Amazon.com

Régis Wargnier's 1992 Oscar winner for Best Foreign Film is a bit like watching paint dry, despite its exotic locale and lead performance by the legendary Catherine Deneuve (Belle de Jour, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg). Deneuve plays a wealthy French landowner, born and raised in Indochina, from 1930 until 1955, the year of a Communist takeover. The brewing political changes bound to upset her fortune and destiny find an even more personal parallel in her relationship with an adopted daughter (Linh Dan Pham), who grows up and becomes independent. The outline of this scenario sounds pretty good, but the film is flat and unworthy of its star. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (55)

Sweeping epic that focuses on romance, not revolution
This 1992 film won an Academy Award for best foreign language film. Starring Catherine Deneuve, it's a sweeping epic set in French Indochina in the late 1930s. The French were colonialists without apology. They felt they were bringing civilization to the country. We all know what happened later, but the characters don't. This made me have the persistent feeling throughout about how I knew the style of life displayed in the film would all be swept away.

Catherine Deneuve was almost fifty years old when the film was made and her maturity just adds to her beauty and elegance. She's cast as a wealthy rubber plantation owner who has never married but has adopted a lovely young Vietnamese girl she raises as her daughter with all the advantages of a French education and beautiful clothes. Both she and her daughter, played by Linh Dan Pham, fall in love with the same French navel officer, 30-year old Vincent Perez. And when the lovely Catherine has him sent to a remote outpost, her daughter follows him. There's political upheaval in the air and soon the daughter and the naval officer are on the run. Eventually they become revolutionaries. There's much tragedy. And a child who is left to be raised by his grandmother.

It's a good story, well told. But it focuses on the romance instead of the revolution. This makes it a little too sugar coated for my taste although the acting is excellent and the screenplay engaging. It did hold my interest throughout the 158 minutes, however, and gave me a picture of what Vietnam must have been like for the French. They lived a fairytale existence in the lap of luxury while all around them people were being exploited and worked to death. I enjoyed the film even though it lacked the bite and emotional engagement that I would have preferred.

Beauty and Sorrow
This deeply felt and emotionally rich portrait of a country about to change forever is one of the most beautiful films ever made. It is elegant and opulent in it's visual presentation and subtle in it's human tale of heartbreak. This film has the majesty of morning sunlight on water we dare not shield our eyes from for fear we will miss one moment of its glory.

Director Reigis Wargnier has created a masterpiece of epic beauty, showing us the country of Vietnam when it existed as the French colony Indochine. He shows how and why the communist uprising was so popular and the way of life it threatened. It does not make judgements but shows the human drama and the heartbreak caused by a way of life that existed and the one that was coming to change it.

Wargnier accomplishes all this in a slow and visually stunning portrait of one family in Indochine centering around the magnificent performance of Catherine Deneuve as French rubber plantation owner Eliane Deveries and the equally terrific Linh Dan Phan as her adopted Indochine daughter Camille. The contrasts of Eliane's cool elegance and Camille's young and sensual beauty is like a mirror for the country itself as Wargner shows the difference between the French and those that serve them.

Eliane runs her rubber plantation with the help of her 'coolies' and it appears to be her entire life except for her daughter Camille. Eliane's cool outward elegance only masks the repressed emotions she hides from others. Her affairs have been casual and she believes indifference is the secret to surviving love. But that indifference changes dramatically as she finally falls hard for young French Naval Officer Vincent Perez (Jean-Baptiste Le Guen). She throws herself at him as he draws away and discovers she is not enough for Vincent.

There is much unrest at the class distinctions of Indochine. Eliane's Indochine is one of elegance and self-indulgence. It is a world of Fitzgerald and Gatsby. The world of the Indochene people is more severe. This film takes it's time showing us all that is beautiful about the country and slowly begins to show the darkness underneath that beauty when Camille falls in love with Vincent also. Eliane is stunned beyond words but not actions as she uses her clout to have him transferred to the farthest outpost so Camille can go through with an arranged marriage to Tanh (Eric Nguyen).

But Eliane has underestimated her daughter's love for Vincent and she runs away to find him. Vincent has learned about the slave trade which provides Eliane and others like her with their workers in this remote French outpost and sees firsthand it's brutality. When Camille finds him it is during the picking of these workers and a tragedy forces both to flee to a place hidden and supposedly cursed where their love will bloom and a legend will start. There are some tender and moving moments and some true heartbreak involving a baby.

As the communist revolution grows stronger and Camille is imprisoned, Vincent will meet Eliane once more. It is only when Camille is imprisoned that she is even sure she is alive. Her long time aquaintance Guy (Jean Yanne) has been searching for years as the legend of this young beauty has grown so that everyone in the country knows the story. Once released she will be the one to help change the country forever, but not before a heartbreaking meeting with her mother and a sacrifice of love.

This film may indeed be slow but it is emotionally rich and the visual beauty of the country itself is magnificently captured. Deneuve's cool elegance is perfect for the part and her Oscar nomination was well deserved. Linh Dan Phan is wonderful as Camille as she goes from the innocence of dancing with her mother to her country's Joan of Arc. There are no judgements made here. This is a human film and not a political one. This film is what a Renoir painting would be if it could leave the canvas and find our hearts.

Watch this film and stay with it. It is richly rewarding and certainly one of the finest films ever made. It's quiet beauty and sorrow you will not soon forget. You must see, and own, this magnificent film.

one of the best
Few films touch my mind, heart and soul at once. This one does. It presents strong, multidimensional characters in complex situations, and who change, grow, and cope with challenges and tragedy in sometimes surprising ways. I am stunned to see the reviews that saw the actors as wooden, the directing inconsistent, or the story lacking: they didn't see what I saw, suggesting that different experiences lead to different perceptions. This film can be seen at many levels and with many interpretations: among them, it showed how individuals may support tyranny with the best of intentions, oppression must fail, and change requires sacrifice...love may conquer, but perhaps not as one hopes for individual joy. There were no innocents, no ineffably strong heroes in this film. The characters portrayed people with whom I could relate, and understand, and cry for. Yet all of the central characters had (at least at some point) participated in enforcing oppression, or committed murder for various compelling reasons. It shows that those who accept the call to fight injustice may be compelled to sacrifice their personal happiness if not their lives-- and their motives are not necessarily noble. The film provides insight to the history that led to the Vietnam war, and relevant perspectives for reflecting on present problems of terrorism, cultural imperialism, and political justifications for war. As in life, there is no single correct view, no one correct line of action, only flawed humans, inadequate policies, and political systems dedicated to reinforcing a status quo. And Indochine shows the failures, the struggles and the human drama...will we ever learn from history?

Awful, overacted, messy
I wish I could find something good about this film but helas...I'm a true passionate about Vietnam but this film is one of the worst ever made about it. I really envy non french-speakers who may then not be affected by the terrible acting (but the text is basically awful so the actors may not be totally responsible). This film is discontinued, the storyline is either too slow or too fast, no identification with the characters is possible, the actors seem to 'recitate' their part with no emotion (Deneuve plays 'Deneuve' and Vincent Perez can be good-looking he truly has no talent). Everything happens abruptly with no real sense. We don't see that much of the Vietnam either and these bits of history do nothing for the film. Reality is far more complex than the 'nasty French and the nice Vietnamese'. This is a very black and white approach.
Bits of this and bits of that, I find hard to understand how this film got an award for the best foreign film. My advice would be: borrow it from someone you know before you actually buy it.
I certainly will recommend 'The Lover' inspired by Marguerite Duras'novel of the same name as well as the films like 'Cyclo' or 'the smell of the green papaya'. A different aspect of the Vietnam but far more interesting and so much more beautiful.

Powerful sophistication
Catherine Deneueve returns to bring class to the movies! This time, she plays a French colonialist in Vietnam who is in love with a man who has an affair with her adopted daughter. The film covers many social and political questions that are still hot topics today! A very relevant film with powerhouse performances by great actors.

