Absolutely horrible


Man, there is so much in this movie that was completely irrelevant. The scenes about his love interests were so unimportant that I almost dropped my dvd player in the bath tub. Not to mention, the director was VERY generous with slo-mo to the point that the film almost became a parody of action movies in general.

This movie was way too long, poorly acted and ridiculously cheesy.

Holy *beep*

reply

The scenes about his love interests were so unimportant that I almost dropped my dvd player in the bath tub.

How was it unimportant that Fronsac was taking Marianne away from her brother? Or that he was confiding in Sylvia, a Vatican agent? You didn't notice that Jean-Francois played these relationships against each other to get rid of Fronsac? Seemed pretty relevant to me.


The slow-mo was a nod to The Matrix. Granted, the film could have done just as well without it, but Gans was paying homage to many of his interests with this film.


I thought the film was very well acted. Gans even pulled a good performance from Mark Dacascos.

reply



Quote JigSaw407: It's really funny how someone always starts a "worst ever" or "absolutely horrible" topic on most every single movie board on the imdb. It's such a cliché by now, it's ridiculous.



It's b/c the postings r made by "attention-starved", uneducated twisted-minded baboons who r lower than a tapeworm on the evolutionary scale. Some race to be one of the first 5 posters b/c it's a game to negative imbeciles w/o a real life. And few, w/ a 3rd grade mentality have the audacity to try to make their rants sound as if it came from the mind-set of a sincere 10th grader. Imagine that! LOL





~~Wise men talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something

reply

And yet this post suggests its owner never graduated beyond grade school.

Ironic.

reply

The slow-mo was a nod to The Matrix. Granted, the film could have done just as well without it, but Gans was paying homage to many of his interests with this film.

lol "a nod"! What an extraordinary way to say a "pale copy".

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

reply

He took the girl away from her brother, while stopping at a prostitution house. Real classy guy !

reply

This movie was terrible! I was shocked to see that the DVD included Deleted Scenes as it seems as if there was no editor on this movie! 2.5 hours to tell a story about some guy who used an animal from Africa to try and gain power in France.

Couple of questions:
Where did the Indian learn martial arts?
Who didn't know five minutes in that the one-armed guy had both arms and was controlling the beast?

The slo-mo was very annoying, and if I saw the guy who was supposed to be an American Indian shake his mane ONE MORE TIME, I may have thrown up.

The movie did have great cinematography, I will give it that. Had the movie been edited down, it may have been enjoyable, but no way should it have taken more than two hours to tell this story.

reply

[deleted]

I saw it twice...and I want my four hours back. Please...

I mean, a lion...Really!?

Umm...(I have no words to describe my loss for why this film was even made).

reply

Umm...(I have no words to describe my loss for why this film was even made).



That's fine if you didn't like it. Good on you for giving it a second go.

As to why it was made, I can help you there. It was made for someone like me. I love this film. One of my all time favorites.

I mean, a lion...Really!?


Why not a lion? You were expecting a wolf?


reply

Monica Bellucci. Sex scene. Cosplay leathers. Need i say more?

reply

Yes...Monica Bellucci slathering her porno-star body all over my DVD screen when I didn't even ask to see it...great. The epitome of greatness. I'm being sarcastic.
I find this film god awful. The costumes are dulled out with cheap colours and tawdry frills; the cinematography is demented; the English dubb is frustratingly wet and heavy; some of the concepts in this film were just ridiculous. I'll name a few: the Beast is a lion? The North American Indian ["MANNY"] can perform Asian martial arts? There are women in mens breeches and openly exhibited stays (corsets) fighting like dogs, despite the obvious laws that there were against women dressing like men in the 18th century???? Francois has one arm pressed into his back underneath a corset, thats been kept there for years, and yet he can move it perfectly??? Its nonsense.

The slow motion was needless. It really cheapened the film and extended tension to an absurd degree. And Bellucci's prostitute/Vatican agent character just annoyed the Hell out of me. The whole pouting, lurking, glaring, dark, deliberately mysterious 'woman of the night' thing just comes across as cliched and cheap. The character can only really appeal to people who are sexually obsessed with the actress-therefore they will buy this film to jerk off over her. I find it depressing that the medium of film can be prostituted like that. But then, with films like this, what else are they good for?

