Gerard-Depardieu Movie Reviews

Nicht gerade umwerfend. Wie eine x-beliebige Krimiserie im Fernsehen. Kein Meisterwerk. Alle lügen und betrügen sich gegenseitig. Depardieu wie Sophie Marceau, die alle reinlegt. Sie sieht allerdings recht durchschnittlich aus, die Rolle hätte mit irgend einer x-beliebigen Frau aus der Nachbarschaft genau so besetzt werden können.
Mir gefiel die französische Umgebung in Paris und Marseille, aber die ständig schnell quasselnden Schauspieler habe ich schon in besseren Filmen gesehen. Ein mal sehen reicht. Es gibt aus Frankreich ganz tolle Kriminalfilme wie "Frantic" oder "Fahrstuhl zum Schaffott", aber dieser hat mich nicht sehr beeindruckt.

It's nice to see Depardieu in this kind of role. He struggles between his police ethics and his passion for a drug dealer, played by Sophie Marceau, lovely as usual, but dangerous...? He combines several characters in one, making his personality in the movie very complex. He's obviously a great actor, and he proves it once again in this film. I was not familiar with Maurice Pialat's work, and was very nicely surprised. I liked this one very much. Worth a try if you like French Cinema.

A gritty contemp French drama like no other. Pialat truely brought the cop genre into the modern era, even before the *so called* impromptu realistic portrayal of cop drams such as NYPD blues and so forth. It was the first to use experimental hand held cameras and improv permances by Depadieu and among the excellent cast, a young Sophie Marceau. The tone and rhythm truely sets itself apart from other very high quality European Cinema of the period(mostly historical).

As a Carole Bouquet fan-atic, this film was totally satisfying. I love her signature hair, her demure French gazes. While her acting doesn't seem to ever go beyond one octave, it doesn't matter: she looks like Hermes Faubourg perfume smells....

Le Pont is set in Normandy in the 60's. The drama plays out slowly and evenly, as a woman (Bouquet) allows herself to bring drama to her life. She visits the cinema regularly, sometimes seeing a film 2 or 3 times. She finally has a chance to leave her working class housewife lifestyle behind. Putting Bouquet in this role, I found it difficult to believe that a shiveringly beautiful woman such as Bouquet could ever lead a boring existence. After all, she is THE Chanel girl.

I loved her husband's reaction to her "choice". Despite his working class ways, he has the strength and love to let her go, to realize her dream. Isn't that what true love is? To enable and empower another human being, sometimes at great cost to oneself.

Listen for the noise Depardieu's car makes when he slams the door closed: it is Ka-lassic

Much is said about the storyline, cinemaphotography, sets, score, costume design, not to mention the incredible performing trio (Bouquet, Depardieu and Berling). I shall only add that the movie is totally believable with the casting of Bouquet - how a man can fall head over heals in lust/infatuation with Bouquet at first sight...and how her husband can internalise all the hurt and anger by forgiving her outright. Carole Bouquet's definitely growing "older" gracefully, in fact, she is even more captivating and delicious than I can remember in her earlier film roles. This movie, along with "A Business Affair", showcase Bouquet's repertoire as a serious actress, not just any MTA (model-turned-actress) whose sole existence is too look beautiful, and hopefully help the box office.