Another great film by the progressive French! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Olivier Martinez (Unfaithful, The Chambermaid) plays Angelo, an exceptionally gallant, Italian soldier-in-exile hiding out from his Austrian enemies in rural France, where a cholera epidemic is sweeping the countryside. Helped in a tough spot by a countess (Juliette Binoche), Angelo swears his unyielding protection to her as she searches for her missing husband. The nobler virtues hold sway as Martinez suppresses his own deepening love and desire for the lady, an admirable posture that has ironic consequences when the countess herself becomes deathly ill. Jean-Paul Rappeneau, maker of the ornamental but empty Cyrano de Bergerac, directs this adventure-romance to a nice pitch of vitality and high drama. The two leads establish a great chemistry (they became offscreen lovers and parents), like watching a pair of thoroughbreds running in the same race. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (29)

A believeable tale only possible outside of Hollywood
This movie was a rare treat to have seen on the big screen. It showcases Oliver Martinez (Angelo Pardi) and Julliette Binoche (Pauline de Theus) in this engaging tale of romance in the cholera epidemic of 1832.

Rather then get into the specifics of the plot which can be seen in the myriad of other reviews, I want to stress how this movie was only made possible due to the supreme casting by Director Jean-Paul Rappeneau and Producer Rene Cleitman. The choice of Mr. Martinez brought this movie to life. Befroe his death in 1970 Giono said that in the belief of Neo-Realism that the actor be a commoner. While not at that level, Martinez portrays an air that other well known actors are unable to feign.

In addition, Julliette Binoche is able to work with him to the point where we are able to actually see Martinez grow throughout the film. All in all a fantastic watch and the upcoming release on DVD will hopefully bring a few more fans of Rappeneau into the mix.

It's lack of love scenes was not a minus
This movie is, first of all, something I don't think could ever be made in America. Why? Because America would want more action and more romance and more of everything that this movie has and "fails to deliver".
I've seen some French movies that were poor and this one doesn't fall into that category. Part of what I liked about this movie was it's simplicity and it's honor. Yes, Olivier Martinez does come across as superhuman as everyone around him succumbs to cholera and he wanders unscatched from every death scene, but it made me keep watching, just to see who this man was and where he came from and what he was supposed to be doing.
I liked the fact that the movie portrayed Juliette Binoche and Olivier Martinez's infatuation in such a simple, uncomplicated way. I liked the ending of the movie and how they kept everything open. It was nice to see people on the silver screen facing "real life rejection" as well, which is something few American films fail to portray, if the candy coated glossed over version of the powerful psychological film "Abre Los Ojos" is any example. Tom, I'm willing to just pretend that didn't happen.
Anyway, you should watch this film, if only to sit there and grind your teeth and be frustrated over it. At least you are grinding your teeth over something.

Very beautiful
This is one of my favorite foreign movies. I won't reveal anything about the plot, I'll leave it to you. I will say that some parts are slightly predictable though.

The acting is superb. I've always loved Juliette Binoche (Chocolat, The English Patient American movies) and I met Oliver Martnez through this movie. Both portray their roles amazingly and delicately, adding something great to a slightly dull script.

The scenery is absolutely stunning, enough said. This is well worth seeing, if you don't mind subtitles. (I don't at all ^^)

Good Old Fashioned Adventure--a la Francaise
Olivier Martinez has been called the French Brad Pitt. How about Juliette Binoche as the French Julia Roberts. Or is that not saying enough in either case?

Well, whatever your opinions of the actors in general, they are perfectly cast in this corker of a romantic adventure. Perfect chemistry between the two stars adds to what already a good, old fashioned high spirited adventure film. They don't make 'em like this anymore--either in this country or in France.

In fact, when you think of current French cinema, you tend to come up with charming, but self-consciously post-modern works like AMELIE or L'AUBERGE ESPAGNOLE. That kind of nod-and-a-wink filmmaking has its place, and I have nothing but affection for those films, but there's something about good old school stroytelling that can be utterly enthralling. You're actually allowed to get caught up in the tale and to forget that you're in a cinema (or your living room) watching images on film (or videotape or DVD or whatever). What a concept!

I am unfamiliar with most of director Rappeneau's work--although I have heard good things about his version of CYRANO and the celebrated ZAZIE DANS LE METRO. He certainly has a flair for historical romance, so I am now eager to see his treatment of the Edmond de Rostand classic. Or almost anything else he's done for that matter. He appears to have a great visual sense (or knows enough to seek out cinematographers who do). It's hard to think of a more beautifully shot film.

Like most films, HORSEMAN ON THE ROOF is not for everyone. But for lovers of foreign films in general--and of real romantic adventure in particular--this film delivers the goods.

Horseman could have been a contender
Horseman on the Roof is a beautifully filmed movie. The acting is good; the script, not so good; the choleric, two-minute transformations from healthy to "Dawn of the Dead" puplesque, ridiculous. The plot is rather predictable and mundane. I'm a big fan of foreign films, including the French ones. Overall, this one disappointingly misses the mark. There are, however, several action scenes that are quite good and the cinematography is outstanding. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Jean-Luc Godard and Luis Buñuel enjoyed an ardent misanthropicduel in the '60s and '70s, but who won is anyone's call. Godard's Weekend lays down the trump in a harrowing and darkly funny allegory in which social mores fray along political lines. Played out in a metafilm in which characters question their own reality, a morally bankrupt Parisian couple tries to leave the city on a much-loathed country holiday with the wife's parents. Along the way, endless traffic jams, sudden violence, and vistas of gory car crashes underscore their corrupted values. Their lethal encounter with the in-laws and kidnap by an anarchic band of radical cannibals finds the couple--and presumably "decent" society with them--reverting to a nasty primitivism. The idea is of course that the bored, apathetic heart of the bourgeoisie is never far from acting out its most homicidal fantasies. --Alan E. Rapp ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Spectacular film, embarrassing subtitles
I'm not sure who's idea it was to insert "arsehole," "collect my father from the clinic," and "he licked my arse" into the subtitles, and who it was that repeatedly forgot to translate "gens" into "people," but I really wish the French would get over their disdain for Americans and let someone who actually speaks English do the subtitles. In a way, the poor quality of the subtitles actually added to my enjoyment of the film, because it made it all the more ridiculous.

Speaking of ridiculous, let's talk about this film. Perhaps the ultimate expression of the New Wave in France, this film by Jean-Luc Godard is like a primitive cross between PULP FICTION and THE BIG LEBOWSKI. Essentially, a couple that hates each other goes on a journey to kill the husband's parents and take his estate. On the way, they encounter traffic jams, car crashes, cannibals, historical figures, Black militants, murderers, and hippies armed with automatic weapons.

I'm tempted to give away some of the funniest moments of the film... Basically, every situation the couple encounters is completely absurd, and sexual, social, and political commentary runs through every scene. I'll never forget the scene when the couple lights Emily Bronte on fire, or the lines, "If you'd like, you can screw her before you eat her!" and "Who would you rather screw, Johnson or Mao?" This movie is just ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous. Godard's courage and brilliant sense of humor is evident throughout the film, and his ability to weave well-conceived philosophical dialogue with slapstick comedy is a skill directors have been trying to emulate for years.

For people who don't need Hollywood to enjoy a movie, the French New Wave is fertile ground for experimentation and wild enjoyment. This isn't one of those films with a "good plot" or "profound dialogue." This is one of those films that's filled with scenes that you can't believe you just witnessed. "Did they really just slaughter a pig on film?" "Did they really just gun down a picnic for no reason?"

This film is filled with absurd scenes involving sex, violence, and class conflict that will delight you and make you hoot with laughter. The film's French perspective adds a subtly foreign character to the humor, which makes the film all the more dazzling - it's like eating a strange and exquisite delicacy - it's not just another funny American movie.