I thought that this film was trying to be like a French 'Sleepy Hollow'.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

Pommeraie Vasundhara, it sounds like you were expecting some sort of serious historical drama about the Gevaudan legend. Gans turned the legend into a live-action fantasy manga. As such, I thought it was brilliant.

the English dubb is frustratingly wet and heavy
I would've just said "crappy". I only watch the subtitled version.

the Beast is a lion?
Why not a lion? What were you expecting?

The North American Indian ["MANNY"] can perform Asian martial arts?
I believe the conceit was that MANI was using savate, a martial art developed in coastal France. Presumably, he learned this from Fronsac.

Francois has one arm pressed into his back underneath a corset, thats been kept there for years, and yet he can move it perfectly???
No, Francois frequently freed his arm in his guise as the "beast master".

As to your criticism over Bellucci's scenes, all I can say is: are you familiar with French cinema??



reply

I rememeber seeing this film years ago, and loving it due to the great fight scenes and the excellent cinematography.

Just got it again off netflix and watched it again. STILL a great movie. I still love the fight scenes, like the idea that hte marquis is narrating the story, and the movie did scare me quite a bit in places! They did a great job with it. Fun little movie.

But damn, the fight scenes, they were badass. Mani character was excellent.

reply

Brotherhood of the Wolf is a masterpiece of the genre. It never became boring to me; I was fascinated by all the scenes. I say bravo to someone trying something a bit different with a horror story.

Made in America doesn't always mean the best.

reply

Well we just watched it again after two previous viewings a long time back, and it did not fare well. It is overlong, pompous, and the fight scene are ho hum - most embarrassingly the one with Vincent Cassel.

I know times have changed and the beast, and his ridiculous manga sword were ambitious and even impressive in 199-whatever, but it was laughable today. And the many slow mos and pointless scenes, and stupid plot, and silly romances.

reply

Hey Angel, you have covered some interesting points. I'll give you that. This is obviously your kind of film-but it isn't mine. I think this film is really quite annoying and pretentious. It makes no sense, and it has nothing to its name but historical inaccuracy, bloated sex scenes and silly inaccurate fight sequences. If thats what rocks your boat, fine, to each his own. But I don't like it for the reasons said.

By the way, I watch a lot of French cinema: Sylvain Chomet, Patrice Chereau, Rene Laloux and Michael Ocelot to name a few. Do you really think that all French cinema is like this rubbish? You'd have to be mad to think that.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

Where is the "accuracy" in Chomet's Les Triplettes de Belleville (which I loved, btw)?
And have you forgotten the sex scene in Chereau's La Reine Margot? The sex scenes in Pacte Des Loups are really brief and fairly conservative in comparison to the typical fare in French cinema. More is implied than is actually shown in this film.

Fronsac and Mani are like characters out of J.F. Cooper or Edgar Rice Burroughs, thrust into a scenario like that of The Name of The Rose or Hound of the Baskervilles. It's a fun action/mystery romp full of colour and visual texture. Fronsac's drug-induced hallucination is like a liquefied Gustav Moreau painting.


reply

Les Triplettes de Belleville is not as nearly as pretentious, fake, crazed and stupid as The Brotherhood of the Wolf! Its of a completely altogether different genre-it never struggles to be believable, or real. THATS ITS POINT. And GOOD GOD did you really just compare the *beep* film that is Brotherhood of the Wolf to a Gustav Moreau painting???

I haven't seen La Reine Margot so I wouldn't know what its like-I don't actually care if its infiltrated with disgusting, nauseating tasteless sex scenes. It is not the film in question. You seem to be hell bent on seeking out some way of proving me wrong?! I don't know what attracts you to this film??? Its God awful-when you look at the great masterpieces of cinema and compare them to this garbage it truly illuminates itself to you as a cheap, idiotic super-fantasy of the lowest order. Its degrading just to watch it.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

Les Triplettes de Belleville is a comic fantasy/adventure. Although it defies genre (one of its charms), Pacte des Loups is certainly a fantasy/adventure, as well as horror/mystery/period/martial arts/romance. You seem to think it's meant to be taken as some sort of serious documentary-drama. Just because the actors aren't winking at the camera every ten minutes doesn't mean the film is in earnest.

