I can guarantee this is not for all tastes, since it is not for my taste. The opening ten minutes are intensely depressing and I found that they set the predominant mood. That in itself is no reason to downgrade this film, but trying to resolve the frequent fluctuations between brutal realism and unbelievable fantasy ultimately wore me out.
Alex and Michele are homeless and camping out on the Pont-Neuf while it is under repair. Michele is going blind and Alex is an alcoholic with a drug problem on the side - certainly a setup that will challenge all but the persistent to bug out. We see rubble on the bridge, but never any indication of there being active renovation going on. This is in keeping with there being almost nobody on the streets of Paris, or in the subways. Maybe the intent of this population void is to focus our attention on the protagonists, but it lent an unreal air to the proceedings for me. And just when we are willing to cut the film some slack in this area we are brought back to harsh realities.
Indeed there are some wonderfully filmed scenes like Michele water-skiing on the Seine at night with Alex manning a speed boat. But what is to be made of that? Prior to this scene we see that Michele is weak and hardly able to walk. Most scenes overstay their welcome. When Michele takes to drugging the drinks of restaurant customers in order to put them to sleep so she can pick their pockets we are saturated with scenes of about a dozen people as they *slowly* succumb to the drug. And is that mode of theft really practical? And so on.
What are we to take away from this film? That homeless people desire love and acceptance just like anybody else? That the homeless have their reasons for being as they are? That love can exist among the ruins? That a few dazzling scenes will keep people watching? That Juliette Binoche fans will put up with a lot just to see her in a movie?
There were no new insights for me here.
Alex and Michele are homeless and camping out on the Pont-Neuf while it is under repair. Michele is going blind and Alex is an alcoholic with a drug problem on the side - certainly a setup that will challenge all but the persistent to bug out. We see rubble on the bridge, but never any indication of there being active renovation going on. This is in keeping with there being almost nobody on the streets of Paris, or in the subways. Maybe the intent of this population void is to focus our attention on the protagonists, but it lent an unreal air to the proceedings for me. And just when we are willing to cut the film some slack in this area we are brought back to harsh realities.
Indeed there are some wonderfully filmed scenes like Michele water-skiing on the Seine at night with Alex manning a speed boat. But what is to be made of that? Prior to this scene we see that Michele is weak and hardly able to walk. Most scenes overstay their welcome. When Michele takes to drugging the drinks of restaurant customers in order to put them to sleep so she can pick their pockets we are saturated with scenes of about a dozen people as they *slowly* succumb to the drug. And is that mode of theft really practical? And so on.
What are we to take away from this film? That homeless people desire love and acceptance just like anybody else? That the homeless have their reasons for being as they are? That love can exist among the ruins? That a few dazzling scenes will keep people watching? That Juliette Binoche fans will put up with a lot just to see her in a movie?
There were no new insights for me here.