and for Sharon Stone who is at her diabolical best. Be aware however that if sexual exploitation of the male libido is not your cup of tea, you will not like this movie, and even if it is, you may find the story more than a bit silly.

Diabolical
One of the most fun, clever and effective scary movies to be found is Henri Georges Clouzot's "Les Diaboliques". But there is a madness around in Hollywood that says it is always a good idea to have a go at remaking a masterpiece. Why? If it ain't broken, surely, don't fix it. Do these people somehow suppose that "Les Diaboliques was a bit of a failure, nice basic idea prevented from great movie status only by the absence of the great cinematic ideas present in this? Sometimes, in fairness, it must be said, the misguided attempt to remake classics has decent enough movies as a result. Think only of well known retreads of "Cat People", "The Thing from another World" or "Scarface". However this is emphatically not one of those movies. It's only possible value might be as am object of study to student filmmakers in how not to make a fun, clever and effective scary movie.

One distinguishing feature of the glorious original was it's remarkable lack of any attempt at naturalism or realism. It is set in a vividly imagined a nightmare dreamworld of shadows and violent emotions This tries to be more naturalistic and convincing. Tries and fails as the writer's and director's idea of naturalistic and convincing is a useless hodgehodge of tired Hollywood clichés. If it has a saving grace it is Kathy Bates as the annoyingly persistent cop (in Clouzot's film an unmistakable template for Peter Falk's Columbo: changing the sex to escape from looking like a tame takeoff of that TV icon was almost the only sensible idea in the movie). And while Bates is a class enough act to rescue many a bad film, she cannot rescue this. Sharon Stone is on autopilot, sleepwalking her way through a reprise of her standard evil and conniving act from countless better (if generally pretty terrible) films. Isabelle Adjani as the wife is an illustration of the film's imaginative cowardice: the film is transposed to the contemporary USA but they make her a Catholic/European type presumably just from a misplaced hope that that will get them a bit of the magical atmosphere of the original. Dream on. The direction, writing, cinematography and, Bates aside, acting, is wooden and hopeless. Given the wonderful ideas for dramatic tension thrown up by Clouzot, it is almost preposterously lacking in suspense and about as scary as "The Waltons". Most depressing and cynical of all is the lamentable changes to the ending to make it a bit more feel-good, a bit less dark, and infinitely, sorry, stupider. It is as if, knowing they had a turkey on their hands the makers felt they could throw it to the focus groups without shame. It remains just close enough to the ending of the original to constitute a massive spoiler if you should ever see the latter (as you should go out of your way to do) and are unfortunate enough to encounter this first. So if you have not seen the original you have that reason, above all, to avoid this like the plague. And, even if you have seen the original, there are loads and loads and loads of other reasons. Life is just too short.

Should award this movie a gobble instead of a star...
...because it is a TURKEY!!!!!!!! ... Read more

Reviews (20)

A Classic, Period!
One of Isabelle Adjani's best qualities is that no matter what character she plays, she's always convincing. 1988's "Camille Claudel" is probably her most passionate, convincing performance. From the film's moving start, to its tragic end, there is never a dull moment. Easily handling a full range of emotions, Adjani manages to charm us, sadden us and even frighten us. This is a long movie but never once did I tire of it or lose intrest. Before this movie, I had no idea who Camille Claudel was. After seeing it, I was moved to find out as much about her and her sculptures as I possibly could. Along with Adjani, Gerard Depardieu deserves credit for his outstanding performance as Rodin. Production values are meticulous right down to the smallest details. While several great movies come out every year, very few "classics" manage to break through. "Camille Claudel" is one of those who thank God, managed to do so.

Good!
Camille Claudel is a must-see. There are various topics in it that make this film interesting: the struggle of women artists of that time; the influence of Rodin on her artistic and personal life; her father's support and insight for his daughter; insanity as product of social misconception on females' role in the art world.

Great acting and a superb story. The only drawback is that it seems to be told entirely by the 'pro-Claudel's side of view'. In spite of that, this is still a movie that has depth and gives an accurate picture of that passion and conflict for being a fine artist.

Passionate, Creative and Tragic, A True Art Movie
I began watching this film on a late night of insomnia....it didn't help me to sleep and that's a good thing!