And GOOD GOD did you really just compare the *beep* film that is Brotherhood of the Wolf to a Gustav Moreau painting???

No, I compared the dream/hallucination scene, not the entire film, to a Moreau painting.
Compare the frozen horror and sumptuous colour in these:
http://img3319.imagevenue.com/images/loc500/72222_Moreau_3_122_500lo_1 22_500lo.jpg
http://img3319.imagevenue.com/images/loc430/72220_moreau_1_122_430lo_1 22_430lo.jpg
http://img3319.imagevenue.com/images/loc422/72221_Moreau_2_122_422lo_1 22_422lo.jpg
to that of the dream sequence. I would watch this movie for the colour alone.


I haven't seen La Reine Margot so I wouldn't know what its like-I don't actually care if its infiltrated with disgusting, nauseating tasteless sex scenes. It is not the film in question.

You seem to have lost the thread of the argument. You were expressing your disgust at the inclusion of the sex scenes with Monica Bellucci.
Fair enough. How you feel is how you feel.
I responded by pointing out that sex scenes are common in French cinema. You appeared to dispute that argument with a list of french directors whose films you enjoy. I only mentioned the sex scene in La Reine Margot because the director was in your list.

I enjoy Pacte for the same reasons I enjoy the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs, Edgar Allan Poe, Walter Scott, and Alexandre Dumas.

Out of curiosity, what do you consider masterpieces of adventure fantasy cinema?



reply

I don't know why you're so obsessed with "FANTASY" anyway!? Ok, Ok, fine-to you this schieBe is a sensuous Gustav Moreau painting brought to life with thrillingly cliched martial arts fights and enough idiocy to drive a perfectly sane person mad!! Whatever! Your opinion, not mine. I'm sitting here completely bemused as to why you are comparing it to truly beautiful films-because this film is TERRIBLE . It tries to make itself a portrayal of actual events [I quote the film, rephrased-"what really happened cannot be found in history books", "I'm the last one to know the truth, I will take it to my grave."] but it is so blatantly ridiculous, nothing seen in this film could possibly occur in reality!! Its purile self-indulgent wanton schieBe!! Its laughable!! The ending is genius as far as comedy is concerned! Vincent Cassel in a corset with one rotted, gangreen arm and a computer-animated sword that falls into pieces whilst on a chain. How can you not laugh at that??!

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

It's still one of my favorite movies.

reply

this film is TERRIBLE . It tries to make itself a portrayal of actual events [I quote the film, rephrased-"what really happened cannot be found in history books", "I'm the last one to know the truth, I will take it to my grave."] but it is so blatantly ridiculous
Perhaps you should take that up with Thomas D'Apacher. You say you find this film unbelievable, and yet you are expressing outrage at the claims of one of its fictional characters. Now, if those quotes were from the director or the writers you could argue that the film is trying to pass itself off as historical fact, but they weren't. The quotes are from one of the film's characters, and for them everything that happens in the film is real.

I don't know why you're so obsessed with "FANTASY" anyway!?
I'm not obsessed with fantasy, but the nature of the fantasy genre seems to be the main issue here, e.g.:
nothing seen in this film could possibly occur in reality!

Well that's fantasy in a nutshell, isn't it? The same could be said about Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, etc., etc.

In order to participate in the experience of fantasy, the audience must exercise a willing suspension of disbelief, they must try to "play along" for the duration of the story. In order to help the audience suspend their disbelief, the storytellers can employ certain narrative devices, such as:

-playing the story straight, as if it were actual fact. Thus the fictional characters are in deadly earnest.
-employing a "lost manuscript", wherein the "real" story is told. e.g. The Hobbit's Red Book, D'Apacher's written testament in Pacte, Rorschach's diary in Watchmen.

One of the most wonderful and powerful things about film is its ability to take us places and show us things that we could not otherwise experience.
I enjoy this film like an amusement park ride that has nothing to do with real life. You seem to take it as seriously as the film's characters, but are frustrated at its unreality. Who Framed Roger Rabbit must send you into fits.

Don't misunderstand me, Pommeraie Vasundhara: it's fine that you dislike this movie. Naturally, that requires no justification. I just find your criticism unsubstantiated. I've addressed your criticisms point-by-point, providing examples to support my argument.

I would also like to mention that I have appreciated some very insightful and intelligent comments you've made on other film discussion boards.

