User reviews

Around 1960 Truffaut Chabrol and theur friends stunned the world by simply filming the World around them without any message or morality . But they mostly filmed High and Middle French Bourgeoisis . This one is set far from the Cote d'Azur..But it is not a Ken Loach Movie..In British Working Class Films People Cry,Fight,Shout and Laugh...Here They Speak a Little but they dont say anything just because they have nothing to say..And when They Talk You hardly understand one word out of three..(atleast foreign audiences will enjoy the subtitles !)..This Movie is Rude and Harsh and send back to Noddyland all other so-called "no Future" Movies . Still there's a strange beauty if the filming of those northern areas close to Ruysdael and Dutch paintings.."La vie de Jesus" belongs to this kind of film you hate at first and that you keep looking and looking to understand why . An absolute Must for all Indies lovers .

With this first movie, the filmmaker Bruno Dumont signs a work of talent and establishes himself as a real author. It is all the more extraordinary as he never studied cinema and he doesn't belong to any film school. It doesn't prevent his movie from being reminiscent of the Dardenne brothers' cinema in its treatment: few dialogs, nearly no music, Dumont doesn't judge or criticize his characters. Neither does he judge their actions, doings and he doesn't condemn the murder of the Arab teenager. Nevertheless, Dumont has got a quality he constantly uses throughout his movie: a wide sense of observation. And sometimes, he lets express his sense of suggestion. In another hand, Dumont may be a genuine filmmaker, be that as it may, he's got a common point with Robert Bresson another French filmmaker: he hires no professional actors. We can take this characteristic for another asset in "life of Jesus" because it gives more strength and neutrality to this movie.

The title of my review is extracted from a song by Steve Albini's former band Big Black: "Kerosene" in which this "enfant terrible" screams: "never anything to do in this town!". It's exactly the same thing in the film. During nearly one hour, nothing is happening. We only see Freddy and his mates wandering again and again in the little town of Bailleul and its surroundings given they are on the dole. I have previously written that Dumont's opus contained few dialogs. Dialogs are almost useless here. Freddy's countenance and his pals' are sufficient enough to communicate the spectator their boredom. There are a few moments of happiness: every Sunday they play in the municipal brass band or they are going by the sea. Furthermore, Freddy takes part in competitions of chaffinch singing. But these short moments of happiness don't change anything in their lives and don't bring them hope. In another extent, when Freddy has sex with Marie, their sexual relations are very primary. It is also interesting to notice that to emphasize their humdrum life, the director uses a recurrent shot that regularly comes back throughout the film like a sort of leitmotiv: a rural or urban landscape with the gang in the middle distance or in the background. Then, gradually, this dull life turns to drama with two dramatic events: Freddy's gang rapes a young girl and they kill an Arab teenager. What shocks is the quasi-indifference of the gang. How did they arrive there? We can put forward several explanations. I will retain this one: maybe constant boredom destroys any judgment and makes the gang narrow-minded enough to lead them to commit a murder.

Bruno Dumont also achieved a tour de force in the cast. All right, the actors are no professional but they reveal themselves highly convincing. With Freddy's gang, the director draws a gallery of listless or racist characters deeply rooted in their land of the North of France. Of all these characters, we could argue that Marie is eventually the sole positive one since she doesn't want to meet the gang again (and especially Freddy) after the rape of the young girl and she accepts the friendship of the Arab teenager, Kader (let's admit it not for very long). As for Freddy, he is a simple-minded but not really clever person. Moreover, Dumont lets us suggest his easily influenced side, particularly in the scene when they rape the young girl. His friends encourage him to act.

At last, this movie contains a particularly harrowing sequence: when the gang visits one close relative of them who's dying of AIDS.

One last thing and I will finish with it: why did Bruno Dumont give his movie a title in which there's no question of Jesus? It is a mystery but it doesn't spoil the strength of this perfectly mastered movie.