This film marks -to my knowledge- Depardieu's first attempt as a director, and it is an obvious success both for the performance of actors and the sublety of the characters. To co-star in his movie, Depardieu chose Carole Bouquet,and it is perhaps because Bouquet is Depardieu's present wife that he is so successful in revealing a new aspect of her personality. Bouquet is best known in France for her past performances in Blier's Buffet Froid and Trop Belle Pour Toi, two movies in which she appeared as a beautiful, but extremely Cold and Solemn woman. On the contrary, in this movie we discover a much more light-hearted Bouquet, in fact so light-hearted that she does not seem to care about the consequences of her acts. Depardieu's performance is equally amazing : to think that this guy was a wonderful Epic Hero in Cyrano de Bergerac and that here he is equally convincing as a simple working man just tells you how BIG this actor is. As for the story I think that this film can be considered as a french ironic answer to the typically US Bridges of Madison County. Indeed in Bridges of Madison County Clint Eastwood, the travelling photographer, which primary goal is to photograph bridges, ends up seducing Meryl Streep, a housewife somewhat bored with her small-town lifestyle. Here Charles Berling is a "travelling" engineer which comes to this small town to build a bridge and seduces Carole Bouquet, a housewife equally bored with her life. But that's about all you can find in common between these films. While Streep's children discover their mother 's love affair only when she's dead, Bouquet's kid is aware of what's going on very early on, and this is just one of the reasons why the french film is much less melodramatic and much more realistic than the US one. Furthermore, while the Eastwood-Streep film was centered on the relationship between the two lovers, this one is centered on Depardieu/Bouquet, the husband & wife relationship, which allows for more complex and subtle dialogs. So if you like french movies and/or if you want to see what would have happenned between Eastwood and Streep in the real life, you should buy this movie.

Yes this is a french road movie, which in itself is interesting, but the rather sickening misogyny of the first part of the film makes it often hard to stomach. So be forewarned as you watch this, for if you are a fan of French cinema and culture, there are some things to be gleaned. As a portrait of a part of French society in the early seventies, culturally not long after the student riots of '68, the bohemian existentialist anti-bourgeois drifter held a romantic appeal similar to that found in an American equivalent to this film, Easy Rider. The relationship between the two men and the much older Jeanne Moreau actually subverts the film's early presentation of women as sexually and intellectually inept; yet her untimely end does nothing to truly mark her sexual freedom as empowered or stronger than that of poor miou miou who is pretty much a stereotyped kitten throughout, even when she learns to "enjoy" her freedom with the men at film's end.
Ultimately, if you are seeking an "amelie" or "il postino" or some other such Eurofilm fun, avoid this. But if you watch french films for some insight into the culture, this one is worth seeing. However, be prepared for some pretty brutal treatment of women. Nonetheless, the men are all largely bourgeois dupes or "liberated" trash too, so at least the film is egalitarian in its disdain for stereotypical gender roles. It is interesting to watch this film in tandem with Truffaut's "the man who loved women" for some insight into one aspect of the French view of women.

Patrick Dweare and Gerard Depardieu are so good together in this movie.a lot of energy from the pair and also some good laughs,the dubbing is ok but i think the movie is better in french speaking.it's a must see if you like french movie.

Yes this is a french road movie, which in itself is interesting, but the rather sickening misogyny of the first part of the film makes it often hard to stomach. So be forewarned as you watch this, for if you are a fan of French cinema and culture, there are some things to be gleaned. As a portrait of a part of French society in the early seventies, culturally not long after the student riots of '68, the bohemian existentialist anti-bourgeois drifter held a romantic appeal similar to that found in an American equivalent to this film, Easy Rider. The relationship between the two men and the much older Jeanne Moreau actually subverts the film's early presentation of women as sexually and intellectually inept; yet her untimely end does nothing to truly mark her sexual freedom as empowered or stronger than that of poor miou miou who is pretty much a stereotyped kitten throughout, even when she learns to "enjoy" her freedom with the men at film's end.
Ultimately, if you are seeking an "amelie" or "il postino" or some other such Eurofilm fun, avoid this. But if you watch french films for some insight into the culture, this one is worth seeing. However, be prepared for some pretty brutal treatment of women. Nonetheless, the men are all largely bourgeois dupes or "liberated" trash too, so at least the film is egalitarian in its disdain for stereotypical gender roles. It is interesting to watch this film in tandem with Truffaut's "the man who loved women" for some insight into one aspect of the French view of women.

Patrick Dweare and Gerard Depardieu are so good together in this movie.a lot of energy from the pair and also some good laughs,the dubbing is ok but i think the movie is better in french speaking.it's a must see if you like french movie.

