MovieChat Forums > La Haine (1995) Discussion > The token 'this film is awful' thread

The token 'this film is awful' thread


I usually hate the people who do these kind of threads but i think it's neccesary here - so, unlike most of them, i'll atleast try and give my reasons.

Firstly, yes this is about a relevant subject and it depicts it quite while in terms of settings, attitudes, etc. But the plot itself is so basic i just can't see how people rate this so highly. Encounter police, run away, encounter police, run away. In the end there's a slight twist but in most movies that would merit a place in the movies '2nd phase' somewhere, not as the overall climax.

And the dialogue is awful. It plays far so much on the 'this is how real people talk' angle so much that it gets laughable and cheesy; it tries so hard to be 'Pulp Fiction' when in reality it’s a far lesser version.

Could go on but I won't, lets just hear some feedback.


reply

First off- where are you from? Are you a native English speaker? Because I would hate to think that you're judging the dialogue based on shoddily written subtitles. The UK English subtitles on the copy I saw read like they had been translated by someone who'd learned their English in England in 1955. Terrible, terrible, terrible. If you have any understanding of French at all, it was blatantly obvious that the dialogue could have been translated in a much better way. This IS NOT a reflection on the quality of the film.

Secondly, have you heard of the phrase 'less is more'? This film isn't trying to be Pulp Fiction in ANY way. You sorely missed the point of everything La Haine was aiming to illustrate. Life isn't plot-driven, and when a film or book is rooted in reality, reality is what we see. In fact, most things in art that portray this quiet reality are often the best. If you need an explosive plot, then I suppose this film isn't for you. However, it doesn't mean it's a bad film, it just means it doesn't suit your particular tastes. Objectivity when forming an opinion is an absolute must, as is being informed about your subject. You would do well looking into both.

reply

hmmm... I must admit, the film didn;t really engage me, dunno why. It wasn't BAD, but I just don;t feel that I could relate to the characters.
I still feel that the youngsters(apart from the black one who was sensible-ish) deserve the treatment they get from the police.
Also I think the film pushed the whole anti-establishment theme too much... the police were slightly demonized.

reply

I can't speak for all of France, but from my own experiences of Paris and the suburbs, La Haine is pretty realistic. The police and security often target young people of ethnic origin (I always get followed around stores and eyed up by the police). A lot of my students that are Arab/black often complain about the police too...and they're generally nice kids. I think the mentality becomes "think of us negatively and so we shall behave" (Although one can argue that it goes both ways..."behave badly and so you shall be stigmatised"). I'm not saying that's an excuse, but the lives these characters led and their social situation gives a clearer perspective into their behaviour.

The police thing may have been exaggerated, but I personally avoid the French police like the plague despite the fact that I am a law abiding citizen. It’s simply the done thing

Anyway, I personally think the movie is amazing. Its so subtle and comes together wonderfully

reply

I'm glad someone understands that subtlety is what makes this film so great.

reply

[deleted]

The police targets young people of ethnic origin ? Of course ! The police is supposed to prevent crimes and to arrest those who commit them !
I've never seen a 60 year old white man burn a car or attack people in their car ata traffic light. Not in those neighbourhood anyway.
The police is not supposed to be politicaly correct, it's supposed to be efficient.

reply

dao54, I don't understand. Do you think it's alright for a police man to falsely arrest someone because of their origin because it's more likely that they will commit a crime than an old white man?

reply

Nobody said anything about arresting anybody. From what I anderstood from the above poster, he felt upset because the police always makes ID controles on young people from foreign origins and frown at them. That's something we hear a lot in France. But in the French projects, 90% of the population is of African or North African origin. And in that polulation, it's mainly the teenagers and the young adults who commit crimes. No wonder they are targeted by the police.
I wouldn't be surprised if the LAPD behaved the same way towards blaks and latinos in some areas of LA.

reply

I'm a she...but yeah.

I'm not upset by it, it doesn't bother me since I've done nothing wrong. I was merely stating the reality of Parisian suburbs. As you said, its about protecting everyone else. It still doesn't justify the police's actions (I hate shopping in France, its such an uncomfortable experience for me). But my viewpoint is that because I'm actually British. In the UK I have NEVER in all my life been followed by the police. So France is a different experience for me. I don't like being targetted just for the colour of my skin, but then I understand as I've seen what the "young ethnics" can do (unfortunately the minority tarnish the majority). Its hard for me to explain because I have such conflicting views...that and having a migraine never helps

reply

I have to disagree with part of your statement. As an historian of the American Civil Rights Movement, I can point to hundreds of incidents where police chose to enforce particular minor (and ultimately unjust) laws when broken by blacks or northern whites who had come south to work in voter education programs - but not against southern whites who murdered those same blacks and northern workers. In Alabama in the 1960's, for instance, middle aged and older white men burned a Trailways bus carrying an interracial group. (And that's just one small incident.)

My interest in the American civil rights movement is what informs my fascination with La Haine; it's almost as if La Haine allows me to see an early snapshot of the movement in the south... but rewritten in a way that I, as a southerner, can see from the "outside"... without some of the cultural markers that scar any attempt to view objectively my own nation's legacy.

No... the police aren't supposed to be politically correct, and justice is supposed to be blind - but it's not, and it never will be. As long as police abuse their authority (as in the interrogation scene), as long as the power structure (police, social support systems) dehumanize minorities and view them as "the other," it won't happen. It just won't. In La Haine, the entire power structure is arranged to disfranchise these kids - and the only hope they can find is in a stolen gun. It's not a hope of construction, it's a hope of destruction and revenge. That's what makes the ending so poignant, whether it's Hubert or the cop that dies - either way, they've both lost. The same story happened over and over in American history; it's just that ours usually ended with a noose.