There is enormous promise in the opening scenes of Bruno Dumont's first feature "La Vie de Jesus". He is clearly a director with a great feeling for landscape, that ability to draw the viewer into a self-contained world, in this case an agricultural area of Northern France. Within minutes we know what it is like to live in this small redbrick town bounded by seemingly endless lanes and fields where very little happens and even the local cafe is all but deserted on a weekday mid-afternoon. We share the stifling boredom of the group of unemployed youths with little do except joyride their mopeds. We are in a world akin to that of Bresson's "Au Hazard Balthazar" and "Mouchettte" with Dumont revealing his with the assured unflinching vision of the master himself. Already we are beginning to sense the thrill that comes with the intuition that we may be discovering a major new talent. A brilliantly observed scene where the group of friends visit the brother of one of them who is in a coma dying of AIDS seems to confirm this. Words cannot convey their feeling but expressions say everything. However after this doubts gradually creep in. It requires real genius to sustain viewer interest in a film about provincial ennui. Not that nothing happens. There is an attack on an Arab youth that results in manslaughter, an arrest and an escape. The problem is not a lack of psychological development. There is an inevitability about the main protagonist, Freddy's obsession with the only girl around and his gunning for the Arab as a result of sexual rivalry fuelled by group racism. Rather is the problem one of a lack of narrative development. One sequence of moped riding becomes just like any other as do all those scenes of young people just moping around. Unfortunately the film eventually evokes viewer tedium in a way that is self defeating. Nevertheless there is excitement in the discovery of a new directorial talent and the prediction that he could in time make a really outstanding film.

La Vie de Jesus, a film by Bruno Dumont, is an unconventional look at marginal young people living in Bailleul in northern France. They spend their time without much purpose, riding around the drab Flanders town on motorbikes or playing in a marching band. From the opening of the film, I could sense that I was in the hands of a director with unique talent. One of Dumont's greatest strengths is his uncanny ability to capture the sense of emptiness of the town and the people who inhabit it. With little dialogue and no musical score other than the sounds of nature to break the stillness, we are forced to relate to the characters by observing their eyes, their physical movements, and the facial expressions that reveal an inner sadness.

In La Vie de Jesus, unemployed, uneducated, and epileptic 20-year old Freddy (David Douche) lives with his mother Yvette (Genevieve Cottreel), a café owner. Douche gives a haunting performance as the sensitive but not very bright Freddy, his body scarred from repeated falls from his motorcycle and his face mirroring the fear of not knowing when his next epileptic seizure will come. Freddy has a girl friend, Marie (Marjorie Cottreel), who works as a cashier at the supermarket but their relationship lacks an emotional pull and their graphically depicted sex feels mechanical. Dumont does not judge his characters and they are fully three-dimensional, both guilty and innocent, displaying tenderness one minute and cruelty the next, searching for human connection. Freddy trains his finch to sing and takes the boy who just lost his brother to the beach to cheer him up, yet shortly afterwards he and his friends humiliate an overweight girl who plays in the band.

One of the most moving scenes takes place at a hospital where the friends stand around a hospital bed watching one of the boys' brother who is dying of Aids. On the wall there is a picture of Jesus described as "about a guy who comes back to life". They do not talk but wait and watch silently and we wait with them as if expecting momentary redemption. Freddy and his friends are not "bad" people but each one is tightly wound, looking for a reason to explode and the film seethes with tension. When a young Arab boy Kader (Kader Chaatouf) foolishly tempts fate by making a play for Marie, the underlying racism of the society transforms an ordinary love story into a tragedy of transcendent power.

This is an interesting French movie about young people, boredom, love, jealousy, and racism. From time to time the film moves from reality close to absurdity, and it leaves mostly the story behind - unfortunately.