Alain Resnais's "Stavisky..." provides a fictionalized account of the last months of the notorious swindler (played by Jean-Paul Belmondo), whose financial shell games brought down the French government in the early 1930s. I sometimes think that the word "exquisite" was coined to describe this film and I don't mean that entirely positively. Immaculately designed, shot, lit and cut, nearly perfect in its way, "Stavisky..." is designer filmmaking at its most refined, elegant and yes, precious.

Resnais and screenwriter Jorge Semprun are very conscious of the fictional nature of what they are presenting, to the point of beginning the film with a disclaimer. Whatever the historical reality of the Stavisky character, we certainly believe that as portrayed by Belmondo, he could sell coals to Newcastle. He is aided by a host of first-rate French actors, including Michel Lonsdale, François Perrier and especially Charles Boyer, in a final performance that makes every gesture into the physical equivalent of an aphorism. The force of the actors' personalities, the fastidious period recreation, Stephen Sondheim's jazzy score, all contribute to the film's point: no matter what evil Stavisky may have caused, it was impossible for those who knew him well not to be taken in by the romance he could conjure out of thin air.

This willingness to excuse corruption by dint of style seems very French, and as an alternative to the easy moralizing of American culture, very refreshing. Still, the glamorized decadence may be easy to enjoy as the intricate surface of a movie, but not so easy to imagine forgiving in reality, particularly for the victims of it. (Among other things, Stavisky was responsible for flooding France with millions of francs of worthless government bonds.) I'm not suggesting that the film would be improved by a sanctimonious, Hollywood-style reminder of the evils of corruption. It would be ruined by such a banality. Rather, because we cannot ever quite forget the reality of the period (the actions take place in the depths of the Great Depression, after all), we also can never quite accept the film's aestheticized vision as anything other than an extremely beautiful evasion.

In a sense, that evasion does get at a reality of the thirties, the willingness of the rich and powerful to turn away from the ever-deepening crises around them. The problem is that in so successfully achieving the world view of a thin-blooded, exhausted society, "Stavisky..." seems a tad removed itself. But exquisitely so.

"STAVISKY" is the true story of Serge Alexandre, known to the world as Stavisky. And Belmondo is terrific as the titular con artist who looted France during the 1930s. Acclaimed director Alain Resnais shepherds a consummate cast that includes Charles Boyer through this lavishly mounted saga of deception, romance, and bittersweet justice. Stephen Sondheim's big score is memorable and evokes the era as well as the moral corruption. You will believe the time and place and characters as the events unfold like a grand, medievel morality play but with superb production values. An odd and interersting film about an amoral character driven by greed and power. Deadly sins both. Belmondo is pitch perfect.

Alain Resnais's "Stavisky..." provides a fictionalized account of the last months of the notorious swindler (played by Jean-Paul Belmondo), whose financial shell games brought down the French government in the early 1930s. I sometimes think that the word "exquisite" was coined to describe this film and I don't mean that entirely positively. Immaculately designed, shot, lit and cut, nearly perfect in its way, "Stavisky..." is designer filmmaking at its most refined, elegant and yes, precious.

Resnais and screenwriter Jorge Semprun are very conscious of the fictional nature of what they are presenting, to the point of beginning the film with a disclaimer. Whatever the historical reality of the Stavisky character, we certainly believe that as portrayed by Belmondo, he could sell coals to Newcastle. He is aided by a host of first-rate French actors, including Michel Lonsdale, François Perrier and especially Charles Boyer, in a final performance that makes every gesture into the physical equivalent of an aphorism. The force of the actors' personalities, the fastidious period recreation, Stephen Sondheim's jazzy score, all contribute to the film's point: no matter what evil Stavisky may have caused, it was impossible for those who knew him well not to be taken in by the romance he could conjure out of thin air.

This willingness to excuse corruption by dint of style seems very French, and as an alternative to the easy moralizing of American culture, very refreshing. Still, the glamorized decadence may be easy to enjoy as the intricate surface of a movie, but not so easy to imagine forgiving in reality, particularly for the victims of it. (Among other things, Stavisky was responsible for flooding France with millions of francs of worthless government bonds.) I'm not suggesting that the film would be improved by a sanctimonious, Hollywood-style reminder of the evils of corruption. It would be ruined by such a banality. Rather, because we cannot ever quite forget the reality of the period (the actions take place in the depths of the Great Depression, after all), we also can never quite accept the film's aestheticized vision as anything other than an extremely beautiful evasion.