I think ... more than anything else ... the problems portrayed in La Haine are a astounding demonstration of "othering." As I'm sure you know, the film proved remarkably prescient, especially in the past couple of years. (Yes, prescient, but not necessarily clairvoyant - the film wasn't born in a bubble and French sociologists have warned of the slowly burgeoning ethnic unrest for decades.) Saied and Hubert both embody the more obvious aspects of France's colonial legacy - but so do the entire banlieues. The 2005 riots and Sarkozy's policies demonstrate France's inability to resolve its post-colonial ethnic divisions. In the '05 riots, cities like Marsailles, where city leaders had taken an active interest in the young people living Saied, Hubert, and Vinz's lives, they could resolve the tensions more easily. Not so in Paris and its 20+ "nuits des feux".

As for the main thread's poster: while you're entitled to your opinion, I don't think you've watched the film very closely. As your primary respondent said, the subtitles do take quite a bit away from the film's intent and they do ... even in the new Criterion release (in which the subs are much better) cheapen the dialogue a little. I find in French films when the writing is so earthy, profane, and colloquial as the dialogue in La Haine, reading the movie just doesn't do it justice. Try watching it again, a couple of times, even. Check out the re-release; I think you'll find the subs a little more genuine.

K

reply

You can't seriously compare nowaday France with the America of the 60's and their police and justice. Of cours there is discrimination in France towards people of Arabe and African origin, but it usually stays with resumes with arabe names put aside by employers or people not being let in clubs.
As for the film being prescient, that kind of riots started in 1981, and became regular from 1990/1991. Other films were made on the same subject at the same periode -Etat Des Lieux (1995) Ma 6-T va crack-er (1997)-.
Finally, I'm curious about the expression "nuit des feux" you used. I've never heard it. Where did you get it ? We usually say "les evenements"(the events) or we just say "the 2005 riots".

reply

[deleted]

"I still feel that the youngsters(apart from the black one who was sensible-ish) deserve the treatment they get from the police. "

This is one of the most shocking, and disturbing things I have read on imdb yet.

reply

Agreed! Shocked and scared

reply

Why are you shocked, these were good for nothing hooligans. Well no-one should be tortured but apart from that I was cheering when Vinz got his comeuppance.

reply

'First off- where are you from? Are you a native English speaker? Because I would hate to think that you're judging the dialogue based on shoddily written subtitles. The UK English subtitles on the copy I saw read like they had been translated by someone who'd learned their English in England in 1955. Terrible, terrible, terrible. If you have any understanding of French at all, it was blatantly obvious that the dialogue could have been translated in a much better way'.

I'll admit to not understanding the French language seeing as i was taught Spanish at school and chose not even to persue that. Maybe the dialogue was poorly put across, but the topics of conversation still seem boring and unoriginal to me.

'This film isn't trying to be Pulp Fiction in ANY way. You sorely missed the point of everything La Haine was aiming to illustrate. Life isn't plot-driven, and when a film or book is rooted in reality, reality is what we see'.

Really, not in ANY way? How about the cheesy 'people talking about nothing which makes it true to real life' dialogue. There's a scene where a kid tells Said about the TV show candid camera for about 5 minutes; that's so Pulp Fiction it could have been one of the deleted scenes.

'In fact, most things in art that portray this quiet reality are often the best. If you need an explosive plot, then I suppose this film isn't for you. However, it doesn't mean it's a bad film, it just means it doesn't suit your particular tastes'.

Rooted in reality? As i've said it seems to portray suburban France pretty well, but it also contains three of the most unrealistic and stereotypical characters you'll see in a movie. The arrogant eccentric, the head-on-his-shoulders voice of reason and the gentle giant who wants to 'get out of the ghetto' - all stereotypes taht are put across in an over-the-top, cheesy way with all the subtly of a jack hammer. And I couldn't quite hear you from on top of that 8 foot derby winner but i don't need to see an explosive plot, just one that shows some form of progression and entertainment - and you might come back with 'but its a documentation of life not a plot-driven movie'. So what, it still has to progress and entertain in some way, otherwise it would have been better to see an actual documentary of what was happening rather than a director's one sided view on events being acted out.

reply

Just because La Haine is one of my all time favourites, I agree that you're entitled to your opinion. But I really think you've missed the point of this film.

There's a scene where a kid tells Said about the TV show candid camera for about 5 minutes; that's so Pulp Fiction it could have been one of the deleted scenes.

Now I HATE it when people link two unrelated films together, and unnecessarily accuse one of copying the other. My dad is an avid fan of Pulp Fiction and when I watched La Haine with him, he didn't once make a comparison between the two. Now, I'm not saying that my dad is the law and if he doesn't mention Pulp Fiction then no one else will. But if the connection is SO clear that the Candid Camera bit "could have been one of the deleted scenes", then it would make sense for such a huge fan to see this connection too. I think you're just linking the two for no reason. Oh and the kid's telling Vinz not Said.

Can I ask what made you watch this film in the first place?
I don't see how it's cheesy at all. Or unrealistic. Do you know anything about French culture? Because if you did, you would see it is incredibly true to life. Oh, and I think the characters were perfect. I can't imagine changing a thing about the way they were portrayed because they carried the story brilliantly.

I recommend watching La Haine again, but this time with the ability stop nit picking with unnecessary criticism. If you still don't appreciate it, fair enough but at least you can say you watched it with an open mind this time.

reply

I think i must be putting my point across in the wrong way here, so this might sound like a s**t out of the argument but i'm just gonna stop trying. So, final points -

i'm merely saying that La Haine uses dialogue which has absolutely no relation to the plot, as has Pulp Fiction - I'm sure everyone has to agree on that. And no i haven't just watched Pulp Fiction recently and put the two together, to whoever made that completely pathetic and patronising comment.

if one agrees with me that these characters aren't relaistic then i don't know, i give up. But just look at Vinz as an example, he's like an arrogant 6 year old running around his garden playing cops and robbers. I understand the whole situation of young people battlign with the police, but they surely just went about it in an ordinary manner rather than pretending to be Action Man.

A charcater points his fingers, which he's made into a gun shape, at police officers and then blows on his finger tips as if he's shot at them and we're all supposed to think that really cool - get a grip. It's cheesy for that sequence if nothing else.