Skip MR. BEAN and order WEEKEND. This is one of the best weird movies in the history of film, and certainly one of the most important. And enjoy those awful subtitles :)

Godard's best
An utterly brilliant pastiche from Godard. JLG gives us a nightmarish vision of contemporary bourgeois society in which the apocalypse takes on the form of a series of bloody car wrecks and cannibalistic revolutionaries running wild. Even the scenes that don't work, like the bizarre encounter with Emily Bronte and Louis Carroll and the 18th-century French revolutionary reading a political tract, are forgiveable simply because they only add to the anarchic nature of the film. How many other movies have you seen that feature a woman screaming before a horrific car accident because she left her handbag inside, or a speech on Hitlerism and African slavery intercut with clips of traffic jams?

One of the most fascinating of Godard's new wave efforts
Jean-Luc Godard's film Week End is loaded with his obsessions with outrageous characters, political and philosophical ideas, and so on, and many viewers have claimed this to be a full on political film. From what I could gather after seeing a poor yet manageable copy of this film, I saw that this is possibly his best effort in terms of abrasive, surreal though bravura directing. He leaves the camera on his characters, with their flaws almost shining off them (which serves as an asset in some scenes), and yet most of the time it feels like he's directing a comedy of these events- comedy of errors.

Consider the scene where the woman has the monologue in her panties and bra, how she leads up such telling, informatory details to a payoff that gives as a reminder of the Walken scene in Pulp Fiction (though he is the better actor). Or in other times the comedy is in the sense of a Godard satire of his past work - the traffic set piece(s) gets the viewer to feel in the mood of the car he so pacingly follows, even as it becomes relentlessly obnoxious and tense, and acts like every other driver on the streets of the cities of America.

However that, and a moment of argument over a corpse in the passenger seat (he cuts to the faces of the onlookers who happen to find such dialogue rather amusing), show by the time Godard reached this stage in his career he wasn't taking himself and his work 100 % seriously, though that's not to say that the element of the woman's path to guerilla-hood isn't a serious topic. For his art film die-hards he also uses a peculiar, non-linear style in story-telling- an added advantage for a week-end timepiece.

I'm reminded of Fellini (as I was while watching another Godard film of recent, Contempt) in one aspect of the picture, in terms of how he portrays his women- he can love them, ignore them, belittle them, or even glorify them in the most drastic of measures, but he can't control them. One also wonders if this is how he just makes it for his films, or if in real life the women of his life were really this (how do I put it) out-there.

The script occasionally veers off on it's tale of a couple going on a disastrous week-end out for stretches of poetry, discussion, things that don't have much to do with the story, and yet there's a catching, eccentric, melodic aura to these scenes and passages. These kinds of scenes make it perfectly clear that Godard has created an original work here, one that may put off audience members who "don't get it" or expect total sense in the outcomes. Certainly a movie made for it's time, country of origin, and target group.

To sum up my review let me put it this way - this is the kind of picture that would've heavily influenced The Doors.

Foolishness on film
This film is easy to describe:
Sophomoric speechifying and utterly foolish.

The dangers of French Bank Holidays!
With influences ranging from Freud to Marx, De Sade and Eisenstein having walk-on roles and the Parisian weekend transformed into an allegorical bourgeois hell,
Week-End is one of the defining films of the 20th Century. Born out of the nouvelle vague cinema (French New Wave), this is the terrible birth that is brought to light from J.L.Godard's obsession with prophesising the destruction and decline of the West. Even after taking into account his overt political messages, Weekend still exist as one of the most technically revolutionary pieces of cinema to emerge from his studios into a blinding glare of publicity and hostility.

Not content with depicting the destruction of western commercial values, Godard disrupts the visual narrative by interspersing film titles, book titles and music onto a background of patriotic red, white and blue colours. From a personal perspective, one of the most impressive sequences is an eight minute long tracking-shot of the Parisian highway which progresses from straightforward traffic jams to car-wrecks and the inevitable symbol of multinational Capitalism, a Shell oil truck. Essentially Week-End marks the 'Maoist period' of Godard's film-making career, during which he declared that 'the only way to be a revolutionary intellectual is to give up being an intellectual.'

Starring Mireille Darc and Jean Yanne, Week-End's fabular narrative is a weekend journey from Paris to Normandy which slowly becomes an apocalyptic struggle against the French peasant revolutionaries who continually intervene to prevent the couple meeting Darc's mother in order to find out whether they have successfully poisoned her father. This emblematic quest for the Capitalist Grail is hindered by a philosophising character from Dumas, two rebels (African and Algerian) masquerading as refuse collectors and Saint-Juste, before the couple are captured on their return to Paris by the Seine-et-Loise Liberation Front, a group of cannibalistic freedom fighters.

Godard's continued affinity with politics can be witnessed in his other Maoist films, Les Chinoise (1967), Le Gai Savoir and Tout Va Bien (1972). Despite accusations of pretension, he still remains one of the most provocative and influential film makers of his and future generations, whilst his immense cinematic output can be regarded as a Marxist biography of the previous century.

What was an initially ground-breaking piece of cinema has evolved into an essential European film. Heralded by Pauline Kael in the New Yorker as 'Godard's Vision of Hell, and it ranks with the visions of the greatest' and 'somewhere between Swift and Samuel Beckett, alternatively violent and tender, humorous and cruel' (Jan Dawson, Sight and Sound) Week-end is a film that must be seen to be believed and to miss this is to miss out on one of the spectacles of 20th Century cinema. ... Read more

Reviews (332)

Brotherhood Of the Wolf-A Masterwork of Period Horror
Director Christopher Gans (Crying Freeman, Necronomicon)has adapted the 300 year old case of the Beast of Gevaudon into the absolutely brilliant BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF (Le Pacte De Loups). Samuel Le Bihan stars as King Louis the XV's chief naturalist, war veteren Gregoire De Fronsac, sent to the French countryside with his best friend, a Native American warrior named Mani (Marc DeCascos)to hunt and kill a wolf-like "beast" responsible for a series of bloody deaths. Along the way, they encounter political intrigue, a witchy courtisan (the stunning Monica Belucchi) and the Beast itself, with amazing results.
Although compared to The Matrix, Crouching Tiger and Jaws, I found this breathtaking film more in the vein of Tsui Hark's Once Upon a Time in China series, with a dose of Dragonslayer thrown in for good measure. Complete with amazing locations, spot-on costumes and butt-kicking Savate sequences courtesy of DeCascos, Le Bihan and the menacing Vincent Cassel (The Crimson Rivers), BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF was well worth the year's wait (it was released in France in January of 2001). By all means, treat yourself to this truly ORIGINAL film. Within five minutes, you'll forget the subtitles, drawn in by the film's voluptuous beauty and thrilling plot twists.

Magnificent folly, way ahead of its time
BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF (Le Pacte des Loups, 2001): In 18th century France, a brave young naturalist (Samuel Le Bihan [TROIS COULEURS ROUGE]) and his Native American companion (Mark Dacascos [DRIVE]) are hired to trace the origins of a bloodthirsty 'beast' which has been terrorizing the countryside, killing women and children. But their investigations uncover an appalling conspiracy which cuts to the very heart of French high society...