(And I'd still like to know what films you consider to be masterpieces. I promise not to tear them apart. They may even be among my favorites.)

reply

I don't want to talk to you!! You laugh at my viewpoint, but desperately try to make your own seem superior to mine!? I don't know who Thomas D'Apacher, and I don't CARE if my argument clashes with his, or yours. I find this film to be purile, and I can't understand why you are defending it. Ok, its a great film to you, but to me its purile. Nobody is right or wrong! But why would you think this film is a masterpiece? It has such poor emotional intensity, a mish-mash, wishy-washy, super-theatrical look to it [and you were just referring to suspension of belief? Yes-I study media production too!] and the acting is meagre. Its like the whole cast were only in it for the money.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

Thomas D'Apacher was the character you were quoting. You should at least know who you are quoting before you proceed, shouldn't you?

I wasn't laughing at your viewpoint, but rather at seeing you apparently arguing with a fictional character, and that in the context of claiming you don't find the film believable.

I'm sorry if you feel insulted. I've attacked your arguments, not your person (though you've been somewhat rude to me).

Anyone can make claims against a film, i.e.:

it has such poor emotional intensity, a mish-mash, wishy-washy, super-theatrical look to it and the acting is meagre.
but you need to supply specific examples that can be compared by all parties, and you have not been forthcoming with evidence to support your argument.

I don't know if this film is a masterpiece, I just really, really enjoy it.

reply

Jérémie Renier's character then? I suppose I look stupid for not knowing that Thomas D'Apacher is a character in the film...but his name isn't mentioned that frequently, and to be honest I wasn't paying much attention to the film to care enough.

"you have not been forthcoming with evidence to support your argument..."
You don't have much confirmation that your argument has the right answer though either. I'm making claims against this film because it isn't my kind of film. And I see no evidence of it being a good film either.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

I see no evidence of it being a good film

Well, let's see:

There's the list of award wins (including a César for costume design) and nominations here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0237534/awards

and I think Roger Ebert accurately describes it thus:

I would be lying if I did not admit that this is all, in its absurd and overheated way, entertaining. Once you realize that this is basically a high-gloss werewolf movie (but without a werewolf), crossed with a historical romance, a swashbuckler and a martial arts extravaganza, you can relax. There is of course a deeper political message (this movie is nothing if not inclusive), and vague foreshadowings of fascism and survivalist cults, but the movie uses its politics only as a plot convenience.

"The Brotherhood of the Wolf" looks just great. The photography by Dan Laustsen is gloriously atmospheric and creepy; he likes fogs, blasted heaths, boggy marshes, moss, vines, creepers, and the excesses of 18th century interior decorating. He has fun with a completely superfluous scene set in a bordello just because it was time for a little skin. The Beast, when it finally appears, is a most satisfactory Beast indeed, created by Jim Henson's Creature Shop. There are times when its movements resemble the stop-motion animation of a Ray Harryhausen picture, but I like the oddness of that kind of motion; it makes the Beast weirder than if it glided along smoothly.

The one thing you don't want to do is take this movie seriously. Because it's so good-looking, there may be a temptation to think it wants to be high-toned, but no: Its heart is in the horror-monster-sex-fantasy-special effects tradition. "The Beast has a master," Fronsac says. "I want him." That's the spirit.


As to my own reasons for liking it, I've compared it to works by some of my favorite writers/artists.


And again, it's totally ok that it's not your kind of film. Just wish I knew what your kind of film is.

reply

Will you stop quoting me already? Jeez, you're such a smart ar*se!!! Get of my case!
HERE YOU GO THEN: "there may be a temptation to think it wants to be high-toned"...
Theres no temptation: IT IS TRYING TO BE HIGH TONED.
THIS FILM IS AWFUL!!!

I quote MovieFreaks.com:
"...hyperactive historical horror melodrama The Brotherhood of the Wolf (Le Pacte des Loups), an everything-including-the-kitchen sink film that defies almost any form of explanation..." The whole film is like somebody either going demented or ejaculating!!! Its stupid.

Oh, and by the way-if you think I'm honestly going to share my best loved films with you, you've got another thing coming. We can't agree on this garbage-do you find yourself so perfect that I'm going to have you argue with me over everything I believe in? Joker.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

There you go calling me names. Quite rude.

