MovieChat Forums > Qui a tué Bambi? (2003) Discussion > Egads this was bad

Egads this was bad

posted 20 years ago by marklacey
8 replies | jump to latest

This movie really had nothing going for it. The story is very boring - at first it seemed like it might be some kind of thriller, but there are no thrills to be had here. It was very predictable.

There were a few scenes where the actions and reactions of the characters were really nonsensical and didn't fit. There is no attempt to explain the motivations of the villian - what makes him tick. It's hard to empathize with anybody in the film. It's too long (at 126 minutes - it could have been edited down to 110 without missing anything essential).

It's just not a very taught story, and more importantly there just isn't anything compelling here - anything to keep your interest. Myself as well as others in the theatre just kept looking at our watches wondering when it would end.

[–] ThisIsNotHappening 19 years ago

Nice use of the word 'egads' there. I'm always trying to use 'egads', but I can never quite fit it into a sentence. Well done.

"Constantly talking isn't necessarily communicating."

[–] ravenosa 19 years ago

I've used egads several times in the past couple days. Good to see its still in use.

[–] adamant-1 19 years ago

I agree... and why did they take a whole hour to show something we figured out ourselves within the first 20 minutes?
The premise is awesome...and the beginning kinda draws you in... and yet, it didnt turn out to be a thriller or suspenseful. Just very long, drawn out scenes which were not necessary.
Go watch The Ice Storm instead.

[–] ronarden 19 years ago

I fully agree with your review. But, for someone who likes to use the word "egad" I would watch out for the sneaky sound-a-like words like"taught." In the context you are using it the spelling should be "taut."

[–] Kalamata 17 years ago

I have to second ronarden, but I feel the need to take it a step further. If we are going to use expressions like "egad", which is well-used in this instance, I agree, we better know the difference between taught and taut.

[–] canticlenumber9 18 years ago

I wouldn't say that I necessarily found it so bad. The cinematography was really nice. Along with the sound, it created a real sense of uneasiness throughout. I thought the main "point" so to speak of was more subtle. While the villain is set up early and there is no real question of it, I find it more of a character study of our heroine. What made me realize this was near the end, when she knowingly drinks the cup of water the dr. brings to her. It sort of got me thinking about her character and her true feelings for him.

Was her fear mixed with an attraction? for a mysterious danger unfufilled by her face-value, boring boyfriend? Was there a darker side to her character?

Considering this, I didn't find the film to be as obvious and over-long as others have said.

[–] freyagoddess 17 years ago

I liked it. There was no need to explain why Dr. Phillipe was a pervert, it wasn't really about him. He & Isabel seemed to have a strange connection, which is why he gave her on of the suvoneirs (the necklace from the Chinese girl) that rapists & killers often collect, also why he didn't just kill her when he realized that she suspected him of something.

[–] madsic 17 years ago

suvoneirs!!!
awesome