Loosely based on true events, this high-powered Gallic blockbuster - directed by Christophe Gans, hired on the strength of his incredible genre-bending adaptation of CRYING FREEEMAN - wowed French audiences when released in 2001. And no wonder! A high-kicking combination of horror movie, period drama, political thriller and 'Matrix'-inspired kung fu pageant, the film combines the best elements of these disparate sub-genres in a dazzling display of technical wizardry. Photographed in widescreen Super 35 by Dan Laustsen (MIMIC, THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN), and played with solemn conviction by an all-star cast - including relative newcomers Vincent Cassel (LA HAINE), Monica Bellucci (the MATRIX sequels) and Jeremie Renier (LES AMANTS CRIMINELS), and veterans Jean Yanne (most recently seen in BELLE MAMAN) and Edith Scob (the elegant heroine of Franju's LES YEUX SANS VISAGE) - the movie is a riot of action and intrigue, sustained by a multilayered screenplay (co-authored by Gans and Stephane Cabel) which recounts an elaborate fable of class warfare and religious bigotry during a grim period of French history. The fight scenes - choreographed with ruthless efficiency by Hong Kong movie veteran Phillip Kwok (MASTER OF THE FLYING GUILLOTINE, HARD-BOILED, TOMORROW NEVER DIES, etc.) - are fashioned with elegant grace, and edited to perfection by Sebastien Prangere and David Wu Dai-wai (another prominent HK movie figure, Ronny Yu Yan-tai's current editor of choice). Much of the film's otherworldly visual texture is due to the sumptuous art direction (by Guy-Claude Francois [JEFFERSON IN PARIS]) and costume design (by Dominique Borg), which roots proceedings in a recognizable period 'style', despite Gans' resolutely modern approach to the material. It shouldn't work, but it does, somehow. The 'explanation' for the beast and its murderous activities - which takes into account a wide range of modern research into the story of an animal which really DID terrorize the French countryside during the 18th century - forms the backbone of the entire production, and while much of the film is a rip-roaring joy, the climactic sequences are offset by an element of tragedy and sadness, which thoroughly distinguishes the movie from most of its Hollywood counterparts. All in all, BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is a magnificent folly, way ahead of its time, and quite unlike anything ever made before.

This review is based on a viewing of the Canadian disc from TVR Films which presents the original French version in its entirety (the international version, including the one released in the US and UK, appears to be shorter by about 10 minutes) and runs 150m 34s, minus the logos which open the video print and weren't part of the original production, and letterboxes the scope frame at 2.35:1 (anamorphically enhanced). The US disc - a region 1 release from Universal - is a no-frills affair which features a letterboxed anamorphic version of the shorter print, and some reviews suggest it's a better-looking transfer than the one featured on the Canadian disc. Captions and subtitles are provided. The Canadian version, however, is a 3-disc spectacular, and features (amongst many other things) an extremely frank documentary on the making of the film which opens with an actress being clobbered during an accident on-set, and proceeds to outline the various obstacles which constantly threatened the production schedule (not least the unpredictable weather during location shooting) and ultimately strained relations between director Gans and co-producer Samuel Hadida. That such a remarkable film emerged from these traumatic circumstances says much about the talent and dedication of these extraordinary gentlemen and all those who helped bring their unique vision to the silver screen. A triumph.

terrible!
i am completely amazed as i read the other reviews of this movie and have to wonder if we saw the same film.
did we?
a movie with no characterization? terrible dialogue? a lot of slow-motion action sequences (trying desperately to copy the John Woo style)? a lot of style and glitz but no plot motivation to back it up? and a SUPER hokey ending?
and don't even get me started on the character of Mani. i'm from the region Mani is said to come from, and all of the displays of Native American traditions which are presented in this film are fabricated and presented to the point that i was insulted!

did we see the same movie?
this is a good movie for cutiosity sake but little else.

Regarding the Beast
From the outset of Le Pacte de Loups, we know that the central beast of the movie is no ordinary wolf. Regarding its identification, however - a point that is never truly elucidated whether you've seen the film or not - there remains debate. My initial and superseding question is, no matter how the beast appears, what makes it impossible to believe in the beast's specificity as a common French wolf? This fact is unmistakable to my intuitions. Many of you might not know French, but I looked it up and "loup" is actually French for "wolf" - not "beast," like many appear to think. First point, the movie title states this so-called mysterious answer from the outset. If the beast was a hyena, the French would be referring to "hyènes," and were it a lion, it would actually be called "lion" (the two languages share this word).

If you need more evidence, there is no lack in the film. Our beast is often seen running with its pack, howling at the moon, and killing people. While Grégoire attempts to denounce the belief in human murders by wolf, one of the final scenes of the movie clearly depicts wolves doing just that: an obvious statement to disaffirm his slander. If you listen to the revealing narrative at the end of the film, it is stated that while visiting Africa Jean-François found the beast and raised her offspring, selecting the largest and strongest to take back with him to France and training it to be more ferocious and cruel than the average wolf.

***WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD.
Earlier we learn that this character has been savaged by a lion, which resulted in the loss of his right forelimb. Would you take the same animal that disfigured you and raise it as your own? Neither would Jean-François.

I had to chuckle at some of these reviews!
Wow! Four out of five. Three out of five. You have to be joking don't you? This movie is perfection. Pure, true, honest, stylish. Of course Americans get a bit ruffled when a 'foreign' film shows the good old US of A how 'it's done' yet again. You folk like you're movies with justification, explanation and gradification... all tied up in a bow. This movie is not sugar covered and goes in depth within (I won't give it away for those that have not seen it) an area that goes way back in time and is still happening today (Bohemiam Grove hint hint etc)which has always fascinated me. So why would you not like it? Firstly that pesky 'other' language (yes, it's in French - and so it should be) makes those of less IQ's have to read. Pesky pesky. Secondly it has many layers as a movie and does not always have to explain EVERYTHING that is going on, and instead relies on the intellect of it's viewers and allows us to progress on the journey and make up our own minds as to how, why and who. I will not go into 'explaining' the film as it is done already in the top review and you all seem to explain it over and over again. I am not French as you may all think, and instead an Aussie relieved and satisfied that a certain standard of perfection is retained in some movies in the world. Erotic, scary, action, suspense, intelligent, beautiful. Simply one of the best movies I have seen this year. (I'll put money on it that America will remake this movie very soon... and yet again bugger up another classic foreign film that should have been left well alone! Please don't! I beg you!) ... Read more

Amazon.com

Gustav Flaubert's celebrated novel of obsessive ardor undergoes a dazzling retrofit for the screen, courtesy of French neurosis-master Claude Chabrol. The basic story (a woman's selfish quest for happiness ends up obliterating all she holds dear) may be the same, but Chabrol's talent for biting through to the dark marrow of passion makes this a startling experience, even for people familiar with the source material or the numerous other cinematic adaptations. Casting Isabelle Huppert in the title role (she's at least a decade older than the standard conception of this willfully tragic heroine) was a potentially risky gambit that paid off big; underneath her glorious surface lies a startling foundation of brilliant ice. The same can be said about this stunning film. Viewers intrigued by this potent actress-director pairing may also want to check out The Story of Women and the wonderful La Ceremonie. In French with English subtitles. --Andrew Wright ... Read more

Reviews (9)

flatter than the DVD
Anyone who claims to have liked this movie can only have said so after
having read the book. Without the book as background there is no point of watching this movie. It was loyally re-enacted but skipped through scenes of the book like a skipping stone over water,
never getting below the suface. The cinematography for a movie about passion
was flat. The lighting was probably done with two hardware
store flood lamps. The scenes were layed out like a low budget neighborhood cultural center production. No great scores. No ones eyes ever meet. Never a breathtaking moment. I just rented this movie after spending
the last week getting through the book. I wasn't moved by the book's plot but I had imagined a movie adaptation enhancing the storyline. I love Isabelle Huppert but she was totally miscast for the role. She's way too old and there's nothing provincial about her. See her instead in Merci Pour le Chocolat. I was expecting something along the lines of The Piano, but got instead someting along the lines of a cardboard box.

flatter tham the DVD
Anyone who claims to have liked this movie can only have said so after
having read the book. Without the book as background there is no point of watching this movie. It was loyally re-enacted but skipped through scenes of the book like a skipping stone over water,
never getting below the suface. The cinematography for a movie about passion
was flat. The lighting was probably done with two hardware
store flood lamps. The scenes were layed out like a low budget neighborhood cultural center production. No great scores. No ones eyes ever meet. Never a breathtaking moment. I just rented this movie after spending
the last week getting through the book. I wasn't moved by the book's plot but I had imagined a movie adaptation enhancing the storyline. I love Isabelle Huppert but she was totally miscast for the role. She's way too old and there's nothing provincial about her. See her instead in Merci Pour le Chocolat. I was expecting something along the lines of The Piano, but got instead someting along the lines of a cardboard box.

