GamerTab That was an excellent one.

VividSimon Simply Perfect

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

kevinbearman-594-846991 Overall, I was very impressed with this film, and will certainly delve deeper into this new (to me) area as a result.However, as expressed by earlier reviewers, the scenario wherein a respected doctor is unable to record a complaint, or at least register an early warning, against a woman with a previous history of mental illness does not ring true.Most of all, I was fascinated by the parallels drawn with religion as the film drew to a close. The devotion, unwanted, of this woman to her chosen deity vs. the devotion, demanded, to God(s). I am personally an (ex Catholic) atheist, but recognise so many of us must worship.Please do not let any of my comments detract you from your enjoyment of this truly excellent film.

fedor8 I'll have to admit that French movies have come a long way since the 60s and 70s, a period during which vastly overrated - but occasionally barely competent - filmmakers such as Godard, Bunuel, and Rohmer bombarded the viewers with plot-less, overly political, and usually pretentious easy-to-make, pointless, free-for-subjective-interpretation, fill-in-the-meaning-yourself baloney. France is still the source of many dumb films (but, hey, so is Hollywood), yet the direction has become far more skillful, and French editors have finally left the unemployment lines and started being hired to do their (underrated) jobs. Many of the older French flicks look as if ALL the scenes that were shot were stuck into the end-product...ANNA M isn't exactly the first movie to deal either with insanity or stalkers, but it's one of the better ones. This is due in large part to Isabelle Carre's charisma and her ability to pull off an ideal, gradual schizophrenic jump from the likable, naive young spinster to the malicious, tunnel-vision-obsessed loon.The only significant drawbacks can be found around the middle, when the movie drifts slightly into far-fetched territory: the whole nonsense about no-one in the police believing the doctor went into overkill drive for a short while there...The ending is somewhat problematic. The birth of her child "cures" her, calms her down: I don't buy that.

missingtth ...then you have to back-up and start watching some Michael Haneke films. His work is brilliant, and makes Spinoza's film seem like a generic French thriller that pales in comparison. This film requires an immense degree of suspended disbelief which makes it unwatchable in my opinion. Am I supposed to believe the events that transpire in the film? Seriously? This film is really far fetched and the lead actress' performance is grating because of its one-dimensiality. Her obsession is just too much. And it cannot carry the film. No one is that obsessed in this world (okay, almost no one), certainly not over a Doctor??? Come on. Get serious.If they would have examined her relationship to her mother (like Haneke did in The Piano teacher) in a more thorough manner then it might have helped out in terms of the character development, but these characters just develop in such narrow terms.I take French Cinema very seriously, but I must admit that this is just average fare. Mediocre at best.

moimoichan6 Anna M (Isabelle Carré) is a poor and sick girl : she's lonely, depressive, she has no friends or sentimental life, she's got a boring job at the Fench National Library and she lives alone with her mother, who seems unable to fill the void of her life. So, she naturally tries to kill herself an evening, while taking the dog out. And when she wakes up at the hospital, she had to find a new meaning to her life, and it will take the shape of the doctor who cured her (Gilbert Melki), for whom she'll develop a crazy love fixation : even if it seems obvious that he only fells indifference for his patient for whom he only have professional concerns, she'll convince herself that he shares with her an absolute love. The movie develops wit realism and intelligence this fixation, that slowly become a dangerous mental sickness, and fallows its progression steps by steps, with the seriousness of a psychological study.To the crudity of this study, that sometimes really penetrates the intimacy of this troubled conscience, Michel Spinosa adds some horror/thriller's touch that wears a double face. Spinosa uses a fantastic tone and even some horror movies figures of style in order to describe the subjectivity of his character (nighmare sequences, deformed frame to underline the sickness of Anna, etc.), but he's also stage some horrific triller scenes, that lead to the most impressive and tense sequence of the movie, where the monstrous character is now in charge of children. The use of horror figures in a traditional dramatic movie is always interesting in the world of french "Cinema d'Auteur", even if it's more and more common (see the recent "Le dernier des fous", in which Laurent Achard imposed a fantastic tone to a classical family study, or "ILS", a french horror movie, supposedly based on real events). And it's nice to see that the mix is quite efficient and that, thanks to the the reflection of the psychological and the horror sides, you're able to clearly understand the madness of the main character.This description of madness, full of tension, is certainly the great achievement of the movie, but if you're deep in it when you're watching it, it's strange to see how its effects quickly disappear after the screening. Even if I was completely emerged in the movie while watching it, I didn't kept a strong memory of the movie, and it didn't get much impact on me. I think it's partly due to the clinical and cold impression that crosses the all movie, and to the fact that you never really fell anything for the characters. Anna is more like a figure of study, an experimental subject for whom you don't really get any emotion nor compassion, but only understanding, than a really human being. And the Dr. Zanevsky doesn't really exist, except in Anna's mind. Melki's character is just plain and mediocre, and you're never really able to see it through the crazy eyes of his mad lover. That's also why, at the end, despite the original efforts of the movie, I still got the feeling to have watched another classical french little drama.