Isabelle Adjani artfully plays real life French sculpturess, Camille Claudel. She displays pure emotion and passionate reactions such that she is completely believable as the tragic yet talented Claudel. Claudel becomes Auguste Rodin's assistant and eventual lover/muse. They fight and compete for fame together and seperately with Claudel always the more talented but underscored by Rodin's jealously and fierce connections to the art world. In the end Claudel succumbs to a broken and ravaged heart betrayed in many ways by her one true love, Rodin.

I recently returned from a trip to Paris and having seen first hand the sculptures created by Claudel and Rodin I am even more impressed with this tragic story of talented yet conflicted artists. To see the obvious gentleness with which Claudel can carve marble and to feel the warmth that stems from a slab of cold stone left me mesmerized by her talent. Rodin appears clumsy and inept next to her creations despite his world reknown fame. I will always wonder what a woman of her talent could have created had she been alive today and not under the influence of an egotistical maniac!

'Camille' est magnifique!
As a French major, this is an excellent film. The language is clear (the nudity is a little inappropriate for some ages, though). I've seen this film twice some months apart and each time it was certainly engaging.

The pace was a little frustrating near the end, but considering the topic at hand (the demise of a promising artist), it is understandable. What does make an impression are the images. Many of the scenes have almost a photographic quality - very nice cinematography. The relationship between Camille and Rodin is very full of little nuances that keep the viewer engaged, too.

This is a great film for pleasure, an art classroom or a history class. Obviously, francophiles would love it, were they to see it!

Good Movie
I saw the movie on cable and it was a fascinating story about the sculptress Camille Claudel and her lover Renoir. She was a talented artist in the beginning with ambitions. Then she gets involved with Renoir, a womanizing artist and a married man. She forgets herself in his world and when he doesn't choose between her and his wife, she leaves feeling as if he is at fault for her waning popularity. Claudel was a talented artist of her day when women were considered second-class citizens and encouraged by her father to be the person she was. Unfortunately, she came across disappointment and mental distress when her relationship with Renoir ended. While she was his mistress, she wasn't herself, and without him, she lost her spirit. Her brother, who was considered the troublemaker, made himself a well-known person in diplomacy and literature. The movie examines the close relationship between Paul and his sister. It was sad that her relationship with her mother was never restored. She always felt she was a threat to her because of her work. Her father was supportive through and through. What disappointed him was the daughter that changed into someone else's shadow. Camille was a gifted woman of her time. Had she kept her sanity and let go of the demons, she would have maintained high status as Collette. The movie was a very interesting movie to watch. ... Read more

Reviews (29)

Possession (1981) d: Zulawski, Andrzej
Incredibly strange nasty that the art house crowd will love. Mark (Sam Neill) and Anna (Isabelle Adjani) are a married couple going through a long dark marital breakdown during the political upheaval of 1970s Berlin. The highlight of which includes Anna expressing her tormented stated of mind by cutting into her neck with an electric carving-knife. On the surface the movie seems very simple: Mark figures that he has gotten to the bottom of Anna's unsettling behavior. He assumes that she is having an affair, and hires a detective to find out who it is. In probably the weirdest twist ever committed to celluloid, we find out that Anna has given birth to an octopus creature in a award-winning ten minute bile-spraying miscarriage on the Subway. If that is not enough, we discover that she is committing incest with the tentacle lover. The demented housewife struggles with leaving her family behind for her slimy monster. "...Part art film, part supernatural thriller, and part splatter horror" this movie has finally been put back in the right order and released uncut for the first time in North America, but it still does not make a lot of sense. Deep metaphor's throughout the picture make Possession incomprehensible but fun to try and figure out.

A distorted look into the mirror of love-- a must!
After many years of acquiring a cult status of mythical proportions, Zulawski's "Possession" finally comes to the viewers as it was originally supposed to be seen.

This is not an easy movie to see or to understand -- and I suppose it neither was easy to write or film. The characters are severely neurotic and seem to thrive on their bizarre behaviour (in more ways than one) yet they are somehow all too human. Like the movie ultimately suggests (once you get to see the secret trick the movie plays on the two leads), this story may be like looking into a mirror, though dark and distorted.

Meet Mark (Sam Neill), an overworked man with a mysterious job that takes him "to far away places". Meet his lovely wife, Anna (an overwhelmingly beautiful Isabelle Adjani), a sexually frustrated housewife and former ballet instructor who has much more than meets the eye going on for her.

Between quarrels and reconciliations, these two share a nice apartment in a quiet and well-to-do district of Berlin and have a five year old son, Bob, but they also share a horror that no one could have suspected, and that will make all their fantasies and nightmares come true.