By the way i don't think i have to watch this film again or watch it again with an open mind, i'm not being pedantic it's just that i've already watched and analysed this movie once and i simply don't like it.

Stopping there. Thanks for the replies, even though i'll have to disagree.

reply

This has nothing to do with Pulp Fiction whatsoever. It's as close to Pulp Fiction as Alice in Wonderland is - both are full of non plot-related dialogue but how many people would compare this to the adventures of the Mad Hatter and his pals? A lazy comparison as is the norm on IMDB.

I must agree with the comments on subtitles though, I find it hard to believe 'You're such a pain' is a commonly used phrase in this film, and surely nobody calls somebody a 'bugger' in anger any more?

reply

A lazy comparison? the film was relaeased a year after Pulp Fiction and i personally believe that the movie saw that the audience of the time liked the idea of hearing references to pop culture in a day-to-day, conversational, non-plot related style (and thats far from insane ramblings of the Mad Hatter, so its you who's making the lazy comparison here)

reply

I would disagree entirely. I should think the film was well into production long before Pulp Fiction was even released.

reply

I'll admit that's debatable, but you haven't explained why the conversation style i've pointed out is so familiar to both movies.

reply

An interjection...

The scene where the kid talks about Candid Camera was put there to show that these kids have nothing.... nothing to do, no school, no jobs, no viable opportunities of any sort. It is essential, because it sets the scene. It is in face integral to the plot because it shows what they do with their time and their lives.

reply

Well people talking about nothing is trying to depict a normal conversation. Maybe in both films the writers were just trying to do the same thing. I don't think you can accuse "La Haine" of copying "Pulp Fiction" though, it was most likely written before "Pulp Fiction" was released. But there is no denying that the dialogue is similar but it really shouldn't be an issue. Anyway I don't think that the film was made for an English audience, if it was it would have been written in English, and I'm guessing that if a person fluent in both French and English watched both films in their original forms they probably wouldn't make the link. I mean I didn't either, but now that you've pointed it out I do see it, but it's just similar, not trying so hard to be "Pulp Fiction". It should only matter if you don't like that particular style of dialogue.

reply

Im a Moroccan kid living in a ghetto and I can tell you that this movie just portrayed the lives of us second class citizens. I could easily be one of the guys chilling on the rooftop or I could have went to school with Vinz. These are real people in my eyes. They live with fishbowls on there head. We dont leave our neighborhood, but when we do its like going to another country. We live of fals concepts that we turn into truth. I have had a few discussions with people and most people that have problems with this movie are people that are white and of the middle - upper class. Who cant seem to relate or dont want to believe the situation and position that these second class citizens live in. I don't want to say that they are racist people. My english isnt that good since I havent been in a classroom since I was 14. So I cant probably express my opion in the most correct and sincere way.Someone said something about how they even can be friends. They just grew up together, when its bad at home you go play outside and dont come home untill its time to sleep. You spend hours with others with the same situation. That creates that bond you become brothers but when you grow older you start to go your own way.

reply

La Haine was made around the same time as Pulp Fiction. By the time Pulp Fiction premiered at Cannes, La Haine would have been deep into production.

reply

i'd say that vinz was kinda over-the-top but the other two were pretty true to life. I knew people like that.

reply

Okay, I won't even broach the topic of dialogue, because you haven't given an example of a film where you believe the dialogue isn't stilted. I would like for you to give an example of a film that, in your opinion, has realistic dialogue. Then we'll go from there.

This film is in no way linked to Pulp Fiction. Someone else said that, and I will say it again. Maybe you watched the two films recently, and that's why you're drawing comparisons. Otherwise, I have no idea how you so expertly managed to link two completely unrelated films.

I will agree that the characters could have perhaps been less stereotypical. However, I think I should point out that this film was made in 1995 (which I assume you've noticed), so I think that should be taken into consideration. Thirteen years ago this film had less competition, and in its wake, it has spurred many other decent, well-made films of a similar nature. Therefore, maybe that's why the characters don't ring true to you. Basically, what I'm saying is that if you'd seen this in 1995, archetypal characters might have been less of a gripe, because you wouldn't have as many films to compare La Haine to, if that makes sense.

Film aren't always about entertainment, which is the simplest of arguments, yet true. In addition, to refute your statement that the film shows a lack of progress, I have to say that this is again, totally incorrect. It progresses on nearly all levels- chronologically (the most basic), moralistically and in terms of plot development. Again, all of these are incredibly subtle, but this film is specific to French culture, not American or even British, so the desentization of violence within the latter two is also something that might thwart your ability to grasp the reality of the film. And again, reality in 1995, not 2008, a time when such tensions and violence have clearly escalated to the point that an audience such as yourself finds a plot centered around a single, stolen gun 'boring'.

reply

Really, not in ANY way? How about the cheesy 'people talking about nothing which makes it true to real life' dialogue. There's a scene where a kid tells Said about the TV show candid camera for about 5 minutes; that's so Pulp Fiction it could have been one of the deleted scenes.


Actually he was talking to Vinz, but to my point...i like that scene. I think he basically trying to portray the boredom of their everyday existence. If you notice where they sat, right by the road, hoping someone they know might walk or drive by. Also Vinz was just trying to engage the kid because he had nothing better to do. He clearly wasn't interested in the kid's story...which was emphasized later on the timeline when he asked the kid the name of actor in the TV show, after 5 mins of silence. So yeah i thought it was a pretty funny scene actually. Anyone who's hung out like that in the suburbs can relate to it.

reply

[deleted]

I know the post is 4 years-old, but I don't think you understand the film.

Every film possess two views, which come into conflict with each other and make the film interesting. I think you are not looking into the film enough, and are only scratching the surface, and seeing the first view.

The whole point of the Candid Camera scene is to show the viewer how dull and boring their ghetto and home-life was.

Also I think you said something about the finger mimicking the gun as being "cheesy". Again, it shows us what's going on in Vinz' mind, and that it's not for show or him trying to be "cool". It kind of represents him practicing for his big moment of shooting a police officer.