I quote you in my replies only to be clear about what I'm responding to. It's just a sensible thing to do.

And so:

I quote MovieFreaks.com:
"...hyperactive historical horror melodrama The Brotherhood of the Wolf (Le Pacte des Loups), an everything-including-the-kitchen sink film that defies almost any form of explanation..." The whole film is like somebody either going demented or ejaculating!!! Its stupid.


The reviewer wasn't criticizing the movie. In fact both reviews at MovieFreak were positive:

Sara Michelle Fetters (3.5/4): After a relatively lackluster December and going into the dog days of a new year, this is a refreshing reminder of how good the medium can really be when in the hands of talented risk-taking auteurs. Brotherhood of the Wolf is a real winner and rollicking good time.

Craig Younkin (3/4):The special effects are also incredible. The film flawlessly puts together some really horrific characters, which makes them become so scary that at a certain point, even the feeling of their presence is enough to send shivers down your spine.
January movies are usually awful. "Brotherhood of the Wolf" is that rare exception; it offers something more.


I'm sorry you're too mistrusting to share what movies you really enjoy. My loss, I guess.
Remember, I'm defending a movie. You're the one trying to tear it down.

Ciao.




reply

Oh God enough!!! ENOUGH!!! GO AWAY! I don't care!!! Should I care?! This film is sparkly, spangly, *beep* velvet-smothered, corset-clinched, blood-dripping, bone-crunching, high-kicking, arm-rotting, prostitute-advertising moronic nonsense and I don't care to talk about it with you any more! Go away!

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

Someone needs a hug.

I like this movie and I enjoy discussing it, so I'm not going to "go away" from the message board. If you don't want to discuss this movie, then simply stop posting, if you can. You seem intent on hurling verbal abuse and on having the last word.



reply

[deleted]

Wow, someone's intolerant of other people's opinions. Maybe you shouldn't spend your time online arguing with strangers if you don't like it. No one is forcing you to.

reply

Guys this is one of the best movies I've ever saw! It will be my favourite french movie for sure! It is just genius! Such great action scenes and such complicated plot! Just love it! There is nothing bad in it!

reply

Wow!
If you had added swashbuckling in there you would described over half my DVD collection!

Sorry you didn't like the movie, I just finished it for the first time about 20 minutes ago, and I thought it was too cool not to post about it.

I do have to agree with you about one thing for sure.
A lion??
Yes, lions can be trained, they can also be quite friendly, we've all seen "Born Free" right?
But I simply could not swallow a lion kept in armor, and cruelly trained for nefarious purposes.
Yes, it was being "trained" to act on its own instincts, but that's exactly my point.
Lions KNOW they are natural born killing machines, and they have some serious tempers, pissing one off is just not wise.
The "Beast-Master" would have become Beast-Main-Course in a big hurry.

Cheers
Dis

http://www.missingkids.com
http://www.amberalert.gov

reply

That's why you start training them when they're a cub, dear. So you don't end up as lunch.

reply

[deleted]

Wow, you managed to let it go for a whole two months. Couldn't resist, though, eh?


Look, I'm not standing here with a remote control for your emotions, so if you're p*ssed off, that's your problem.

In which of my posts, exactly, did I insult you? Quote it back to me.

I don't care if you like the movie or not. These forums are for discussing movies. If someone posts a criticism of Pacte des Loups that I disagree with, I try to refute their argument, and I substantiate my own argument with examples. Throwing a tantrum doesn't win an argument. If you don't want to be part of the discussion, then just stop posting. It's that simple.


reply

Hmm... a post from someone who, according to imdb, "does not exist". There's cowardice for you.

Can we get this thread back on topic?

reply

[deleted]

Whose the "little weakling" here, idiot??? I think you're the weaklings for liking this *beep* little film...you clearly have no imaginative scope at all. For you its all run-around super-sexy uber-ridiculous fantasy, backed up by Vincent Cassel and Monica Belluci!!

And as for you, Mr. supercilious angel face, yeah-I gave up, I realized how futile and exhausting it is trying to argue with you. Then I decided to have a look back on this message board, and realized just how infinitely irritating you are so I decided to leave a message!