In a sense, that evasion does get at a reality of the thirties, the willingness of the rich and powerful to turn away from the ever-deepening crises around them. The problem is that in so successfully achieving the world view of a thin-blooded, exhausted society, "Stavisky..." seems a tad removed itself. But exquisitely so.

"STAVISKY" is the true story of Serge Alexandre, known to the world as Stavisky. And Belmondo is terrific as the titular con artist who looted France during the 1930s. Acclaimed director Alain Resnais shepherds a consummate cast that includes Charles Boyer through this lavishly mounted saga of deception, romance, and bittersweet justice. Stephen Sondheim's big score is memorable and evokes the era as well as the moral corruption. You will believe the time and place and characters as the events unfold like a grand, medievel morality play but with superb production values. An odd and interersting film about an amoral character driven by greed and power. Deadly sins both. Belmondo is pitch perfect.

I don't know about the actual movie... The DVD audio is just awful -- imagine the distortion you get when the volume is set higher than cheap computer speakers can handle, now imagine getting this distortion every time somebody speaks no matter what volume your tv is set at.

Also, people move at the wrong speed, and not even a "consistent" wrong speed. The subtitles are part of the picture; they can't be turned off.

There are certain directors whose films can survive even the worst video transfers, and Resnais is one of them. Not that New Yorker Video should not be chastized for giving us yet another scandalously poor video and audio transfer of a classic film. Rather, one should not let the poor DVD quality deter one from buying this DVD, as Resnais' MON ONCLE d'AMERIQUE is masterful and argueably the director's greatest achievement. To be completely honest, in my humble opinion Resnais is the greatest living director. For what it is worth, I have seen everyone of his feature films, including everything in the 80s and 90s, and I find this picture to be the most compelling. Having carried out his most rigorous investigation of the time and memory of personal consciousness in "Je T'aime, Je T'aime," Resnais' work in the 70s undergoes a gradual shift in emphasis toward a time and memory belonging to community. At the risk of sounding overly reductive, one might locate the decisive moment of this shift in "Providence," in which the radically subjective, stream of consciousness narrative is completely undermined in the film's epilogue. In reflecting on Mon Oncle d'Amerique, I think it is paramount that one sees the film in the context of this decisive shift (which is not to say that Resnais simply abandons his earlier project). The film produces some of the most extraordinary images of time and memory reconfigured from the standpoint of community, and argueably marks the director's crowning achievement. One need look no further than the opening sequence in which a camera circles around a canvas comprised of still shots from scenes in the film, such that already at the film's outset the viewer is confronted with an image of the whole.

Having laid out this context, I strongly disagree with the general presupposition, betrayed in Maltin's summary and many of the customer reviews below, that Resnais has somehow attempted here to illustrate the behavorial theories of Henri Laborit. Resnais himself (in the DVD notes) expressly rejects this reading, which is nowhere corraborated by the film itself. He explains that in the film he has tried to set the biologist's theories and the narrative side by side, such that the two elements can co-exist, without either one dominating the other. The unmistably ambivalent tone of the ending testifies to the success with which Resnais has executed this vision. The superb direction and screenplay are supported by an outstanding score and an excellent cast. I cannot recommend this DVD more highly.

I haven't seen 'Smoking and Non-Smoking' and not that singing film he did recently, but otherwise I'm pretty well informed about Resnais and amongst his other work I rank this film as being his best.

It lacks many of the 'arty' touches, that Resnais otherwise and most regrettfully endulges in. This one tells it to you straight - most people live lives that resembles what rats do in captivity or otherwise. The comparison is most amusing but there is a very serious side to it as well. In the end Resnais states: "As long as we do not realize that we use the cortex of our brains chiefly in order to dominant others, then nothing can change." Power'full' (powerless really, since directed against power) words indeed.