In a small town in France, the epileptic Freddy (David Douche) is an unemployed young man, who spends his time doing nothing but flirting and having sex with his girlfriend Marie (Marjorie Cottreel) and riding motorcycle with his idle and shallow friends. When the Arabian Kader (Kader Chaatouf) courts Marie, Freddy explodes his racism against Kader in a violent way. I saw this movie for the first time in 04 Jan 2001 and today I have decided to see it again, after watching 'L' Humanité', from the same director. My opinion about 'La Vie de Jésus' has not changed: it is a good tale of idleness, intolerance, violence and racism. However, I do not like explicit sex in art movies. I believe it is unnecessary and pure opportunism of the director, raising some sort of polemic subject to promote his film. In the end, the actress who participates in this type of scene is the unique person who gets burnt in this industry. Although being the lead actress of a film awarded in many festivals of cinema, see the empty career of the gorgeous actress Marjorie Cottreel in IMDb. 'Le Pornographe', '9 Songs' (which I have not seen yet) and 'La Vie de Jésus' are ridiculous showing scenes of explicit sex. As my friend Ricardo, who also loves movies, uses to say, 'better off watching Private, John Stagliano's 'Buttman' or Rocco Siffredi flicks if the viewer wants to see real sex on the screen'. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): 'A Vida de Jesus' ('The Life of Jesus')

"Although the ominous racial antagonism is all over the place, Dumont doesn't stoop to violent provocation when the chips are down, and afterwards, he invokes a ghost of surrealism in the wake of Freddy's foul play, if the message is ambivalent, or even elusive (what is the redemption for Freddy's original sin? And the correlation between him and "Jesus" in the title isn't easy to grasp), Dumont's visual starkness and his critical if slightly snide eye on human frailty and banality can fairly put his name on the map, the sullen debutant is a sui generis auteur-in-the-making."

read my full review on my blog: cinema omnivore, thanks.

Excellent, slow-paced, but rewarding film about a dead-end 20-year old and his extremely boring life in a small French town. Freddy is a young layabout who hangs around with his friends, rides his motorbike, and has rough sex with his girlfriend Marie.

This is probably the most interesting film I've ever seen about boredom. It has much in common with some of the films of Bresson, presenting an environment of extreme emptiness, all the while finding its own rhythm and feel.

Action-wise, this is up there with "The Goalie's Anxiety at the Penalty Kick" (in other words, VERY little happens) and the director takes a few stabs at showing things in a non-judgmental/anthropological light (a la Shohei Immamura) with hardcore, clinical sex scenes and the gang's sometimes amoral attitudes, but in the end that isn't the direction the film heads in (thankfully).

This is an original and unusual vision in service of a story told with great strength and care. Dumont clearly knows what he is doing and he isn't copying anybody else.

The film shows the youngster's world as something of a void, but one not totally devoid of beauty. There are several transcendentally gorgeous moments of pure poetry in this film that really need to be experienced. Just look at the scene where young Kadder is hugged by Marie and he looks up at the sky. What a beautiful moment!! Definitely worth seeing, highly recommended. Although if you're an ADD-afflicted sort who can only stomach films that move like bullet trains, go look at something else.

Each scene of this film grabs you. You want to *see* what is happening. As in Dumont's other film "L'Humanite", he has an intuitive grasp of what the viewer wants to see, where the human eye would naturally want to look. He is also a sensitive observer who understands human behavior in all its richness. Even though the main characters of his films are lowlives who we would probably not have much in common with, we appreciate them as human beings. He never makes fun of or degrades his characters. I disagree with the reviewer who said there is no development. I think there is a tremendous amount of development, but unlike a Hollywood film, he does not announce it with a surging musical score, a change in lighting, and other such cheap tricks. Instead, we observe a character moving beyond the grief of his brother's death when he bites off the knot of a mourning cloth he tied to his wrist. This is a great film by a great director.