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

[deleted]

More like running to the hills crying with laughter!!! Yes, I can go running home across ""the hills"", and what will you be doing? Building a podium for your fantasy idols?? You are crazy!!

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

[deleted]

Ooooh Zaaubererrr I am SO jealous!!!

I'm going to live a free, beautiful, enlightened life whilst you shuffle about in the fantasy, blood-splattered, sex-fed, mainstream, multiplex, mass-produced world of popular movies FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE! You're just another slave to the system! Go and watch Harry Potter and marvel over the computer graphics and the fantasy beasts, you *beep* wit.

"Always be a poet..."-Charles Baudelaire

reply

[deleted]

This whole conversation has been effing hilarious..

Thank you archangelofmars for eloquently stating your points, and keeping your cool.

And thank you PommeraieVasundhara. Rarely do I get a laugh reading the IMDb boards, but you genuinely made me chuckle. Your ever-increasing exasperation over being in a discussion with a guy that you "don't want to talk to" (as if someone were forcing you to) that rose to the point of e-screaming "Oh God enough!!! ENOUGH!!! [] GO AWAY! I don't care!!!" like a rabid Howler monkey on PCP (it's a fact that Howler monkeys can scream in English when they're on PCP)... was either real comedic genius, or a sign of mental illness. But the funny quirky kind, not the sad suicidey kind. Please don't be too upset at me quoting you.


I'm going to keep an eye on you. I just bet that your posts are a trip to read.

:)



---EDIT---

Yep, I win the bet. But I might have been a little off with the quirky mental illness observation :(

You saw Dingleberries?

reply

Hiya Pommeraie!









You saw Dingleberries?

reply

Your ever-increasing exasperation over being in a discussion with a guy that you "don't want to talk to" (as if someone were forcing you to) that rose to the point of e-screaming "Oh God enough!!! ENOUGH!!! [ [] ] GO AWAY! I don't care!!!"

lol, that reminded me a bit of the confrontation between Marianne & Jean-François towards the ending!!!

Quoting archangelofmars:
In which of my posts, exactly, did I insult you?

Maybe in PommeraieVasundhara's "Fantasy"!!!

reply

I agree, this was all fecking hilarious. I haven't even WATCHED this movie yet, but now I definitely want to. Jesus Christ.

At first, PommeraieVasundhara seems like someone who could possibly have a brain and make a reasonable argument... But oh my God, how quickly they digress. This...person...thing...doesn't seem to understand that they don't HAVE to continue arguing, or that people don't HAVE to agree with them. If they genuinely don't like the movie, why bother taking the effort to come and post on this board? Does no one have better things to do anymore??

Not to mention that some of the mistakes in this person's grammar were hilarious. XD And I know mine isn't the best either, but my God. You could at least make a little effort with your argument; this person provided no examples to any of their accusations.

And why watch a fantasy movie if you don't like things that "could not happen in reality"?

Honestly. What is wrong with the people of the world today?

I think I'm going to buy this movie in honor of this "argument". I think this just made my day.

Angel, you were just...brilliant. Gah. I'm in awe.





There's no need to call me 'Sir', Professor.

reply

You're too kind, Ri Potter.

Regarding grammar: in Pommeraie Vasundhara's defense, I suspect English isn't his first language. I applaud anyone's efforts in a second, third, or seventh language (just met a young fellow working on his seventh language).

Hope you enjoy the film, Ri.
But if you don't, that's fine too.

reply

Dang. That was the most entertaining thing I've read on IMDB in a long time. I'm just so upset that I didn't find out about this movie and the message board for it until today. I would have loved to see this argument unfold as it happened. I honestly have yet to see the movie, though I plan to watch it as soon as possible. I'm a big fan of French films and was looking forward to seeing another...but now I'm ecstatic. I can't wait to see Le Pacte Des Loups even more so now that I've read this epic argument.

I really thought PommeraieVasundhara was going to make some legitimate points and make things interesting. But his/her world came crashing down fairly quickly, and though the last post made was deleted by the administration, (given that they waited a whole two months and then couldn't hold it in any longer) I bet it was freaking hilarious. I'm pretty sure Angel is right in that "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" DOES induce fits in this poor soul. And in addition to the point about the awards the film has been nominated for and won, IMDB also keeps track of the ratings the film has been given by users, which can be found here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0237534/ratings

I increasingly found myself wondering how old PommeraieVasundhara is. Especially seeing as they go from being a semi-reasonable, seemingly intelligent (self-proclaimed) fan of French culture to a blubbering toddler in a matter of days. Oh, and they have an oddly extreme aversion to sex. Really, if you're old enough to see the film, you should already have an understanding about sex, and if you so love French films, you should know that sex is part of the culture. Is this simply a culture-enriched ten year old? Who knows.