C"EST MAGNIFIQUE...
This is an excellent adaptation of the Gustave Flaubert novel of the same name. Isabelle Huppert is superb as the central character, Emma, a prosperous farmer's daughter, who marries a doctor, Charles Bovary (Jean Francois Balmer). He is a kind and gentle soul who adores her and wants nothing more than to make her happy. The problem is that he does not know how. Even Emma does not really know what would make her happy.

This is the story of Emma Bovary and her unhappy, wasted, shallow life. She is a woman who on the surface seems to have everything, an adoring, doting husband, a lovely, healthy daughter, an attractive well appointed home. Yet, she is unhappy. She loathes her husband, finding him pedantic and dull. She has little time for her daughter and seems to have little motherly instincts. What worldly goods she has never seem to ber enough.

Seeking fulfillment, she takes lovers who always seem to fail her in the end. She mistakes passion for love and never fails to be disappointed when that love turns out to be fleeting, blind to the love that exists under her very own roof. As her unhappiness and dissatisfaction grow, so does the beauty of her wardrobe. Beautifully gowned and accessorized, Emma Bovary is as beautiful as she is shallow. She spends what she does not have on passing fripperies, only to have her world eventually come crashing down around her. She takes the easy way out of her self inflicted misery and, in doing so, consigns those who had the misfortune to truly love her to a doomed existence.

Claude Chabrol deftly directed this arresting period piece, exacting wonderful performances from the entire cast. Isabelle Huppert is perfectly cast as Emma Bovary with her icy beauty and gives a performance that is on the money. Jean Francois Balmer is also notable for his portrayal of her doting and supportive husband. This is an excellent, value priced film, one that is well worth having in one's collection. Period piece lovers will especially enjoy this film.

A true Madame Bovary
This movie is one of the best renditons of Gustave Flaubert's classic novel. The actors do a wonderful job giving depth to the characters and it is a wonderful adaptive screenplay. I recommend this version of all others except for maybe the one with Francis O'Conner.

Madame Bovary
Nobody could play the role better than Isabelle Huppert! I have red the book and seen the film. Never have I seen a film more "loyal" to such a wonderful book, than the film made by Claude Chabrol. And Isabelle Huppert gives us the most wonderful representation of the young Madame Bovary. She truely transmites us the idea of a woman who lives in another world; whose soul is restless, sufering, bored and longing for a glamourous life. If one likes the book, the film by Claude Chabrol will certainly not be disappointing! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

The film is well made and well acted.
I liked all the parts of this film. The characters were perfect. The plot was smooth and interesting throughout even though this was the second time I've seen the movie. I like the casual chat and the train noise that reminds one that Claude Lelouch believes in realistic sounds as part of the background. Like the "princess" in the film the viewer is charmed; however, only the viewer (besides the bandit) knows what is actually taking place in the Opera House and why. The movie engages the audience's attention. In the end, all dishonorable characters prove they do have a familial code of honor. And the princess proves that she is truly a princess. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

An Intelligent Adaptation
Victory (the novel) is hardly one of Conrad's masterpieces, and is his most melodramatic piece of fiction. These melodramatic elements lend themselves very well, however, when it comes to translating Conrad to film (which hasn't been done very well to this stage, apart from Coppola's loose adaptation of Heart of Darkness, Apocalypse Now). Director Mark Peploe, a sometime collaborator with Bernardo Bertolluci, has fashioned a script that comes close to the spirit of Conrad's novel. The changes that have been made have to do with the book's ending, yet they don't hinder the artistic flow of the film in any manner.

The story is a classic good vs. evil allegory, with Heyst (Willem Dafoe) representing a fallen Adam trying to make his way back to paradise. Just for reinforcement of the concept, Heyst's father stares down in glaring disapproval from a painting Heyst has had delivered from his old digs in San Francisco. He's now living in a paradisical setting (the Javanese vistas the camera captures are beautiful indeed), yet is living in isolation. His loneliness is cured when he rescues a young, French violinist playing in a travelling all-female orchestra which is performing at Herr Schomberg's hotel. Schomberg, who hates Heyst, is in the process of purchasing Lena (who we learn is actually named Alma) from San Giacimo, the oily impresario who conducts the orchestra and who, along with his iron-fisted wife, has absolute control over the female orchestra members.

After Heyst has rescued Alma and hidden her away on his island retreat, Schomberg receives a trio of unwelcome guests at his hotel. These are the Satanic duo of the mysterious Mr. Jones and his "secretary," Ricardo. A swarthy henchman named Pedro also acts a criminal aide-de-camp to Ricardo. In order to get rid of the trio and to exact his revenge on Heyst, Schomberg tells them that Heyst has swindled a former partner and had him killed, and that he then cashed in a huge insurance policy, the proceeds of which Heyst has secreted away somewhere on his island.

In the meantime, Heyst, who had been a reluctant benfactor at first, has fallen in love with Alma, who appears to have fallen for him as well. Suddenly, the trio appear at Heyst's dock in an open boat, and they look to have suffered from water deprivation and exposure. Heyst is suspicious of them from the outset, but acts the samaritan and gives them food, drink and shelter. Plot description beyond this stage would involve spoilers.

This movie is extremely well directed and well cast. Dafoe fits the bill for the Conradian westerner isolating himself in the far east. Sam Neil captures the "please allow me to introduce myself" quality of Jones and Sewell is a perfect Ricardo. Irene Jacob, who slept-walked like Lady Macbeth in her role of Desdemona in the 1995 Othello, is a convincing Alma. Ho Yi, Simon Callow, and Jean Yanne as Schomberg round out an excellent ensemble. Yet the major credit goes to Peploe for an intelligent script and assured direction. It's not easy adapting psychological novelists to the screen, which is why there are so few efforts at it. Nostromo, Conrad's masterpiece, for instance, reads almost like cinema, yet it hasn't been atttempted in a screen version, save for a rather weak BBC television adaptation. The Peter O'Toole Lord Jim was nothing like the novel. This neglected version of Victory may not be perfect, but it's as close as a filmmaker has come thus far.

BEK

too smart for American audiences?
Conrad is difficult. Conrad is difficult? Who are we kidding? Exotic locales, action, angst, and history, what's not to like? This may be the most accessible Conrad story for a movie-length treatment. A stronger female character than he's usually known for... a more straight-forward plotline that resolves more quickly... and a message. Ah, now, the message is the trouble isn't it? The explanation of how the title applies is a bit too philosophical for American audiences, I'm sure. And yet people sat through drivel like the Bridges of Madison County in droves? I don't get it.

Casting. Rufus Sewell is the shining star -- and he's not even on the cover of the box. As is so often the case with his supporting performances, he injects a level of energy into this film that should have come from its stars. Sam Neill can be forgiven; he's playing an opium addict aristo. But Dafoe is so understated he seems to be sleepwalking at times. He should have watched Peter O'Toole in "Lord Jim" before playing this part. (And yet, the tiredness of his character and others makes you feel the oppressive heat and barbaric surroundings they live in, so it is not altogether uncalled-for.)

As someone else said, Sam and Rufus are the best part of the film, wonderfully scummy and intensely watchable. Conrad is the next best (even adapted to film, the complexity of his stories shines through), and the setting follows. It's a great story that takes its time and rewards smart viewers, but this isn't the kind of movie you can watch with six people in the room blabbing at the same time. Pay attention, and you will find yourself transported to another time, another world, another way of thinking that could only come from the mind of someone who lived there. That is what makes Conrad great, and the people who made this movie wanted to be true to his themes even where they may not have been entirely true to the book. I think they did an admirable job.

Racier than the book--and the book's better
The film "Victory" is based on Joseph Conrad's novel. The story takes place before WWI and revolves around Heyst--a man who lives a solitary life on a remote island. On a rare trip from his island, Heyst encounters Alma (Irene Jacob) a violin-playing prostitute who is attempting to stave off some very unwelcome attentions.