Bruno Dumonts "La Vie de Jésus" is one of the best movies I saw that year. It's a very gripping tale of a group of bored, at first glance no-good youngsters, who end up in a lot of trouble because of their racism. To me, without being a patriot, this isn't really a French, but a Belgian movie. The setting (French Flanders), but also the themes it deals with, the environment (no foreigner can fully grasp the horror of all those old people sitting on their chairs in the doorstep, waiting for something to happen, staring at the occasional passer-by). But whatever country it is made in, it is a strong story, filmed in a raw way, which very much fits the rawness of the characters in the movie. If you take under notice that all the actors were amateurs, yet they manage to make lots of so-called pros look like the real amateurs, you have to give the director credit for that.

In Bruno Dumont's 'La vie de Jésus', we are given a portrait of Freddy, a twenty year old epileptic, and his lifeless existence.

This film successfully manages to lull the viewer into the same anaemic and insipid 'ennui' that Freddy, the central protagonist, finds himself. In the reliance upon a monotonal landscape to produce the only reflection of the character's being, this film is as one-dimensional as the characters themselves. We see countless, seeemingly never-ending, shots of Freddy weaving his way through, and into the countryside on his scooter. We see him march through the countryside with an army band. We see Freddy repeat recordings of bird song to is budgie, then cross off the number of calls in a competition. We see the TV in the deserted local café as the only form of diversion. We are given a graphic depiction of Freddy having sex in an open field with his girlfriend. Freddy is depicted as a mere animal, who will later prey upon an arab who tries to pursue his prised girlfriend's affection.

Ultimately this film fails to make an impact, as it only succeeds in doing one thing; demonstrate how man can be nothing but beast.

Freddy & his friends are all unemployed. They try to pass away the time by wandering around on their motorcycles & by directing their aggressive feelings towards Arabic immigrants. Freddy is in love with Marie, a cashier at a local supermarket. When she is mad at Freddy & starts dating Kader, an young Arab man, Freddy & his friends have an idea: they decide to punish Kader for what they call "such a provocation." After they have raped another girl, Marie finally commits to Kader, which seals his fate. Freddy & Marie (played by David Douche & Marjorie Cottreel) are two teenagers with their futures uncertain & their present undefined. They ride motorbikes, they have sex — communication like any other sort. But in their hometown of Bailleul in Flanders, where news from the world-at-large disappears just as quickly as it drifts in, death proves to be inescapable & decidedly permanent. As the film's powerful climax unfolds, the viewer will come away with his or her own interpretation of how the life of Christ has figured into the story of Freddy & Marie — a contemplation on mercy. This is probably the most interesting film I've ever seen about boredom. It has much in common with some of the films of Bresson, presenting an environment of extreme emptiness, all the while finding its own rhythm & fee. It is beautifully filmed with great vistas of the Bailleul Flanders area. (Where a lot of the French painters painted) It's a slow story not much happens but I found it very interesting & it kept me interested. Freddy is a strange guy with his epilepsy & liking for brutal sex which does nothing for the needs of his girlfriend. He has great tenderness for his finch but a hatred of Arabs. Mom does not go far enough in making him work. It is such an interesting film I am sure I will watch his others soon. It is hard to believe that this is the debut feature film of Dumont. Dumont included extreme close-ups of penetration to emphasize the animal nature of the sex act. 5 stars

Whilst certain elements of Dumont's cinematic approach are commendable, the curiously titled La Vie de Jesus (1997) never really amounts to anything more than a series of laboured, social-realist clichés. As with his other films, such as L' Humanité (1999) and the recent Flanders (2006), we have the presentation of a series of slowly paced, deliberately structured and naturalistically rendered vignettes that propel the narrative - in this case, one that looks specifically at the issues of teenage delinquency, violence and alienation - whilst simultaneously creating a stark sense of drama from the seemingly mundane. As each scene is placed, one after the other, the broader implications of the story become apparent, and it is not until the end of the film that all the ideas become clear and we can think and reflect on the moral message that Dumont is seemingly presenting. However, for me, the film was so slight and seemingly without greater interpretation, that any attempt to really think about or feel this film were somewhat superfluous.

