Nachtblende

If you are a fan of the book there are obviously a great deal of glaring differences, but this film does not disappoint if you can give it a chance. Obviously it is a European tale and the countries and languages are completely different to the original film. It is also a different story in terms of the characters. This is a film about a man who has recoiled from the life he wanted, but who is then forced into free fall. His skills learned through his unwanted life see him through, and he finds himself a new purpose and a new role in the world. I won't say any more than that as I see no point in spoiling a film by writing a newspaper-style plot summary. The ending is what many people don't like, but this is not a film of the book, it is a film inspired by the book. Let it be what it is.

I found the film a bit illogical and ridiculous as the main character's paranoia have not been depicted realistically...well I have seen the film in the french films club lair with my vision distorted by 2 rows of other people. Anyhow the film might have been a great one had it been cut better. Had it say started at the sea and then retrospectively (getting there backwards) let the viewer to discover the whole, a viewer would personalize the idea and intentions better. In the movie on the other hand, one gets to be introduced to the 'normal' person who gets clearly mad, arranging his life as a paranoic schizophrenic yet acting sanely as before so he even manages to lead a life of a star artist with ease. There are some great plot points like leaving of the loved, stealing of the identity, accidental death, unwanted? artistic praise, sea survival friendship. Unfortunately they are loosely connected with the hero's intentions that are depicted not deeply enough to make a good sense... hence a schizophrenic.

The failure of a professional photographer to use the latest equipment is a good metaphor for this movie, whose English title makes no sense. It seems like it was shot from the original script submission before any grownups had a chance to edit the story. Terrific performances by all the actors, but a story line so sloppy that I re-animated my disbelief about half-way through. For me the most enjoyable aspect was the glimpse to life in various venues around (and near) Europe. I would love to have seen this in the hands of Alfred Hitchcock. He would have lent credibility to the desperation, which I felt was contrived and forced on me. I'll bet they ran out of money while filming and couldn't afford the ending they'd originally planned.

The Big Picture (2010)

Terrific vibes here, and a euphoric basic idea of a man getting out of a troubled situation and going for broke, for happiness. Literally, and spiritually.

First there is the set-up: a happy, charming, positive Paul Exben (played by the cheerful French actor Romain Duris). He's got an unhappy, negative wife and a kid who loves him and an infant who doesn't know what he wants (except to cry a lot). He's a photographer in the new manner, using high tech computers and high end printers. He loves being who he is, and is very successful financially.

But the wife is bitter and unyielding. Things are going to go wrong and they do. Exactly how (involving another photographer, a man who is very old school with a darkroom and enlarger) is partly what the movie is about, and the surprise is one of its peaks. Then the movie takes some amazing turns.

I say amazing but really there is a lot of incredulity built in. Would Paul Exben really go so far? Wasn't there a simpler solution (many of them)? If the end goal really was to "start over" in a manner of speaking, wouldn't there be ways of doing that and not sabotaging everything else? Maybe not, but then we should have been set up better for all the implications.

The movie's original title is "L'homme Qui Voulait Vivre Sa Vie," or "The Man Who Wanted to Live His Life." That's sooooo much better and more compelling. And that's what the movie is about. But the English title reminds us that photography, and this photographer, are central to it all, and I'm a photographer. I've been that old school type (by necessity) for decades and still have an enlarger (and a university darkroom) at my fingertips. But I have also moved almost completely into new school photography with inkjet printing and such.

I have to say, this movie made me want to get back in the darkroom. Not that there are scenes that romanticize that. More that there are lots of flaws and mistakes in pointing out the differences. Our man Exben ends up ditching his fancy Canon gear and getting an old Nikon film camera and a couple of lenses. Then he starts to print, rediscovering his roots. And then on his darkroom wall are some color prints--absolutely impossible with some trays as shown. And pretty much not possible period these days. Yet his new direction in color is what takes his career new places. I found the photography stuff annoying and enchanting, both. If you're not into the field, you'll probably just like the enchantment part. Never mind the far too easy gallery luck near the end.

But the movie is about what the French title suggests--and here it falters, too. Is this a man who is really living his life? In some obvious ways yes. But the existential drama could have (and should have?) taken this far deeper. By the final scenes where our man is photographing a horrifying event from a distance (and then sells some illogically close-up photos of the event to a publisher) we get a sense that he is truly dedicated. But also a bit lost. An opportunist. A man who accepts being trapped by circumstance.

In a way, this is a movie waiting to be remade. It wouldn't take much to make it a classic look at the human condition, with some attractive hooks along the way. What we have isn't so bad, but it offers more than it delivers.

Well to be honest i wasn't expecting much from this French thriller but i was convinced enough by the trailer that i should give it a try. When i started watching i realized how right i was about the film and how correctly i wasn't expecting much from the film. For about 50 minutes of the film i started counting the films i had seen based on wife cheating her husband, getting charged with infidelity and then good husband getting upset and finally taking care of the problem.

I shouldn't have watched this film i thought...

It was after the first 50 minutes of the film when i was taken aback by the jolting surprise and a bizarre movie experience which remained with me after few days even. THIS FILM MUST BE SEEN.

It explores that side of a character that is commonly not paid attention by the filmmakers. The movie takes a sharp turn and gets lost into infinity, where everything gets stagnant, slow and becomes endless. It can go on and on like this for hours. To me it felt very unusual experience, something both poetic and strange, beautiful and scary at the same time.

Eric Lartigau, the writer and the director did a fabulous job in both of his departments. Although a little more character development of the supporting roles in the second half would have been beneficial making the narrative more deep.

Romain Duris comes up with a startling performance, his character transitions from one mode to another and the actor just goes freely along with it. His deep influential performance is another fact why the movie haunts you after it ends. I was moved to tears by the intensity of his approach towards the character. This one role should transcend his career as an actor to higher level.

The movie was adorned with lilting musical score and gorgeous cinematography enhancing the impact of the film on the viewer. By the end i was thankful to myself that i saw the movie truly relying on my instincts, i was so glad i came across such a warm movie and I'm sure others who watch will feel the same.