Heyst takes Alma back to his island, and there of course, they fall in love and take off their clothes several times.

A trio of thugs, urged on by wild rumours that Heyst has a fortune hidden away on his island, arrive suddenly. Heyst insists that Alma puts her clothes on and hides her in his hut.

The film became much more interesting with the advent of the thugs. And really the thugs were the best part. Sam Neill played the rather oily, misogynistic "Mr Jones," and Rufus Sewell played the insane, violent and lust-driven "secretary." Both Dafoe and Jacob played their characters too flatly, and there was just no chemistry between them. Dafoe really makes a problematic hero even at the best of times. The ending, unfortunately, was ruined as always happens when a book is turned into a screenplay. ... Read more

Reviews (332)

Brotherhood Of the Wolf-A Masterwork of Period Horror
Director Christopher Gans (Crying Freeman, Necronomicon)has adapted the 300 year old case of the Beast of Gevaudon into the absolutely brilliant BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF (Le Pacte De Loups). Samuel Le Bihan stars as King Louis the XV's chief naturalist, war veteren Gregoire De Fronsac, sent to the French countryside with his best friend, a Native American warrior named Mani (Marc DeCascos)to hunt and kill a wolf-like "beast" responsible for a series of bloody deaths. Along the way, they encounter political intrigue, a witchy courtisan (the stunning Monica Belucchi) and the Beast itself, with amazing results.
Although compared to The Matrix, Crouching Tiger and Jaws, I found this breathtaking film more in the vein of Tsui Hark's Once Upon a Time in China series, with a dose of Dragonslayer thrown in for good measure. Complete with amazing locations, spot-on costumes and butt-kicking Savate sequences courtesy of DeCascos, Le Bihan and the menacing Vincent Cassel (The Crimson Rivers), BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF was well worth the year's wait (it was released in France in January of 2001). By all means, treat yourself to this truly ORIGINAL film. Within five minutes, you'll forget the subtitles, drawn in by the film's voluptuous beauty and thrilling plot twists.

Magnificent folly, way ahead of its time
BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF (Le Pacte des Loups, 2001): In 18th century France, a brave young naturalist (Samuel Le Bihan [TROIS COULEURS ROUGE]) and his Native American companion (Mark Dacascos [DRIVE]) are hired to trace the origins of a bloodthirsty 'beast' which has been terrorizing the countryside, killing women and children. But their investigations uncover an appalling conspiracy which cuts to the very heart of French high society...

Loosely based on true events, this high-powered Gallic blockbuster - directed by Christophe Gans, hired on the strength of his incredible genre-bending adaptation of CRYING FREEEMAN - wowed French audiences when released in 2001. And no wonder! A high-kicking combination of horror movie, period drama, political thriller and 'Matrix'-inspired kung fu pageant, the film combines the best elements of these disparate sub-genres in a dazzling display of technical wizardry. Photographed in widescreen Super 35 by Dan Laustsen (MIMIC, THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN), and played with solemn conviction by an all-star cast - including relative newcomers Vincent Cassel (LA HAINE), Monica Bellucci (the MATRIX sequels) and Jeremie Renier (LES AMANTS CRIMINELS), and veterans Jean Yanne (most recently seen in BELLE MAMAN) and Edith Scob (the elegant heroine of Franju's LES YEUX SANS VISAGE) - the movie is a riot of action and intrigue, sustained by a multilayered screenplay (co-authored by Gans and Stephane Cabel) which recounts an elaborate fable of class warfare and religious bigotry during a grim period of French history. The fight scenes - choreographed with ruthless efficiency by Hong Kong movie veteran Phillip Kwok (MASTER OF THE FLYING GUILLOTINE, HARD-BOILED, TOMORROW NEVER DIES, etc.) - are fashioned with elegant grace, and edited to perfection by Sebastien Prangere and David Wu Dai-wai (another prominent HK movie figure, Ronny Yu Yan-tai's current editor of choice). Much of the film's otherworldly visual texture is due to the sumptuous art direction (by Guy-Claude Francois [JEFFERSON IN PARIS]) and costume design (by Dominique Borg), which roots proceedings in a recognizable period 'style', despite Gans' resolutely modern approach to the material. It shouldn't work, but it does, somehow. The 'explanation' for the beast and its murderous activities - which takes into account a wide range of modern research into the story of an animal which really DID terrorize the French countryside during the 18th century - forms the backbone of the entire production, and while much of the film is a rip-roaring joy, the climactic sequences are offset by an element of tragedy and sadness, which thoroughly distinguishes the movie from most of its Hollywood counterparts. All in all, BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is a magnificent folly, way ahead of its time, and quite unlike anything ever made before.

This review is based on a viewing of the Canadian disc from TVR Films which presents the original French version in its entirety (the international version, including the one released in the US and UK, appears to be shorter by about 10 minutes) and runs 150m 34s, minus the logos which open the video print and weren't part of the original production, and letterboxes the scope frame at 2.35:1 (anamorphically enhanced). The US disc - a region 1 release from Universal - is a no-frills affair which features a letterboxed anamorphic version of the shorter print, and some reviews suggest it's a better-looking transfer than the one featured on the Canadian disc. Captions and subtitles are provided. The Canadian version, however, is a 3-disc spectacular, and features (amongst many other things) an extremely frank documentary on the making of the film which opens with an actress being clobbered during an accident on-set, and proceeds to outline the various obstacles which constantly threatened the production schedule (not least the unpredictable weather during location shooting) and ultimately strained relations between director Gans and co-producer Samuel Hadida. That such a remarkable film emerged from these traumatic circumstances says much about the talent and dedication of these extraordinary gentlemen and all those who helped bring their unique vision to the silver screen. A triumph.

terrible!
i am completely amazed as i read the other reviews of this movie and have to wonder if we saw the same film.
did we?
a movie with no characterization? terrible dialogue? a lot of slow-motion action sequences (trying desperately to copy the John Woo style)? a lot of style and glitz but no plot motivation to back it up? and a SUPER hokey ending?
and don't even get me started on the character of Mani. i'm from the region Mani is said to come from, and all of the displays of Native American traditions which are presented in this film are fabricated and presented to the point that i was insulted!

did we see the same movie?
this is a good movie for cutiosity sake but little else.

Regarding the Beast
From the outset of Le Pacte de Loups, we know that the central beast of the movie is no ordinary wolf. Regarding its identification, however - a point that is never truly elucidated whether you've seen the film or not - there remains debate. My initial and superseding question is, no matter how the beast appears, what makes it impossible to believe in the beast's specificity as a common French wolf? This fact is unmistakable to my intuitions. Many of you might not know French, but I looked it up and "loup" is actually French for "wolf" - not "beast," like many appear to think. First point, the movie title states this so-called mysterious answer from the outset. If the beast was a hyena, the French would be referring to "hyènes," and were it a lion, it would actually be called "lion" (the two languages share this word).

If you need more evidence, there is no lack in the film. Our beast is often seen running with its pack, howling at the moon, and killing people. While Grégoire attempts to denounce the belief in human murders by wolf, one of the final scenes of the movie clearly depicts wolves doing just that: an obvious statement to disaffirm his slander. If you listen to the revealing narrative at the end of the film, it is stated that while visiting Africa Jean-François found the beast and raised her offspring, selecting the largest and strongest to take back with him to France and training it to be more ferocious and cruel than the average wolf.

***WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD.
Earlier we learn that this character has been savaged by a lion, which resulted in the loss of his right forelimb. Would you take the same animal that disfigured you and raise it as your own? Neither would Jean-François.