For ninety minutes we follow around our central protagonist Freddy - an epileptic skin-head and motorcyclist - as he spends his days riding around the countryside with his gang, engaging in uninvolving sex with his girlfriend, or harassing the local Arab family. So we have elements of defiance, disappointment, littleness, jealousy, racism and more, all going into the creation of this suffocating pressure-cooker like environment that is never as successfully rendered as it possibly could be. I first saw the film back in 2002 when I was still in my late-teens and I found it somewhat disappointing, especially in the context of Dumont's second feature, the award-winning L' Humanité. I decided to re-investigate the film after having recently viewed the Shane Meadows film This is England (2006), which has a number of similar themes and overall scope. For me, both films are well acted, well directed and have an honesty to them that is rare and laudable, but for me personally, fell flat given the weak script and the overall clichéd subject matter.

Some of the acting is highly impressive, particularly from Marjorie Cottreel as Freddy's put-upon young girlfriend, but David Douche as the central character occasionally comes across as a little stilted; obvious showing his limitation as a non-professional actor. However, despite these slight limitations, it is the overall mood of the film that eventually becomes the most problematic aspect. The film is so relentlessly grim and depressing, with no beacon of hope to cling to, that Dumont's ultimate message is buried beneath the misery. So much so in fact, that any moment of real dramatic tension is stifled, highlighting its own clichés and plunging the depths of third rate melodrama. Dumont would go on to improve his craft with the aforementioned L' Humanité, in which he drops the clichés and refines his characters to the point of real, searing interest. La Vie de Jesus isn't a complete failure; committed cinema goers will find some level of interest from the uncomplicated visual presentation and slow meditation on violence and guilt, however, too much of the film (for me) missed its target on almost every level.

This movie was one of my first contacts with french cinema. Later I saw a bunch more, but this one stays one of the best. It gives a somewhat scary insight in the rural parts of France. It shows a group of young boys that have definitely suffered from heavy inbreed. They are miserable machos wih an attitude. It shows a young generation with few hopes but the cheap thrills and the fast kicks. The tone of the story could be compared with 'Gummo'. The style of the movie is obviously not comparable with Gummo, since nothing is comparable in style with Gummo. But, returning to la vie de jesus, It is a beautiful movie wich leaves you with a strangely uncomfortable feeling. If you have the chance, go see it. The only thing that I really can't place it the very explicit shot somewhere in the middle of the movie.

I was wary of this one. It seemed a lot like this trend in recent world cinema that I don't like, where the camera observes unemployed losers who do little besides screw, smoke, and ride around on mopeds not looking for jobs. These films rarely provide any interesting insights, or even interesting characters. So the subject matter had me prejudiced against this movie from the start. Fortunately, Dumont does have some insight into these people. I wouldn't say it's a lot of insight, nor would I say that the film has much new to say. However, the characters come off as real people. A couple of minor complaints: I thought that the lead actress, Marjorie Cottreel, was far too beautiful to fit in with the rest of this picture. And the hardcore sex scenes were entirely unnecessary. And I didn't need to see Mom's vagina, either.

The north of France close to the Belgian border is a region contrasting with Belgium Flanders because the towns all seem to be inhabitated. You explore in the film by the camera of Bruno Dumont the non-experience of living in such a town where a love-affair with the only girl of the vicinity can develop into manslaughter when she is with somebody else. The drama of the movie is that youngsters in that region have no possibility to enjoy life because everything, the houses, the family, the people is so dull and there is no work. So they become red-necks on their motorcycle and terrorize by noise the people. The silence in this movie becomes significant because it means that the boys are confronted with their emptiness and their tedium. This gives them dangerous thoughts. This movie must end with something terrible and indeed everything is pointing in the direction of hate and jealousy.