Finally, the story that the oldman told them in the toilet was an anecdote: If you don't *beep* on the rails, and *beep* in the bush, you'll miss the train. = If you don't take your chance now, you'll miss it. = Shoot the cop when you have the chance.

I hope you'll end up liking the film and seeing the second view to it! :)

reply

You just doggedly disagreed with everything he said simply to defend your precious honour.

Your opinions does not mean *beep*

reply

First off- where are you from? Are you a native English speaker? Because I would hate to think that you're judging the dialogue based on shoddily written subtitles. The UK English subtitles on the copy I saw read like they had been translated by someone who'd learned their English in England in 1955. Terrible, terrible, terrible.


I just watched it on Amazon Prime. I don't speak French but I did get the feeling the subtitles were really doing the dialogue a disservice. Some examples: "We live like sh*t in rat holes and you do sod all to change things" "You're such a pain" (repeatedly said to Vinz) "Who was that tart?" (referring to the woman with the news crew who film them in the playground) "I can't let you in, they'd sack me" "Creep" (when they try to visit Abdel in hospital) "The buggers" (when they're running after the train on the platfrom)

It just seemed like the bad language was being watered down in the translation. There was bastard, dickhead and wanker but the f-word didn't seem to be in the subtitles at all. Would characters like this say "You do sod all"? No, they'd probably say "f*<k all"

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

you have to be a complete idiot not to like this movie.
its powerfull on all levels.

reply

[deleted]

please don't say Amelie

Why?

I've seen plenty of good french films, and while La Haine is excelent, I don't see how it's better than any other?

reply

Funny.

The director of this movie is Nino in Amelie.

reply

'you have to be a complete idiot not to like this movie.'

If you were talking about any movie in the world this would still be an arrogant and short-sighted viewpoint.

reply

Firstly, La Haine is plotted linearly, but framed as cinema verite. The dialogues effect, especially reinforced if you actually understand French and its colloquial, is an accurate representation of how someone of that social strata living in a Parisian cite would talk. It's presented rough hewn, uncontrived, with an honesty that strives to represent the day-to-day interactions of cite youth, that is as far from Pulp Fictions self-indulgent dialogue meanderings as Mary Poppins is from Jaws. The only relationship that the films bear to one another is that they were produced roughly at the same time.

Secondly, the film is not required to flow in the sense that a Hollywood production would. The pacing is spot on, deliberate, cleverly reflecting the haphazard nature of the day that the triumvirate are experiencing. It's not trying to be cool, it's social commentary, an appraisal of disenchantment, a contemporary wake-up call for the French government, a film borne out of a profound sense of curiosity and exploration of what motivates people to go to extremes.

I think it is not sage to judge a film by its subtitles. C'est toi la vache.

reply

And there you go, couldn´t have said it better.Thanks man:)

La haine is one of my favourite movies ever,i like everything in this movie and i was ready to offer my view on this thread, but this guy did it better.

le monde est à nous!!

reply

Damn. I wanted to lay down my own argument for why this post creation was wrong on 94 levels, but some like minded people have already beaten me to it. The original poster is nowhere to be seen.

Shame

le monde est a vous

reply

Well its difficult to be 'seen' on an internet forum, but here i am mcmist. Any more self indulgent sh**e you want to post? I hope so, it'd be a shame to go without your undoubtedly insightful and incisive opinions on this matter.

reply

Well, just as an extra voice on this matter, since I was passing by out of curiosity... ;-)

I studied this in film class a couple of years ago, and I'm afraid that the class were universally unimpressed with it, except for the teacher himself. (It was an adult class, in case you're wondering.)

I can't comment on the realism of the script especially, since I saw it with subtitles, and am not french. However, I found this to be a simplistic, typically sensationalist film. The class I was in, all agreed, that the characters just felt unrealistic in the extreme (There may be some people who've experienced those areas of france who disagree, but at the end of the day, we're only able to comment from our own perspectives) It seemed as though the characters had been shoe-horned into being 'friends' for the sake of the plot. In normal circumstances, it just seems so utterly unlikely that they would be.

They are also such un-sympathetic characters, that by the end of the film, we have far more sympathy with the police, than the leads. Which we all know is was the opposite of the actual goal! This film was so heavy-handed in its "Police/establishment evil" message, it lost any credibility almost from the very start. And by its conclusion, had failed in delivering that message anyway.

Obviously many people have a different opinion, but as with anything, we're all entitled to one, as long as we can justify those opinions. (whether we agree with those justifications or not)

Time enough for the earth in the grave!

reply

My God thank you wdlee, I thought I was the only one.

reply

Carragher23, you could benefit from the Grunwalsky story (which is the same as the movie's message). Until you drop your pants, you won't learn anything...
You came here to "argument battle" and to look for confirmation of your opinion, which you will find for absolutely any idea in this world, no matter how crazy or stupid or genius it is. You are not writing in order to learn or discuss the film, and that's a lost effort.
Until you drop your ego, and stop understanding every post as an attack (although some are), you won't change nothing in your idea of this film (not that you want to, but I think it would make your life better). Stop nit picking illogical parts of post and selectively reply, and instead try to understand what people are writing about...

As for characters being "unrealistic"; I understand why are you claiming that. But please understand that you just didn't grow up in a (French) ghetto where the rules are different. Also, keep in mind that these are 3 teenagers we are talking about. I had a bunch of friends, when I was teen, with a very conflicting personalities. Such kind persons would never be my friends today.
You just find one thing you like about them (or simply you're just lonely, or you're neighbors) and you stick together. That happens a lot in poor environment. They can't really choose their friends... They ARE FORCED TOGETHER. You noticed that nicely, but you failed to understand that this is because they're oppressed minorities. And if they don't stick together, they die. You can see that throughout the movie they separated various times, and were forced together by violence (in order to protect each other), or simply because they had no other choice...