Thank you, Angel, for brightening my day and putting people in their place (though I suspect that was never your intention). And thank you, PommeraieVasundhara, for being a stubborn, raving lunatic.

~Intelligence will always win out over stupidity~

reply

Uhhh...you're welcome?

Hope you enjoy the film.

reply

Saw the movie in 2001. Had luck with a cinema with great sound system. Went again after two days. It was great. Still remains, after all these years, one of the few movies I could watch 100 times in a row.

reply

Riiiight.

Nobody who gets publicly hysterical the way you do, in visceral hatred of a genre-bending film, is likely to "live a free, beautiful, enlightened life." The latter is infinitely more achievable with a flexible mind that can dislike all or part of a work of art (good, bad, or indifferent) without taking it personally or foaming at the mouth.

reply

You totally owned that guy. Bravo with your counter arguments. Some people just need to come to terms that just because they do not like something doesn't mean it is crap.










My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

reply

[deleted]

HA HA! You got OWNED!










My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

reply

Given how much I enjoyed this, and my wife did, upon its release let me just validate both viewpoints.

If you haven't seen many films, or gained a wider appreciation of film really, and anyone under 30 probably hasn't then this might be a great movie. It's got some action, nice costumes, it's a bit foreign and you know smart people watch foreign films so this is a great film becuase it's basicly a really dumb mainstream action film that makes up its inordinate runtime with a lot of pretentious bs.

Then there are people that don't think that every other Marc Dacascos film was watchable, or still think manga movies are still fresh or innovative.

reply

I think you both have missed the point here. Opinions about movies are going to vary. Bottom line. It's not likely that we will alter the other's opinion about a film in these message boards.

However, with that said, the medium of film began with "fantasy" (Jules Verne's Voyage to the Moon was one of the first fictional works commited to film) and continues to provide some of the most lucrative subject matter for films. Superhero films are based on fantastical settings. So are alien life-form films. Even the animated masterpiece Triplets of Belleville was a fantastical take on history. Your opinion, Pommeraie, is that this film sucks. And the counterpoint has been that the very flaws you point out are some of the film's strengths. I saw the movie in theaters, and I own the DVD because I enjoyed it. Was it a masterpiece of film-making a la Saving Private Ryan, or Raiders of The Lost Ark? No. Not even close. But to me (and please note the qualifier) the film was a fun lark. Your continously more aggresive arguments to the contrary seem to indicate that you take yourself a little too seriously. And your statement about not wanting to talk to your nemesis about it make you seem childish. I have no way of telling if that's really you, since I have only your posts to go by, and that would be an unfair judgement of you. But that's my impression at this point.

reply

Raiders a masterpiece?Fun sure,but a masterpiece?Really?This movie is better,but hey,this here's a great example of that difference of opinion thing we're all entitled too!Wohoo!

reply

Someone disagrees with you and likes a film you don't? This gets you angry? Fricking hell.

reply

Les Triplettes de Belleville is utter boring garbage! Long live Brotherhood of the Wolf!!

Relax Angel some people (PommeraieVasundhara) will never admit that their opinion is not the definitive answer to every person.

reply

PommeraieVasundhara: There are two sides to every coin, but poeple like you seem to ignore all but one. The problem you have with the film is that you can't reconcile what you WANTED the film to be and what the film ACTUALLY WAS. What the film actually was is not a bad thing either. What you wanted is also not a bad thing. However, you will continue to hate this film and a great many others, I think a little irrationally I might add, if you can never accept films for what they are.

Instead of rebelling against films that don't conform to your preconceptions, why don't you try finding what it is the film is meaning to do, and find out how to enjoy and appreciate it. It might not be what you usually like, or be how you usualy think, but fIlm is supposed to be rewarding and that is how it is done. I watch a vast array of film and I rarely find one that I can't watch or didn't injoy in some way. I find it contrary to the point of film-watching to obsess negatively over film.