People break their necks in order to fit in or make a career, which in truth is as rediculous as when Stan Laurel speaks of it in that wonderful short "Their First Mistake". When will this madness of competition between people cease in order to leave room for a competition directed towards your own ability to enhance your consciousness instead? When will competition for competitions sake alone cease, a competition which does not even care about what it is competing about, as, for instance, present competition of market economy, which is just a competition about the 'skills' of cheating one another? That is the question and Resnais doesn't have the answer but at least he poses the question.

Maitresse begins fairly interesting. But about 1/3 through, the energy fades. The plot slows down and seemingly takes a shallow, uneventful trip to a stupid ending.

There are some stops on the trip that are worth seeing. Mainly, there are some great fetish outfits. But even the S&M becomes as annoying as the droning dialogue.

It's worth adding to your collection, but you'll probably only watch it once or twice.

This film written and directed by Barbet Schroeder is unusual since it presents a world of sadomasochist sex play without any hint of eroticism or exploitation. There is more violence in the faux-Helmut Newton portraits in The Eyes of Laura Mars. A slim and beautiful Gerard Depardieu meets dominatrix Bulle Ogier by chance and begins an affair with her. The parallel between the roles she plays with customers who have dictated the terms of their pleasure, and her relationship with Gerard doesn't quite come off. It's about the same as when Schroeder shows us the slaughter of a horse. Depardieu has told us he used to work in a slaughterhouse and when he happens across one in a drunken stupour, the horror of the killing of the animal can't be equated with Bulle piercing a man's chest and penis. The only similarity is in the same matter-of-fact way Schroeder displays both images. When Bulle has a semi-breakdown midway in the film, my interest was peaked since this showed narrative promise. If enacting these roles had a psychological effect on her, that would reveal more to her character than she has allowed us to see. Bulle comments that she likes the play because it allows her into the intimacy of some people's "madness", she keeps a venus fly trap plant, and has a doberman called Texas. Unfortunately Schroeder has Bulle quickly recover and she returns to her job, thereby reducing her character to a cypher. Therefore Depardieu is the one left to respond. Observing the paraphernalia of s/m can only have a surface interest before you either want to experience the sensation, or you get bored, and it is disappointing that the narrative only extends to his wanting to discover the identity of Bulle's "pimp" as a matter of "control". When he threatens to make love to her in front of her clients, Schroeder cuts away. The ending is particularly frustrating since Schroeder pulls away from a Postman Always Rings Twice tragedy for a pointless gag. However he only uses music in certain contexts - eg in the roleplay scenes for comic effect. Otherwise the soundtrack is silent, to reinforce his almost documentary eye to the subject. He would later bring this clean approach to more commercial titles like Reversal of Fortune, but with greater effect.

Although the subject matter is risque, the cool, unstylised camera work and authentic acting make MAITRESSE a far, far better film than others in the "adult" genre. Barbet Schroeder cut his directing teeth on documentaries and it shows: the weird and extreme scenes hover between funny, frightening and banal - the audience isn't told what to feel or think, and have to decide for themselves. The whole affair feels real and human, and it's relaxed and unself-conscious in a way that modern movies, especially Hollywood films, just aren't anymore. Bulle Ogier, as the maitresse, is terrific.

Maitresse begins fairly interesting. But about 1/3 through, the energy fades. The plot slows down and seemingly takes a shallow, uneventful trip to a stupid ending.

There are some stops on the trip that are worth seeing. Mainly, there are some great fetish outfits. But even the S&M becomes as annoying as the droning dialogue.

It's worth adding to your collection, but you'll probably only watch it once or twice.