Your view of them as stereotypes is oversimplification. The movie "progressed and entertained" by introducing those characters to us and their relation. They're all voice of reason at times, they're all egocentric at times. Try to watch it again, and see the subtlety in it.
And to repeat again, this movie has absolutely nothing to do with Pulp fiction. It is the opposite in many ways, and similirar in almost none (has similarities to Pulp Fiction as much as ANY movie).

If you want me to try and explain details of my claim, I will try. But first, I'd like to see your real interest, instead of hate. Ask if anything you like, and I'll try to go deeper...

Try to understand that you don't know a lot of things in this word (like I don't, or anybody else), so try to learn; and not dislike anything that doesn't fit in your image of how world should look like.

All I'm saying is, don't judge what you don't know!!! Learn first...


P.S. I suspect that your problem with this film (like I had with many) is that you expected the "Pulp Fiction" clone and you didn't get it. I had similar situation with Magnolia. Somebody recommended it to me as American Beauty type of a movie, and I hated the it, until I saw it 5 times...

reply

Firstly freebiescrap, thank you for showing such an extreme interst in my personality.

I'm not going to go through your post point by point, but I will make a few of my own. I do understand the vast majority of the opinions which are being put across in this thread - I obviously don't know everything, as you incisively noted, but I can certainly grasp the ideas being presented. Let me say that you and many other people have made valid points in this thread and I have in no way completely dismissed them, I've merely defended my side of the argument. I understand the many various social messages that are being portrayed, I understand the reasons for oversimplifying characters, I understand the concept of people being friends for reasons besides them both having the same set of interests and yes, I even understand that I can't completely undertsand the context of this movie because I haven't been brought up in a French ghetto. But the fact remains - I do not like this movie. And I'm sorry, but no amount of viewings or self-realisation on my part is likely to change the fact that I thought this movie's script was neither entertaining nor realistic (and not in terms of the film's context, but in terms of general interaction between any movie characters). I have to say that the hypocrisy of this thread is laughable at times, primarily when people tell me that I must be more open-minded in order to like this movie, and yet they cannot open their minds to the idea that their opinion on said movie could possibly be wrong.

As for your own post frebiescrap; I admire the fact that you've put a friendly gloss over the surface if your viewpoints, however the fact still remains that you've, ironically, made some snap judgements on my intelligence and abilty to review or discuss a movie in an analytical manner. As said previously I won't draw specific examples from your post, but it's quite insulting and patronising to be repeatedly told what I'm doing wrong in analysing a movie; especially when your knowledge of my ability to do anything is limited to what you've read in a couple of off-the-cuff posts that I've thrown onto this thread (don't judge what you don't know!!). I don't suppose it ever occured to you that my hate-filled ego may have been starting 'argument battles' in order to spark a genuine debate into this forum, rather than having to trawl through the 'Who's your favourite character?' threads and other such unprovocative drivle. Maybe I've been hostle at times, although not so in my own opinion, and if that's the case then I'm sorry; but it's difficult to defend a viewpoint that you are constantly told is undeniably wrong without becoming aggrivated.

And FOR THE FINAL TIME, I merely suggested that ONE scene in this movie uses the idea of dialogue which disscuses something currently relevant to pop culture and which has nothing specifically to do with the plot - a devise which is often used in Pulp Fiction. I by no means expected La Haine to be a French clone of Pulp Fiction, in the same way that I don't expect any film to be a clone of any other before viewing it. I base my opinion on films by merit and happen to appreciate a wide range of texts, from Mullholland Drive to Million Dollar Baby and almost everything in between.

So thanks for your efforts, but in the future just give your opinions on a movie and I'll give mine; seeing as I've got no intention of being lectured.

reply

I never judged your personality, I judged your posts.

I repeat what is sad in reference to your posts:

Until you drop your ego, and stop understanding every post as an attack (although some are), you won't change nothing in your idea of this film (not that you want to, but I think it would make your life better). Stop nit picking illogical parts of post and selectively reply, and instead try to understand what people are writing about...

And if you take a look in the references of any movie, you'll see that about 70% reference culture, and 90% have scenes that have nothing to do with plot. So, I don't know why you picked Pulp Fiction to compare it to...

Just saying you understand something, doesn't mean you do. Nobody's forcing you to like this movie, we're just trying to point out to you that you have no right to call it unrealistic, since you don't know that part of reality (as you said yourself).
It's like me saying that documentary on genetic engineering is unrealistic.

If you really want to defend your side of the argument ("argument battle"), answer to those two quesions:
Why compare it to pulp fiction (when most of the movies have the similar references)?
And how can you say it's unrealistic, when you know little of how that part of humanity looks in real life?

reply

Why compare it to pulp fiction (when most of the movies have the similar references)?

Take the scene with Vinz and the kid against the scene with Vincent and Jules talking about French fast food (and no, I'm not making the connection because it happens to be french food that their talking about, before someone makes that thoughtless point). They both use two characters conversing in an informal manner about contemporary pop culture; with one asking questions whilst simultaneous trying to remain nochalant and the other answering the questions by using a select section of knowledge on the subject to try and boost his ego and make him seem 'cool'. Again, I don't think movies are alike, I'm just pointing out that this one scenes such as this replicate each other in terms of the style of dialogue. Your saying that 70% of films reference culture; but not idle, pointless culture in direct conversation between two characters, in the manner I've described above.

And how can you say it's unrealistic, when you know little of how that part of humanity looks in real life?

Obviously I can't, but if I could only judge the realism of a film based on whether I'd lived there for a significant portion of my life then I'd be able to analyse very few films. And it isn't the sequence of events or setting that I'm saying are unrealistic, it's the dialogue and the overly-played character stereotypes which i thought lacked realism.

And I'll stop understanding every post as an attack if you stop trying to give me a behavioural lecture in every post. Seriously, you're superiorty complex is pathetic. Why say things like '[i]we're[i/] just trying to point to you...', as if I'm some sort of delegate from the main group of similarly opinioned people that you belong to and so I need to be taught otherwise? I really don't want to come across as a victim here, but I can't help feeling talked down to for the simple reason that I don't like a movie. Ofcourse I don't think every post is an attack, some have been insightful and well put across (e.g. punchbear made a good post if I remember) and I've taken them into account. This still doesn't mean I'll agree with them though, and if I don't then I'll just continue to defend my argument.