No one makes a film that is purposefully bad. They don't make films that purposefully make mistakes. It is much more rewarding to look at what the film makers PURPOSEFULLY tried to do, and find the value in that, or learn what that value may be.

reply

PommeraieVasundhara - are you implying that in a world where all human beings have legs and like to fight, that only the Asians started kicking eachother? The fact that English boxing outlawed kicking, shows that kicking was seen as a 'problem' there. Fighting techniques using kicking have been hinted at in European history as well and as the other poster said, the conceit that Manny is doing some kind of Savate crossed native Canadian fighting style is pretty logical, in a film as fantastical as this is.

As for the 'laws'. There were also laws against killing people and those same crossdressers and their clan were tolerated. The laws you speak of were in place for the poeple that belonged to the society of laws. Those two women did not and neither did their rabid clan friends. We have laws today and an alarming number of people don't follow them. Would I see you post in an action film saying something like this: "then the villian killed three people, despite the strict laws stating that such a thing was illegal"?

And I don't think that slow motion cheapens a film if it is done well. To say that it does, period, is foolish. SLow motion is a technique of visual story telling and who cares that the Wachowski Brothers couldn't get enough of it. It is still valid and can be used to great affect. And 'extended the tension to an absurd degree'? What the heck does that mean? Is there some optimum level and length of tension that you desire?

As for your assumptions about Belluci's role and her fans, I think you need to start speaking for yourself and less for other people. You didn't like her? That's fine. Don't insult the poeple that liked her. And how does this film 'prostitute' the medium of film? This film is a CELEBRATION of film. Perhaps you take the medium too seriously, and perhaps selectively so. Do you even watch movies? If a slick and professionally made film such as this, and one so obviously made with love for genre film, is a prostitution, then I would love to see what self-important word you come up with for the REAL stinkers out there.

And what you THOUGHT the film was 'trying to be' is more than likely not what the film was actually intended to be. I can't see how what you THOUGHT and IMAGINED can then be said as if you somehow know what Gans was trying to do.

reply

[deleted]

"Yes...Monica Bellucci slathering her porno-star body all over my DVD screen when I didn't even ask to see it...great"

But you DID ask to see it as soon as you started watching.

reply

This is a stylized storytelling - mis en scene - of a French myth: the beast of Gevauden. Think Little Red Riding Hood.

The film is fiction, it's for entertainment. The cinematography, sound, directing....this is an incredible film.

reply

It was made in French, that answers your questions.
The indulgent narration, too, that's also typically French.

````````````
Imagine that.

reply

[deleted]

I can understand why people don't like this movie. I myself loved it - although not enough to watch it multiple times. If I watch movies multiple times, chances are I find things wrong with it, so out of the enjoyment this movie gave me, I chose not to watch it for a 5th time lol

After a century of instant gratification, I found self-discipline… challenging.

reply

i couldn't disagree more. i hadnt seen this movie for a few years and i just watched it again today...still loved it. its so good. probably one of my personal favorites.

you better watch what you say...the beast may come for you






"I'm in the godamn club aren't i?"

reply

THIS POSTER DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NATURE OF A "SPOILER" IS. Do not read further if you have not seen this movie. He/she does not "get" the movie, anyway.

reply

The "unimportant scenes" are called character developement.

You show your inexperience in films by saying this was cheesy, you need to watch more movies if you feel this was cheesy...

Or you could take that bath with your dvd player lol.

reply

I found nothing irrelevant about those scenes. I think it's a great film and has what I have always liked in movies - effective mix of genres in this case horror, thriller, action and drama with interesting history aspects of French revolution. Slo-mo action scenes are well done and it's more matter of style considering that movie tells classic horror tale in a very modern way.

- too long, poorly acted and ridiculously cheesy - argument is completely ignorant IMO

You go Glen Coco...

reply

Every person i've come in contact with via RL or internet that hated this movie always looks past the story of the film expecting it to be The Matrix meets Jurassic Park.

The 'fighting' isn't very relevant to the overall story so to make some of it slo mo actually adds interest to it.

reply

One of my top 10 movies.
very beautiful and imaginative. Action is good, story and acting also good job!



Have u ever felt the fighting presence of another?

reply