BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Executscan Expected more

Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

Rexanne It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

federovsky Modern day adaptation of a section of Proust's magnum opus that is true enough to the book in its theme and events and interestingly has the Marcel character still sunk in an archaic, aristocratic world.KD Lang lookalike Stanislas Merhar does a good job doing the insulated, emotional (and physical) frailty, trapped in an adolescent infatuation of towering poetic naivety, all the while consumed with jealousy by the suspicion that his live-in girlfriend is an active lesbian behind his back.It's slow. There's a lot of prowling around his creaking Paris apartment, lots of talking in cars - we seem to be taking entire journeys in real time. Akerman gave herself an easy directing job. The use of classical music is lazy - Schubert's Arpeggione Sonata is suitably Proustian, but Rachmaninov's Isle of the Dead is absurdly melodramatic, especially when played incongruously, Godard-fashion, over serene images.Those familiar with the writer and director can easily pull back the gauze to reveal the real issues - an inverted couple struggling to maintain a hetero relationship - but that is so superficial it hardly seems worth special effort and the film works better with the ambiguity in place (as intended), with the implication that naivety (misunderstanding, confusion) is at the root of jealous passion. The Marcel character is so naïve that in the sex scenes he doesn't even know that he is supposed to put it in - doing the movements without getting undressed (he's in bed in his overcoat in one scene). That was strangely tragic, and although it may have been a stylisation to symbolise their failure to connect, it was easier to take it literally.With liberties like that though, and done so earnestly, it's craves some indulgence. The worst problem is that the girl is comatose and unattractive, showing nothing of Albertine's sprightliness and guile that gave that character her painful duplicity. The ending too is a disappointment.

runamokprods A quiet, intense, low key look at the dysfunctional relationship between a very rich young man and the young woman he 'keeps' at his house. Is she trapped or is he? Who's really the captive? Not much happens in terms of events, the film is mostly in the details, but those details are great. The two leads give amazingly subtle performances, and the photography and lighting – while never showy – are magnificent. One of the most interesting and effective 'cold' looks I've seen in a film. Beautiful compositions. A film for those interested in complexity of character, a director using image and mood to tell a story, and patience to allow the slow accumulation of details to add up over time to something very special.

roobad What a disappointment! And, if you're going to make a film this boring, at least make it a bit shorter. They should put "ideal for insomnia sufferers" on the cover. I can't believe I wasted nearly two hours of my time on this pointless film. At the beginning I thought "Give it a chance, it might be a slow burner," Once it got to the middle I thought hurrah! something has to happen now. I was sorely mistaken. Frankly, I have a mind to ask for my money back from my video shop. A guy wanders round Paris, following his missus and looking glum. More happens in Eastenders (and that was before the Demi/Leo storyline). Seriously, root canal work is less painful than this. Don't bother. Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'll go and find some fresh paint to watch.

wanghui Oh, my God. I can't believe so bad movie it can be made. Bad directed, bad written, bad cinematographered. The whole thing is garbage. After 112 minutes watching, I got nothing but one man and one woman. I can't imagine anything that the director want to tell. I really hate the movie. If you haven't watch it, do not take it. It's really bad.