After being brutally butchered by Vestron Video for its original release, "Possession" has been restored to its original lenght and sequence, therefore becoming coherent for the viewers who used to find it mind-numbingly strange.

I think of it as a very unique piece of craftmanship, part Ingmar Bergman drama, part Polanski suspense thriller, part Dario Argento gore, part Kubrick satire, part Buñuel surrealism and still somehow, very much its own.

The camera angles, the direction, the strange whims and seizures that seem to take over the characters (including one memorable and disturbing scene on a subway station with Adjani pulling all the stops not ontly to her acting abilities but to her physical strength too) are part of a very strange style Zulawski has to tell his story.

If you are accustomed to standard horror fare, then probably you will dismiss this movie as pretentious eurotrash (something it has been labeled off as countless times) but if you're game and follow the sequences and let your imagination be ensnared this will be a convulsive ride to the depths of emotion where you won't emerge as the same person.

And quite possibly, that's what all horror movies are really about at heart.

As a footnote: Isabelle Adjani won a very deserved Gold Palm at the prestigious Cannes Film Festival for her dual role in this film that, no matter how much you loved it or hated it, is still unforgettable.

The quality of the DVD in picture and sound is also of note.

What more can I say?
You either love this film or you hate it. I write this review mostly to add five more stars to the ratings this film has recieved. There is not much more I can add to what the others have said. This film is a unique experience. By American standards, all the performances are grotesquely over-acted, but if this is pretentious, then I say bring on the pretense! Isabelle Adjani is wonderful to watch even in the calmer moments, and when she moves into High Historionics she is utterly unlike anything you have ever seen (and much more impressive than the monster). The film is not light entertainment, but deep catharsis, intended slap the viewer into satori, the Dionysian dream of an Apollonian chorus. Since viewing it, I have searched for anything by Zulawski I could get my hands on, and it has not been easy to find much. This is his only film in English, and much of his work has never even been released with English subtitles, much less in American formats. (Perhaps after the mutilation Possession recieved at the hands of Vestron, Zulawski did not want to release more of his films in the United States?)

Aimless, directionless, useless
This film was a ridiculous waste of time and energy. There was no narrative to hold the scenes together. Characters were too weird and strange and violent. The whole thing seemed pointless. The only redeeming value to this film is Isabelle Adjani, who is beautiful beyond words. And the cover art and insert have some provocative images. Aside from that, SAVE YOUR MONEY.