I had to chuckle at some of these reviews!
Wow! Four out of five. Three out of five. You have to be joking don't you? This movie is perfection. Pure, true, honest, stylish. Of course Americans get a bit ruffled when a 'foreign' film shows the good old US of A how 'it's done' yet again. You folk like you're movies with justification, explanation and gradification... all tied up in a bow. This movie is not sugar covered and goes in depth within (I won't give it away for those that have not seen it) an area that goes way back in time and is still happening today (Bohemiam Grove hint hint etc)which has always fascinated me. So why would you not like it? Firstly that pesky 'other' language (yes, it's in French - and so it should be) makes those of less IQ's have to read. Pesky pesky. Secondly it has many layers as a movie and does not always have to explain EVERYTHING that is going on, and instead relies on the intellect of it's viewers and allows us to progress on the journey and make up our own minds as to how, why and who. I will not go into 'explaining' the film as it is done already in the top review and you all seem to explain it over and over again. I am not French as you may all think, and instead an Aussie relieved and satisfied that a certain standard of perfection is retained in some movies in the world. Erotic, scary, action, suspense, intelligent, beautiful. Simply one of the best movies I have seen this year. (I'll put money on it that America will remake this movie very soon... and yet again bugger up another classic foreign film that should have been left well alone! Please don't! I beg you!) ... Read more

Reviews (3)

An Unashamedly Enjoyable Film
The American critics have been not been kind to this film, nor have the French critics been overwhelmed. Granted, if your first impulse on leaving the cinema is to ask what the film was trying to say, then you will likely be disappointed. Meaning and message are not the stuff from which "A la mode" ("Fausto" in France and the UK) is fashioned. The business of this film is simply to provide an hour and a half of enjoyment. This it certainly does.

The four principals know their craft well and provide excellent ensemble. Ken Higelin is winning as the driven young emerging fashion designer. Jean Yanne is endearing as the kindly Jewish tailor who adopts him. He is the one strong actor in the film and doesn't try to steal the show from the youngsters. Francois Hauteserre is charming as Higelin's gross-out friend. Florence Darel is wonderfully demure and unaffected as the love interest and gorgeous as well. The smaller parts are given equal care. More than the usual attention, obviously, was paid to editing and the mise-en-scene. The film never lags, something possibly due in part to its director's having worked for a decade previous in advertising. (And before "selling out" to advertising, he spent a decade working as an assistant director on several important French films.) Sadly, "A la mode" seems to be Duchemin's only feature film. This is a film for those who simply want to sit back and be entertained. It is totally lacking in pretentiousness (Hauteserre certainly sees to that) and very full of charm. Even if it is not "The 400 Blows" or "Citizen Kane," I continue to enjoy "A la mode" after many viewings.

Yet another saucy French coming-of-age comedy
"A La Mode" is a fairly standard coming-of-age movie, without much of a French twist. Our hero is young Fausto (Ken Higelin), who is bullied for a while in the orphanage but eventually makes friends with Raymond (François Hauteserre), who can fart Beethoven's Fifth. Eventually Fausto is apprenticed to a Jewish tailor named Mietek, who adopts the two boys. Fausto turns out to have a natural flair for creating outlandish fashions, but his attention is on Tonie (Jean Yanne), the daughter of the local mechanic. In the end Fausto manages to combine both of his loves, dressing up the woman he loves. This is a funny film and certainly has touching moments, but there are so many of these types of films on both sides of the ocean that it is hard for any of them to stand out.

A mix of comedy and passion does not make a movie a success!
This film will not make the list of 100 best films ever, nor the top 200 or 300, but the film does make a decent effort to make you laugh. Overall, it is a decent film without any break through performances. The movie is the story of Fausto, an orphan who becomes an apprentice to an established tailor. Fausto, however, has dreams of becoming a fashion designer, particulary for women. Fausto's friend in the film provides much of comical relief, and is the only character who seems to have any depth.

If you have a couple of hours to waste and need a good laugh, then you may want to watch this film. If you are looking for a good foriegn or french film however, I do not recommend you rent/buy this film. ... Read more

Amazon.com

It's a mixed blessing, but Claude Chabrol's 1991 adaptation of Madame Bovary can at least claim a proper French pedigree in its fidelity to Flaubert's literary classic. It's certainly more faithful than Madame herself, played here with icy determination by Isabelle Huppert. Frustrated, repressed, and desperate for any opportunity to break free of her numbing marital bondage, the wife of Dr. Bovary finds her chance in the affections of Rodolphe Boulanger (Christophe Malavoy), but she is too shallow and too selfish to sense his lack of commitment. And as Flaubert's tale unfolds (along with Chabrol's dryly accurate interpretation), Emma Bovary finds herself caught in a snare of her own design. This tragedy of self-absorption--a universal study of indulgence, ignominy, and fatal discontent--should prove potent for anyone who feels the oppression of an unhappy marriage, but it's also a compelling study of boredom as an internal phenomenon. Huppert conveys exasperation, passion, and self-destruction in equal measure, yet she barely alters her passive, blank expression; her performance is too cold to ignite the resonant themes of Flaubert's novel. All in all, one wonders if Chabrol--seemingly uneasy with costume drama--is being too respectful of Flaubert at the cost of his own directorial mastery. This is a prestigious and worthwhile adaptation, but like one of Dr. Bovary's patients, it's been bled to the point of paleness and fainting. The result is a literate film that's "good for you," even though it may not be entirely good. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (9)

flatter than the DVD
Anyone who claims to have liked this movie can only have said so after
having read the book. Without the book as background there is no point of watching this movie. It was loyally re-enacted but skipped through scenes of the book like a skipping stone over water,
never getting below the suface. The cinematography for a movie about passion
was flat. The lighting was probably done with two hardware
store flood lamps. The scenes were layed out like a low budget neighborhood cultural center production. No great scores. No ones eyes ever meet. Never a breathtaking moment. I just rented this movie after spending
the last week getting through the book. I wasn't moved by the book's plot but I had imagined a movie adaptation enhancing the storyline. I love Isabelle Huppert but she was totally miscast for the role. She's way too old and there's nothing provincial about her. See her instead in Merci Pour le Chocolat. I was expecting something along the lines of The Piano, but got instead someting along the lines of a cardboard box.

flatter tham the DVD
Anyone who claims to have liked this movie can only have said so after
having read the book. Without the book as background there is no point of watching this movie. It was loyally re-enacted but skipped through scenes of the book like a skipping stone over water,
never getting below the suface. The cinematography for a movie about passion
was flat. The lighting was probably done with two hardware
store flood lamps. The scenes were layed out like a low budget neighborhood cultural center production. No great scores. No ones eyes ever meet. Never a breathtaking moment. I just rented this movie after spending
the last week getting through the book. I wasn't moved by the book's plot but I had imagined a movie adaptation enhancing the storyline. I love Isabelle Huppert but she was totally miscast for the role. She's way too old and there's nothing provincial about her. See her instead in Merci Pour le Chocolat. I was expecting something along the lines of The Piano, but got instead someting along the lines of a cardboard box.

C"EST MAGNIFIQUE...
This is an excellent adaptation of the Gustave Flaubert novel of the same name. Isabelle Huppert is superb as the central character, Emma, a prosperous farmer's daughter, who marries a doctor, Charles Bovary (Jean Francois Balmer). He is a kind and gentle soul who adores her and wants nothing more than to make her happy. The problem is that he does not know how. Even Emma does not really know what would make her happy.

This is the story of Emma Bovary and her unhappy, wasted, shallow life. She is a woman who on the surface seems to have everything, an adoring, doting husband, a lovely, healthy daughter, an attractive well appointed home. Yet, she is unhappy. She loathes her husband, finding him pedantic and dull. She has little time for her daughter and seems to have little motherly instincts. What worldly goods she has never seem to ber enough.

Seeking fulfillment, she takes lovers who always seem to fail her in the end. She mistakes passion for love and never fails to be disappointed when that love turns out to be fleeting, blind to the love that exists under her very own roof. As her unhappiness and dissatisfaction grow, so does the beauty of her wardrobe. Beautifully gowned and accessorized, Emma Bovary is as beautiful as she is shallow. She spends what she does not have on passing fripperies, only to have her world eventually come crashing down around her. She takes the easy way out of her self inflicted misery and, in doing so, consigns those who had the misfortune to truly love her to a doomed existence.