Also, I don't think I can agree that 90% of scenes have nothing to do with the plot. Maybe nothing to do directly with the basic plotline, but surely every scene adds somethign towards the tapestry of the plot, or adds to the demensions of a character so taht their actions in the plot become more understandable.

reply

The point of that scene is that some young kid from the neighborhood is talking vinz's ear off while he and his friends are anxiously awaiting a drug deal to go through. Nobody cared what that kid was talking about and it certainly wasn't supposed to make anyone "cool." The kid is laughing it up involved in his pointless story and vinz stares into space hoping the kid shuts up. That's the farthest thing from the pulp fiction car scene that ever could be. What a ridiculously tenuous argument to keep defending.

reply

[deleted]

I agree with wdlee. I also saw this in film class recently, and it struck me as an average movie. I couldn't relate to any of the characters very well and I also thought it was odd that the three friends were even friends at all due to their conflicting personalities and how they interacted with each other. Now I don't watch very much French cinema, or know much French culture and I don't speak French. So, that might be part of why I was unimpressed with this movie.

reply

You need to understand the circumstances before saying that about the characters. If you honestly had more sympathy for the police in this film then you clearly missed the point or were watching something completely different. After the torture lesson scene and the ENDING (and the general behaviour of the police throughout the whole film, except the one who bailed Said out of jail) then I don't know how much you must have disliked the characters to feel sympathy more for the police than them.
What did you find unsympathetic about them?

reply

I cannot believe it...
An American (or British?) class of 2008 judging how life in the French suburbs in the 90s was..
How more arrogant could you be?
I suggest you quit immediately that so-called class..

For your record, I am French, I saw the movie in 95' and I can tell you the movies depicts life in the suburbs in the most realistic way. And I am not politically biased as I am right wing.

Yours,
Guillaume

reply

Quite frankly I can't stand London. I've spent a lot of time there and its just too hectic and stressful. I'm actually a northerner, from round Manchester way, so I much prefer the North of England.

I see the police wandering around Manchester all the time, but compared to Paris its nothing. I have a whole new respect for the British police after living in France, they're so much nicer.

As for the subtlety of La Haine, I think its amazing. Everything develops so smoothly. The odd little conversations about everyday life just give a sense of realism...we all do it. I also love the way it leaves a lot open to interpretation on the viewer's behalf. Kassovitz invites us to develop our own ideas, he forces us to think and use our imagination. Something so few movies can do so well.

reply

[deleted]

I live in Tower Hamlets and I see the police around quite regularly. I passed two on pushbikes today - I thought the bobby on a bike had vanished before I was born!

____________________________
"An inglorious peace is better than a dishonourable war" ~ John Adams

reply

Manny is God's country.

reply

I know....I'm not saying it's not "well made" and a good example of a particular film style, but that doesn't mean it's interesting.
Boring boring boring. 35 minutes into it, I had to read the synopsis on wikipedia, because I didn't even know what the movie was about.
The movie hasn't given me a reason to keep watching it.

reply

who was this film aimed at?
that is where the answer lies.
its a french film of course but the issues it raises makes it openly accessible for viewers from different nations. its interesting to view as an outsider but you obviously wont relate to it or understand the message in the same way. but is it purely french? fair enough the dialogue, the setting, finance, and the director is french although kassovitz has no history of living in the banlieues. i reckon it has a strong american connection which adds to realism as the main characters try to emulate hip hop gangsters from the us. its naive and stupid but people do it to comfort themselves because of a lack of identity.. its awesome how they bond through the riots, it makes it more realistic to show how humans respond at times like this.

their struggle is universal i think.
thats why it was so successful.
i enjoyed everything about it.
its just an amazing piece of cinema-photography, if you want to make a connection with pulp fiction thats where it would be, in the quality camera angles and smooth editing. 2 class directors.

i see what you're saying about the dialogue, i think that happens in tons of films though ay, if it was all plot related you would be totally exhausted after following it. im a big fan of films where you havent got a clue whats going on then all of a sudden it just fits in to place. but this film is just a 'life account, nothing complicated all ran by emotion' easy to follow and beautiful to watch.
i think its a bit like les quatre cent coup in away. although they are 2 very different films.


reply

although kassovitz has no history of living in the banlieues


Although during the behind the scenes in the DVD extras section Mathieu does exaggerate the problem a bit, I think he did know what he was doing. He clearly did his research and it shows him and the 3 actors living in the banlieue they filmed in for 5 weeks, on the budget that the residents lived on aswell.

nique la police

reply

This claim:

it tries so hard to be 'Pulp Fiction' when in reality it’s a far lesser version.

...and this claim...
Again, I don't think movies are alike

...are contradictory. Please choose one, so that we can continue our little debate.

As for your idea that those two scenes resemble each other, I'd say maybe just a little. I think, with your description, you nailed on the spot the scene in La Haine. But I don't agree that it was like that in Pulp Fiction. I see the relationship of Vincent and Jules in a very different light (as equals), compared to Vinz and little kid (kid obviously dreaming of becoming like Vinz). I think the scene in Pulp fiction served a different purpose (to show how cold blooded they actually are)... In PF, they didn't need to talk to boost their ego, they had guns for that...
The kid is talking about the candid camera he saw on TV, Vinz is talking about his trip in France and their fast food (no contemporary pop culture there). Dialogue is also different. In PF, they use relatively educated, but street poisoned language, while in La Haine they use abomination of ghetto language (equal to the dirtiest Ebonics ghetto language, heard in the darkest hip hop songs).
The only real resemblance is that both scenes contain egoistical, ignorant characters.