man oh man oh man......
I was thrilled to find so many references to Polanski and Cronenberg among the reviews for this film. It does indeed combine the dark suspense and ironic humor of ROSEMARY'S BABY, the biological horror and familial disintegration of THE BROOD, and the unabashed histrionics and directorial flamboyance of Ken Russell's THE DEVILS. With themes of marital strife, familial disintegration, and psychological breakdown harking back to the former two and the in-your-face grotesquerie and visceral drama reminding the viewer of the latter two, little-known but acclaimed Polish filmmaker Andrzej Zulawski tells the story of Anna (Isabelle Adjani, in the performance of a lifetime) and Mark (Sam Neill), she a bored housewife and he an overworked... something (the film never makes clear his occupation). They share an apartment in an empty, run-down Berlin with their young son. After completing an important job of some kind, Mark comes home to his family to find things changed. He drags the truth from Anna that she has been having an affair. She insists she cannot stay with him, and leaves Mark with the child, apparently to shack up with her lover. Mark tracks down the lover, a real weirdo named Heinz (Heinrich Bennent), but after insults and fisticuffs, Heinz insists he has not seen Anna in quite a while. Mark, perplexed, hires a detective to follow her from their apartment after one of her sporadic visits, which always end in chaos. The detective manages to get in and... something really strange happens. I know what that something is, having seen the picture, but on the off-chance you haven't read the other (spoiler-inundated) reviews, I'll keep it secret. Instead I'll talk about the photography, which goes a long way toward mirroring the absolutely unhinged performances, and the set design, which provides a cool counterpoint to the feverish tenor of the film's action and dialogue. It obviously isn't going to be for everybody, and in fact some will doubtless find it repellent. Writing the film was obviously therapeutic for Zulawski (who, like Cronenberg when writing THE BROOD, was going through a nasty divorce). A friend of mine said he was more sickened by the scenes of emotional anguish than by any of the film's often-stomach-churning special effects. Just keep two things in mind: firstly, this isn't your typical "horror flick", therefore the splatterpunk/gorehound set should stay away; and secondly, this one is playing for keeps: though laced with a bitter humor, there are no light moments here AT ALL, and this should not be watched by couples on a first date, or any couple whose relationship is not secure. Also, keep impressionable children away from it. I was very impressed with what I thought would be just another dreary, over-hyped horror film and turned out to be a genuine classic (at least as far as I'm concerned). Watch POSSESSION if you like Polanski's horror films, Cronenberg's more dramatic outings, or any of Ken Russell's stuff. SCENE OF NOTE: Adjani going ABSOLUTELY NUTS and having a miscarriage (or going into labour...?) in a subway station for what seems like an eternity. ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Nobody Does It To You Like Roman Polanski!
Roman Polanski's THE TENANT, released in 1976 (two years after his blockbuster CHINATOWN), is my all-time favorite movie. It isn't Polanski's best film (MACBETH gets that honor in my opinion), but this story (taken from Roland Topor's equally strange but less inspired novel) really "does it to me". Polanski himself (who also co-wrote the screenplay with long-time friend and collaborator Gerard Brach) plays Trelkowski, a timid, lonely Polish immigrant trying to make ends meet as a file clerk in Paris. Polanski's performace is genuinely amazing. There are not many actors, let alone directors, who would feel so comfortable playing such a difficult and potentially career-shattering role. In the film, Trelkowski finds an apartment in a dingy old building run by the oddly sinister Monsieur Zy (Melvyn Douglas) and a rude Concierge (Shelley Winters). The previous tenant, Simone Choule, attempted suicide by jumping out of the window. Monsieur Zy tells Trelkowski that if she dies, he may have the apartment. Trelkowski hot-foots it to the hospital to see how long it'll be before he can move in. Simone lies, semi-comatose, swathed in bandages like a mummy from head to toe. When she screams upon seeing Trelkowski's face, the head nurse demands that he and Stella (Isabelle Adjani), Simone's best friend, leave immediately. Trelkowski tries to initiate a half-hearted love affair with the frumpy Stella that evening, but they are unable to connect for some reason and go their seperate ways. The next day, Trelkowski learns of Simone's death. When he moves in, he begins to notice strange things: neighbors complain of noise, usually without cause; people seem to spy on him from the communal bathroom across the way; he finds a human tooth stashed in a hole in the wall behind his wardrobe; there are knocks on the door when no one is there; he is constantly bothered by neighbors who are either obnoxious (such as Jo Van Fleet) or pitiable (like Lila Kedrova). Eventually, surrounded by artifacts from the dead girl's life, and torn apart piece by piece by his increasingly demanding neighbors, Trelkowski slips into insanity, dressing in Simone's clothes, pulling out his own tooth to match the one lodged in the wall, and even purchasing a wig and high heels, intoning things like "I think I'm pregnant" to himself in the mirror. He begins to hallucinate, and his persecution complex turns into a severe case of schizophrenia. I won't tell you the ending, but I will say that if you enjoyed REPULSION and ROSEMARY'S BABY, then you will find this to be a fitting third piece of the puzzle. Like Carole and Rosemary in those films, poor Trelkowski is a victim of urban living, a pathetic lost soul not unlike Travis Bickle of Scorcese's TAXI DRIVER (released the same year), except that Trelkowski is a danger mostly to himself. Like I said, this isn't a great film, but it's worth your time if you enjoy horror films Polanski-style. And as a vision of one man's private hell, it's indispensable. I love this movie, flaws and all. Obviously not for all tastes.

ANOTHER GREAT CINEMATIC WORK - wanna know why?
In CHINATOWN, Polanski gave us a great story of corruption. In ROSEMARY'S BABY, he studied the occult. In REPULSION, he gave us a portrait of a troubled mind. Here, in THE TENANT, Roman Polanski gives us a stunning new portrayal of absolute paranoia.

Polanski stars himself as the main character: a man who rents the apartment of a dead woman - who apparently jumped from her window.

Strangely enough, Polanski's character starts to identify with the dead woman little by little as he starts to live in the same environment... the same apartment, the same neighbours, the same window, the same talk... and - guess what! - maybe she did not commit suicide after all...

But this is just the beginning. To reveal more, it would be unthinkable.

Why is this a great film? A first rate screenplay (beautifully constructed), amazing actors (Shelley Winters and Melvyn Douglas are great!), and...

...The sets! T