Drama about racial tensions in a small French town, with the central plot revolving around a 22 year old epilepsy sufferer called Freddy. The film explores the monotonous nature of life in the town using a group of guys, including Freddy and the venting of their anger on an Arab boy whom Freddy believes to be a sexual rival. The film also explores the boredom of Freddy by showing how tedious and monotonous his life is, his only respite being found in the sex he has with his girlfriend and the seemingly endless rides into the countryside that he has on his moped.

None of the film is as interesting as it might sound and has little merit other than the scene towards the end of the film where Freddy is lying in the grass after escaping from prison, which though beautiful could not begin to redeem this boring, monotonous and quite self indulgent film. The sex scenes are appallingly shot and unromantic in the extreme but I dare say a necessary addition to the film, showing the lack of communication and love between Freddy and his girlfriend Marie. Then there's the long shots of Freddy and his friends riding their mopeds through the French countryside, which are very boring and too frequent.

Scenes of interest in the film are the aforementioned one at the end of the film, and the one where Freddy and the gang visit a friend in hospital who is dying of AIDS. This scene is quite well observed and the only one where there is anywhere near good acting.

My main quarrel with this film is that there is little character developement and little emphasis on the racism aspect of the storyline which according to the box cover is what the film is all about. A film that has been called 'important' by certain reviewers should at least stay true to its themes and and have some sort of message which this film clearly does not.

Overall, I didn't completely dislike this film - in some places I found it touching and perhaps moving, but it isn't worthy of the full marks it has been given in some reviews. The acting is sub-standard and the script is atrocious - or maybe that's just the translation, and the film is very jumpy.

All in all a fair attempt from first time director 'Bruno Dumont', which catches the mood of each scene exceptionally well, but unless you have the opportunity to see this film for free, it really isn't worth bothering with. If you want to see a truly great French film - try 'Amelie'.

2/5

You will literally stagger out of this film, bewildered, disillusioned and perfectly miserable. This isn't enjoyable by any stretch of the imagination. However, it's certainly memorable. Much like contracting herpes.

The tale centres on epileptic and borderline psycho, Freddie. Freddie, a scooter nut, lives in his mum's bar, has an uncommunicative sexual relationship with the girl down the street and hangs out with a gang of very dumb and very unattractive wasters in a dreary provincial French town. It sounds harsh, but trust me they make the redneck murderers in Easy Rider seems congenial.

Kicking-off like a kitchen sink drama with bikes, it slowly dawns that Bruno Dumont's debut film is no Quadrophenia or The Wild One. This is pure social realism. There are no stylish gimmicks or hint of light relief courtesy of a groovy soundtrack. If anything, La Vie De Jesus mocks the infamous Marlon Brando hero figure. Freddie, the twitching, unsympathetic yob, keeps a finch (On the Waterfront), rides a bike (The Wild One), shaves his head (Apocalypse Now) and suggests sodomising his girlfriend (Last Tango In Paris).

Maybe these comparisons are stretching credibility, but Dupont certainly seems to be saying that the staple inarticulate, "silent one" in the majority of Hollywood films is essentially a ridiculous myth.

Freddie lives in a town less glamorous than a septic tank. AIDS, starvation in Sudan, Armistice Day do impinge themselves on this drab place, but it doesn't change the locals and their parochial prejudices.

The first half an hour is merely depressing, the last hour excruciating. The descent begins with some mindless bigotry aimed at a family of Arabs in a cafe. The collective moronism and crassness of the town embodied by Freddie uttering, "Shut up, you wogs." This racist incident introduces us to the only moderately likable character of the entire piece, Kader (Kader Chaatouf). However, from the word go you know things are going to end badly.

Revolutionary French director Jean Luc Godard would probably be pleased with this unrelenting grimness, the greyness, the endless social comments and, to some extent, this is indeed a very powerful and worthy work. However, do not expect to feel empathy for the yobs as in the marvelous La Haine or indeed any hint of stylish camera work to break up the film's painful, nihilistic journey. Almost unwatchable.

Ben Walsh