I'd say that Fight Club is more similar to Pulp Fiction, by your measurements, than La Haine. Just take into account any scene with Pitt and Norton (them talking about flight exit procedure, for example)

Your answer to my second question was:
Obviously I can't, but if I could only judge the realism of a film based on whether I'd lived there for a significant portion of my life then I'd be able to analyse very few films. And it isn't the sequence of events or setting that I'm saying are unrealistic, it's the dialogue and the overly-played character stereotypes which i thought lacked realism.

Again, my question was:
And how can you say it's unrealistic, when you know little of how that part of humanity looks in real life?

I don't know if you're answering to me, or just talking something that sounds cool. Maybe it's me expressing badly (English second language).
In other words, I asked you how can you say that the people in the film are unrealistic, when you don't know that type of people? But I guess it's a half rhetorical question (that you already partially answered), and I'm just trying to get you to back off that claim. If you don't want to, I surrender then, its unrealistic...

And next misunderstanding:
Also, I don't think I can agree that 90% of scenes have nothing to do with the plot.

I said that 90% of the movies contain some scenes that have nothing to do with the plot, not that 90% of the scenes are pointless. I agree with what you said about character growth...

Sorry if I offended you by the "we" remark. I didn't mean it. I just think its easier and shorter to write "we" instead of "adamedea1, znier, threelittlebirds, richie_patrese, punchbear, ooze26, wittman_howell and me". Hope that I cleared this up. (this was a lot of work...)

P.S. So I think we have a deal here. I'll stop preaching, and you stop acting as a victim, or understanding every mark as an attack... That way we can really discuss the movie, no?

reply

'Please choose one, so that we can continue our little debate'.

My first statement there was intended to be about the one scene I've been talking about, sorry if that wasn't clear. The movies aren't alike, I was just pointing out similarities in that one scene.

'I think, with your description, you nailed on the spot the scene in La Haine. But I don't agree that it was like that in Pulp Fiction. I see the relationship of Vincent and Jules in a very different light (as equals), compared to Vinz and little kid (kid obviously dreaming of becoming like Vinz)'.

Valid point.

'I think the scene in Pulp fiction served a different purpose (to show how cold blooded they actually are)... In PF, they didn't need to talk to boost their ego, they had guns for that...'

I agree to some extent, but if they had no intention of boosting their respective egos then they could have quite easily of sat in silence and, by doing so, created the idea that they are cold-blooded in a 'strong and silent', mafiosa sort of way.

'Vinz is talking about his trip in France and their fast food (no contemporary pop culture there)'



Unfortunately, I think fast food has become a part of pop culture and I imagine that was the case even in 1994 - I'm too young to know that for certain though, so I'm open to being corrected on that point.

'In PF, they use relatively educated, but street poisoned language, while in La Haine they use abomination of ghetto language (equal to the dirtiest Ebonics ghetto language, heard in the darkest hip hop songs)'.

Again I agree to some extent, but I think the differences in dialogue don't so much represent the characters (from each respectives movies') different standings in society as much as they are simply differed because of the part of the world that they each hail from.

'I'd say that Fight Club is more similar to Pulp Fiction, by your measurements, than La Haine'.

It probably is, I've already said that the movies aren't alike.

'In other words, I asked you how can you say that the people in the film are unrealistic, when you don't know that type of people?'

My apologises, I read and replied to your post quite quickly and not thoroughly. When you're saying I don't know 'that type of person', do mean that I don't know people who are at the low end of society, struggling to find work, who feel as though they're opressed by the police and who roam around the streets in gangs? Because, without trying to wear some working class badge here, I think that I do - maybe they're not in a position where the police are actively being corrupt towards them, but I'd say that I know people who have that mentality/feeling of paranoia.

'I said that 90% of the movies contain some scenes that have nothing to do with the plot, not that 90% of the scenes are pointless'.

Ok, my mistake - like I've said, I read this quickly.

'Sorry if I offended you by the "we" remark. I didn't mean it. I just think its easier and shorter to write "we" instead of "adamedea1, znier, threelittlebirds, richie_patrese, punchbear, ooze26, wittman_howell and me"'.

No problem, I knew what you meant it was just that the toen of your writing came across in a certain way, maybe it wasn't intentional.

'So I think we have a deal here. I'll stop preaching, and you stop acting as a victim, or understanding every mark as an attack... That way we can really discuss the movie, no?'

Sounds good to me, pity it took this amount of pointless arguing for that idea to surface.

reply

I usually don't like this kind of threads because the one starting the discussion just put some very negative and/of hateful comments and never come back.

But in this case, I have read the whole thread and you keep coming back and develop interesting arguments. The answers where sometimes interesting and sometimes quite stupid (like "watch the movie a couple o times, open your mind and you'll love it !" what a bunch of crap...as if you can have your own opinion...)

Here is my own view of this movie :

I think it's quite good but it is also quite overrated. Kassovitz is a very talented director and the direction is indeed very good. The atmosphere is good and I found the story entertaining as well. The acting was quite good too.

but....

you can feel it is Kassovitz 2nd movie. It is quite arrogant in the way that the whole description of the French society and the whole world in general gives the feeling as if he understood it all.

Second, I understand the comparison with Pulp Fiction. The dialogs in La Haine try so hard to sound cool that I found it quite annoying. Also over the dialogs, I don't think they are really realistic. They want to "sound" realistic, that's different. And don't start with "you don't get the subtitles" because I'm French !!! I don't know how to explain it but the dialogs are too "neat" and not spontaneous enough to me to sound natural and realistic.
I really feel that the dialogs have been written down as a script before hand hand and it is not really realistic to me.

My final argument will be that when it came it out in France back in the days, many people from the "Banlieues" (french ghettos) critized the movie as being "unrealistic" (for example, NTM, a french hip-hop duo for the connaisseurs, really trashed the movie back then).