Claude Chabrol deftly directed this arresting period piece, exacting wonderful performances from the entire cast. Isabelle Huppert is perfectly cast as Emma Bovary with her icy beauty and gives a performance that is on the money. Jean Francois Balmer is also notable for his portrayal of her doting and supportive husband. This is an excellent, value priced film, one that is well worth having in one's collection. Period piece lovers will especially enjoy this film.

A true Madame Bovary
This movie is one of the best renditons of Gustave Flaubert's classic novel. The actors do a wonderful job giving depth to the characters and it is a wonderful adaptive screenplay. I recommend this version of all others except for maybe the one with Francis O'Conner.

Madame Bovary
Nobody could play the role better than Isabelle Huppert! I have red the book and seen the film. Never have I seen a film more "loyal" to such a wonderful book, than the film made by Claude Chabrol. And Isabelle Huppert gives us the most wonderful representation of the young Madame Bovary. She truely transmites us the idea of a woman who lives in another world; whose soul is restless, sufering, bored and longing for a glamourous life. If one likes the book, the film by Claude Chabrol will certainly not be disappointing! ... Read more

Reviews (3)

A rare movie that hits truth. Costa tops himself
It's not usual for directors to be politically incorrect. A daring movie that hits the truth, goes against the stream, and explore the tragedy.
I recommend for people seeking understanding of the midle east. Hope you enjoy it.

no easy solutions
This is probably the least interesting of the 4 films Costa-Gavras made with A-list Hollywood actresses, the others being Missing, Betrayed and Music Box. However it does provide us with a different take on Clayburgh. Here as a lawyer living in Israel, she defends an accused terrorist with a slowed-down deliberate address as if biting her tongue. And at times she looks nearly as beautiful as she did in Bertolucci's Luna. Once again Gavras places a female protagonist in an oppressive environment, though in relation to the other women, she seems to have it pretty good. She has 3 suitors (count em!) and an international appeal. But we know something is amiss when the trial of the accused terrorist is skipped in favour of Clayburgh's pregnancy, and it's all gone wrong when she is reduced to chasing her client around abandoned refugee camps. It's never made clear why this trial becomes so important to Israel, in spite of providing a pro-Palestinian point of view, and matters aren't helped by scoring points off Clayburgh's competence as a lawyer. In spite of this lack of focus, which one might attribute to the writer/director's overly ambitious task, he does provide some interesting moments, whether it's Clayburgh's French husband, played with charming dryness by Jean Yanne, reacting to her ridicule of him, the frightening righteousness of Gabriel Byrne's District Attorney, or the images of Jerusalem as a beautiful city ravaged by time and war. Near the end, Clayburgh offers up her child to the father, willing to abandon all responsibilty for it, and this shocking act has no weight. She tells us that finally she has lost her identity a la Kafka, and perhaps in a country where identity is everything, the price is what she faces in the final moment.

Unique
This is an interesting film, given that it attempts to view the Arab-Israeli conflict through a lens sympathetic to dispossessed Palestinians. It is also unique in that it is one of but a handful of films that does not use the worn-out habit of portraying Arabs as nothing more than a horde of violent terrorists or oil-rich buffoons.

The film is well worth watching, especially for those who are only familiar with one side of the conflict. The fact that it was filmed on location in Israel and the Territories makes it that much more remarkable, as this is a side of life that the Israeli government is not anxious for the rest of the world to see. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

A cerebral thriller of vengeance
After a hit and run accident Charles Thenier (Michel Duchaussoy) loses his only son and he is determined to find and murder the perpetrator. In Charles's investigation he records every minute detail and notion that passes through his mind in regards to the death of his son in a small black journal with a red marker. However, the private investigation that Charles is running seems to come to an end as he watches with a discouraged mind all clues lead to nowhere, until by accident he comes across some information that leads him to the killer of his son. Calculated and determined Charles enters the world of the killer as he attempts to get as close as possible to carry out his vengeful plan. This Man Must Die is a cerebral thriller that is based on a novel by Nicholas Blake that Chabrol adapted brilliantly to a terrific cinematic creation. The suspenseful atmosphere that Chabrol creates is inescapable, as the audience can hear Charles's dark thoughts as he scribbles them down in his black journal, but cleverly Chabrol leaves something untold that will keep the audience in awe until the end.

By far the best film of Chabrol
No other film deserves an intense analysis like this. The sense of revenge takes a unsuspected twist in this simple story. Finally you make your choice. This film is simply authentic. And even you don't agree with the rhytm of the story, you will obtain a redemption's sense in his mitological ending.

HE WILL
THIS MAN MUST DIE (Que la Bête Meure) is a movie written and directed by French director Claude Chabrol in 1969. The film is about the revenge of a father looking for the hit-and-run driver who's killed his only son.

It's a pleasure to rediscover these Claude Chabrol movies of the late sixties-early seventies period. Often despised by those who swear only by the name of François Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard when speaking of the french New Wave, Claude Chabrol deserves our utmost respect. Each of his films is the acid description of a slice, in the Balzacian meaning of the word, of the french society of his time.

Chabrol is an admirable storyteller with a caustic and perceptive mind. His actors and actresses don't have much to say, their behaviours and silences replacing for the best unnecessary lines of dialogs.

A DVD zone "tell me a story".

Masterpiece of Chabrol's second phase
Chabrol's name brings to mind two things, the French New Wave & Alfred Hitchcock. If you're looking for the New Wave side of the equation I would suggest Le Beau Serge, Les Cousins & Les Bonnes Femmes. All three early 60's New Wave masterpieces. By the late 60's however Chabrol was a different kind of film maker. This Man Must Die along with La Femme Infidele & Le Boucher are what might be considered the best films from Chabrol's second phase. Until his resurgence in the 90's with the Cesar winning La Ceremonie these three second phase films were also considered his last great films. La Femme Infidele, Le Boucher & This Man Must Die(under its French title Que la Bete Muere) have not been the easiest films to find but have now all been rereleased in March 2003.

This Man Must Die begins with a little boy walking back to his home from a day at the sea. As he crosses the desolate street in the seaside village near his home a speeding car hits and kills the young boy. The car never stops but speeds away from the scene. Slowly the villagers gather round the corpse and when the father arrives on the scene he screams with helpless rage. After a period of mourning he begins to plot his revenge. He plans to find, earn the trust and then kill whoever it was that killed his son. The plot is one of Chabrols best. Each phase of the fathers revenge is fascinating to watch. We get to follow the fathers investigations as he hunts down the murderer and at the same time we witness what effect this revenge has on his psychology. When he does finally find the murderer he befriends him/her as planned and is invited to spend a week at the murderers seaside estate. All along he wonders to himself if he will actually be able to commit murder but as he gets to know this murderer he finds he is a most despicable creature who bullys every one around him. Murder nonetheless is a complicated thing and Chabrol is the master of the plot twist so you can sit back and enjoy this knowing full well you are in the hands of a master. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This 1969 masterpiece by Claude Chabrol is a high point of the FrenchNew Wave director's mid-career, as well as that of actress Stephane Audran, Chabrol's then-wife. Audran plays a lonely schoolteacher who develops an inexplicable draw toward an ex-army butcher (Jean Yanne) who may or may not be a serial killer plaguing a small town. Drawing on Hitchcockian themes of exchanged guilt and shared secrets, Chabrol constructs an extraordinary relationship between the two characters that marries unspoken self-awareness with constant suspense over the unresolved nature of their bond. The film becomes so responsive to their tiny, meaningful gestures, their pregnant silences, and the comic-tragic synchronicity of their insulated world that the mere blinking of an elevator light speaks volumes about the hell of privileged knowledge. Le Boucher returned Chabrol to the backdrop of the French provinces, which he had visited before in his debut, Le Beau Serge, and later in La Ceremonie. --Tom Keogh ... Read more