This film written and directed by Barbet Schroeder is unusual since it presents a world of sadomasochist sex play without any hint of eroticism or exploitation. There is more violence in the faux-Helmut Newton portraits in The Eyes of Laura Mars. A slim and beautiful Gerard Depardieu meets dominatrix Bulle Ogier by chance and begins an affair with her. The parallel between the roles she plays with customers who have dictated the terms of their pleasure, and her relationship with Gerard doesn't quite come off. It's about the same as when Schroeder shows us the slaughter of a horse. Depardieu has told us he used to work in a slaughterhouse and when he happens across one in a drunken stupour, the horror of the killing of the animal can't be equated with Bulle piercing a man's chest and penis. The only similarity is in the same matter-of-fact way Schroeder displays both images. When Bulle has a semi-breakdown midway in the film, my interest was peaked since this showed narrative promise. If enacting these roles had a psychological effect on her, that would reveal more to her character than she has allowed us to see. Bulle comments that she likes the play because it allows her into the intimacy of some people's "madness", she keeps a venus fly trap plant, and has a doberman called Texas. Unfortunately Schroeder has Bulle quickly recover and she returns to her job, thereby reducing her character to a cypher. Therefore Depardieu is the one left to respond. Observing the paraphernalia of s/m can only have a surface interest before you either want to experience the sensation, or you get bored, and it is disappointing that the narrative only extends to his wanting to discover the identity of Bulle's "pimp" as a matter of "control". When he threatens to make love to her in front of her clients, Schroeder cuts away. The ending is particularly frustrating since Schroeder pulls away from a Postman Always Rings Twice tragedy for a pointless gag. However he only uses music in certain contexts - eg in the roleplay scenes for comic effect. Otherwise the soundtrack is silent, to reinforce his almost documentary eye to the subject. He would later bring this clean approach to more commercial titles like Reversal of Fortune, but with greater effect.

Although the subject matter is risque, the cool, unstylised camera work and authentic acting make MAITRESSE a far, far better film than others in the "adult" genre. Barbet Schroeder cut his directing teeth on documentaries and it shows: the weird and extreme scenes hover between funny, frightening and banal - the audience isn't told what to feel or think, and have to decide for themselves. The whole affair feels real and human, and it's relaxed and unself-conscious in a way that modern movies, especially Hollywood films, just aren't anymore. Bulle Ogier, as the maitresse, is terrific.

It is so sad to see such a brilliant filmmaker (and so many talented actors) create such a stupid, incoherent, pointless, unfunny, meandering, clichéd-filled, hodge-podge of a film. It is horrifying to witness the indignities that she imposes on her poor actors (particularly Jeanne Moreau). How is it possible that the same woman can create such brilliant, insightful and truly beautiful films (like Vagabond and Cleo From 5 to 7) and then also create such lousy ones (like 101 Nights and Kung-Fu Master)? Does she have an evil twin? Is she schizophrenic? What is going on?

But if you DO love movies, well, the more you love and appreciate them, the more you will love and appreciate this one! This is an AMAZING homage to movies and to the role they play in our lives. It is boundless in its imagination, wit and charm, and it balances beautifully between the sophisticated and the sentimental. I love the cinema from France and from all other countries, but I watched this with someone who had not seen many films outside the USA and he still managed to adore this, even though he was unfamiliar with many of the films and stars that are referred to in this film. The more familiar one is with French cinema, the more one will appreciate this film, but there are plenty of Hollywood films and stars that are referred to as well (including a scene with a Liz Taylor clone that is hilarious!). This film's quintessential charm will hold anyone in a spell who knows intrinsically that cinema equals MAGIC! Varda understands that perfectly (as did her late husband, the great director Jacques Demy, who she also refers to in this film). She creates a loving tribute to the past century of films just in time to celebrate its centennial (fans of the Lumiere Brothers and Georges Melies will identify some great gags associated with their films!). If you aren't already obsessive about movies, you will be after seeing this one!
This one definitely deserves a hundred and one stars!!

I completely disagree with the reviewer from New York! I LOVED this video! Any fan of old french and italian cinema will love this title! What a treat to see such great talents as Mastrioanni, Depardieu, Deneuve, Moreau - just to name a few, together with American actors such as DeNiro and Eastwood. Going down memory lane with M. Cinema and having the opportunity to see old film clips from past european films is truly delicious! If you're a film history buff and appreciate the european flavor of expression, you will love this film!