To conclude, according to me, the movie is quite good because it is well made and acted and I found it entertaining. But, to me, it is not a masterpiece because it is trying to hard to be realistic when actually it is not.

reply

I wish I didn't get here so late, but at least I get the retrospect on top of this WORST FARKING PIECE OF EUROTRASH SHEET I HAVE EVER HEARD. If ANYone could have been a bigger idiot than the original post/er - Johan is our "man", child.
'I usually don't like this kind of threads', but "I will come here and be a worthless hypocrite, despite my post modern (lack of) self awareness, god of this discussion board" - Johan, you are a "negative/ hateful" K U NT, your self. And if you doubt it, only because you have no 3rd person perspective on STUPIDITY.
It is impossible to "over rate" this film, IMPOSSIBLE. It is a truly immaculate conception, 'La Haine'. Because it's obviously impossible for you not to pee all your pseudo-intello-stupidismo all over this masterpiece of all time; tell me where you saw more proficient camera work than the no-edit, flying shot over the ghetto, while NWA was being mixed with Edith Piaf!?????
As your name seems French, yet your diction and syntax (look them up) seem DEUTSCH, I have no doubt you are quasi-fascist, neo-moron EuroTrash nevertheless!
THIS however, is your crowning "glory":
'(for example, NTM, a french hip-hop duo for the connaisseurs, really trashed the movie back then).'
Are you about 10 or 15 years old!? Were you kidding. ALL THOSE NTM mo-fos can SUCK MY D I CK, (what a shame IMDB edits swearing). MAYBE, maybe they make half-decent hip-hop, MAYBE, but why would I . . . okay, no one is fairer and less arrogant than me, when judging S H ITE. SO, I looked at your little, Bourgeois, hip-hop outfit! They fake being ghetto do they!? Well, their music is C R AP. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "hip-hop for the connaisseurs" - YOU EUROTRASH LOSER. AND, IF, they happen to be from "the ghetto", SO FARKING WHAT!? So, they can show that off to all their hyper Bourgeois Eurotrash CONNOISSEUR friends!!?????
Even IF their music were good, AND they "knew what it is really like" in the ghetto - THEY KNOW NOTHING OF FILM! Particularly as you also have failed to note; what is startling, and beautiful and PROFICIENT (well made, you eurotrash loser), AND POETIC in this film - IT DOES NOT EVEN MATTER THAT THE SETTING WAS THE GHETTO.
About me: I lived 4 years in a Brasilian ghetto (favela), and you, what do YOU know of life, film, OR LANGUAGE!? "Connaisseur" MY AR S E!
The Director is nowhere near as simple minded as you, Johan - do you REALLY believe that he put ONE arab, ONE jew and ONE black, and NOT think about the silly cliché it COULD be. OF COURSE HE WAS AWARE AND THAT IS WHY THE FILM IS ALL BRILLIANT METAPHOR, ALLEGORY AND STUNNING, "CHIC" POETRY. And if the simplicity yet brilliance of the story and script doesn't wow you, this film maker thought he would show off with brilliant camera work, soundtrack, and film making in general.
It is a masterpiece - the best film of it's epoque, hands down - but also a secret for people who understand, without referencing tenth rate, whatever, French hip-hop, repressed homo duos. Tell me what MC Solaar said!? (Oh, he's no good because he is too popular!?)

PS. what I hate is what IF everyone hated, we would certainly be building a more just world - I HATE the world's most bourgeois people (yes, +- all of us at IMDB), BUT, those who are NOT even smart, yet purport to be. At least when I talk about "ghetto", I have literally lived in one, and a long time at that. And even if I hadn't, at least when I purport to be smart or to know - you'd better prick up your lazy, ignorant ears. Yes, this may be a painful experience, but the best growing ones, always are.
signed,
THE IMDB GOD :) (Sarcasm, in case you dry, eurotrash k unt stayed clueless).

reply

Wow!!! Amazing... I feel a lot of hatred here... you should take it easy, it is just a movie allright ? If you don't share my point of view, fine but you don't have to insult me all along....

take it easy and have a nice day, allright ?

reply

First off, based soley on the direction this film is a masterpeice. Every shot is perfect. Second, the dialouge is real, and does fit. You say its not belivable, and then you say its ripping off Pulp Fiction, when, how realistic do you think Pulp Fiction is? not that its bad, but your comparing two distinctly different things, and then contradictiong yourself.

reply

Neither have realistic dialogue, but Pulp Fiction wasn't trying to create the same realism that La Haine was. The dialogue in LH isn't believable to me. You think it is, that's your opinion.

reply

couldn't agree with you more, carragher23

not only did i find the dialogue unrealistic [for the record i didn't have to watch it with subtitles since i'm fluent in french], i also thought the movie was stylisticaly overdone, the direction being so poseurish 'n all

kassovitz could 've been a contender, heh 8-)


---------------------------

the METAL!!!

it comes from HELL!!!

reply

Thanks drlecter, that's basically what I've been trying to say.

reply

If Kassovitz saw the impact the style of dialogue used in Pulp fiction had with filmgoers of the time, then you're suggesting he wrote it after the general release of Pulp Fiction in October '94. That would have given them a whole 7 months to write, produce and release the film by May '95. Do you really think that's plausible?

reply

The dialogue in LH isn't believable to me.


I assume you are a young french person living in the ghetto. Or are familiar with that culture. Otherwise you have no credibility in making that statement.

nique la police

reply

Going by that logic, less than 1% of any movies audience would be eligible to pass judgement on the authenticity of a movies culture.

reply

Going by that logic, less than 1% of any movies audience would be eligible to pass judgement on the authenticity of a movies culture.
I will assume that when you say "movies culture", you mean the different cultures of people, represented in the movies.
I'd say that in most cases, 1% is too much. How many people could have said in year '73 that the Godfather was (un)realistic? And which people had the credibility to do so (that's where your 1% comes in)....

You see, I live among many French (Caribbean) and many of them are coming from Paris. Some of them got born in a very poor families and lived a hard life (which is pretty obvious by their behavior, tattoos, habits...). So, when they say that those people in the movie "La Haine" are really looking and talking like the real people, they get the credibility from me and I turn myself into ears.

And when some American college boy says that French ghetto people don't look real, I turn my head away (towards something interesting)...

reply

[deleted]

Stories don't need climaxes.

reply

This one had a climax. Just no resolution.

reply