I didn't like this film at all. I don't mind subtitles so that wasn't the problem. I expected humour but there were only two places where I laughed. Other places, I thought were quirky but I didn't even smile. I like Jackie Chan and I like silent movies. This was a bit like both. But I didn't like this. I came away feeling cheated.
shareI get that you do not like it ... what I don't get it why?
Your comment here is not helping me to decide whether to see it or not to see it?
How about some explanation as to what you are talking about please.
I actually find it hard to explain why I didn't like it. I guess that basically, real people were turned into caricatures. And I didn't like what they were turned into. It was like watching a cartoon where the cartoon characters were humans. So humans were diminished.
Whether you should see it or not?
It's a very unusual film. So, yes.
It left a bad taste in my mouth. So, no.
Maybe it's this. If you've come from poverty, you won't like it. If poverty has never touched your life, you'll like it.
If you see it, let me know you're reaction.
Barry
Movies these days are caricatures and stereotypes worked over in different ways and amplified
because of the fact that so many movies are remakes.
I don't plan to see it. I really do not like the kid, and I used to like Jackie Chan, but he is used
in American films just as you say. This is the new Chinese friendly demographic, so I imagine
there is some manipulation in there to make China look good.
Well, I thought it was entertaining enough and the characters were supposed to be caricatures. That's what Jeunet (sp?) does. Where it lacked was that he didn't humanize the caricatures as he does in his other films. We feel for the bad guy, Kronk, in City of lost children. We believe the love story between One and the little girl in the same film. In Deli, the love story is developed btwn the clown and the butcher's daughter. Amalie is nothing but characterization. for instance in Micmacs he total avoided developing the love story. He dropped in a few obligatory kisses, but there was no fun or sparks in it. So while entertaining he missed on the characters.
I did enjoy the havok wrecked on the arms industrialists. Sorta reminded me of Yojimbo.
Fun to watch but not his best work.
Dictated, but not read.
Whether you should see it or not?
It's a very unusual film. So, yes.
It left a bad taste in my mouth. So, no.
Maybe it's this. If you've come from poverty, you won't like it. If poverty has never touched your life, you'll like it.
Barry-
why bring socio-economic status into determining whether you may like a film or not?
I think that maybe the reason you have so much trouble figuring out why you didn't like the film is because you didn't Understand the film!
It's a very creative endeavor, there are many different quirky characters and they all revel in a world of cartoon ingenuity and violence. This film is not for everyone, but i don't think being poor or rich has got anything to do with it.. you don't even need to speak french, as much of the film is silent and relies on sight gags. The protaganists in this story are all underdogs, with lifestyles on the outer fringes of society, and i think that the manner of this sort of 'charicature" made them more human, maybe even a simplistic reminder of what humanity is supposed to be, a sense of community among fragmented individuals.
Anyways, this film is delightful, fast-paced, and a lot of fun. Please give it a chance.
Also check out City of Lost Children.
You answer the question yourself of why refer to poverty. You say they are underdogs on the fringes of society. I'm saying if you've been there yourself then you may not like the cartoon version. I didn't find it delightful nor fun. I found it painful.
Barry
"Maybe it's this. If you've come from poverty, you won't like it. If poverty has never touched your life, you'll like it."
Exactly how I feel about this sort of movies. Thanks for reminding me.
[deleted]
Skip to the bottom of this post for the more serious comments on the film.
Of course you don't HAVE to like this film, but as far as socio-economic issues in this film, and comments thereof, go: I think people should wear helmets, becuase they are in danger of falling of their oh-so-high horses. Alternatively put aside any deep seeded issues and comment on THE FILM.
Socio-economic class is only part of the story line. I imagine there are many people who have been hit by a stray bullet (not literal) in the ongoing recession and would like to declare war on the culprit. I am certainly one of those (although I cannot see any means of declaring any fruitful wars on the economy, if anything I'd be in an even worse situation than now if I were to). However, this is a matter of opinion. It is also, however, bad form to use the word 'however' at the beginning of a sentence. However.
Class is used to make you sympathise with the main characters more. He was shot and as a result homeless, jobless, alone, then he found some friends.
The Film:
The story was weak, but overall I believed the film to be pretty good. Character exploration delved very little further than the opening 10 minutes, but it wasn't meant to and didn't need to. As far as cartoony goes; I almost see where you are coming from, but it's quite an odd statement. It's not meant to be a serious film. I like that there is a lack of dialogue. They use facial expressions, body language, and the scenery instead. I quite like the fact that they succesfully carry out entire dialogues without saying a word. You can almost imagine what they would be saying to each other. This, if anything, is testament to their acting and to Jeunet's directing.
The Jackie Chan comment I definitely do not understand. But then I dislike the vast majority of his Hollywood films. I'm more of a Drunken Master/Snake in the Eagle's Shadow kinda guy.
I just finished watching this, and I think I agree with you. But it wasn't just the fact that it was cartoony that made it feel wrong, I think it was because they defeated freaking arms dealers by pulling these grade-school pranks.
There was a disconnect between the whole crippled children and rape in the Congo bits and the cutesy clockwork mouse stuff. It felt really forced.
Plus, there was the really weird random stuff, like Bazil's mental tangents. Their purpose and logic completely baffles me.
Yes, the grade school pranks were what I meant by cartoony.
sharecrippled children and rape in the congo????????????
***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**
I think especially people from poverty can find hope in this film. Hope of friendship, kinship, of love, of overcoming hardships and "evil" forces.
It's much more sensible than Hollywood films where poor people dream of becoming millionaires by sheer luck, or by selling their bodies...
***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**
I came from a bombed slum in London. I thought it dehumanised its subjects.
As for why I expected humour, that was how the critics portrayed it.
Barry
[deleted]
I think you people are talking about the new Karate Kid. Why am I seeing this in the "Micmacs à tire-larigot" discussion forum??
shareI'm definitely talking about MicMacs. But I was comparing the clowning of Jackie Chan with the sort of miming in MicMacs.
Barry
I cannot find any connection between Micmacs and Jackie Chan. What are you guys talking about? I can't see that poverty was a theme of the film. It was about a bunch of social misfits who brought down two arms dealers in a clever and amusing way. I was going to give the movie 7/10, but the final 20 minutes elevated it to an 8/10. Offhand I can't recall any Jackie Chan film I scored 8 or higher.
shareCheck out Shinjuku Incident for a good Jackie Chan film. As for this one, I actually gave it a 9/10. This movie cracked me up!
- jeffsterz©
This one was a bit boring for me, maybe I just had higher expecations because I liked the older films.
i agree, the random quirkiness was there for its own sake, it really didn't add much to a souless story, so it was like some guy jumping up and down in front of you constantly calling attention to itself, but with no substance at all. like special effects, quirkiness for its own sake will just get boring.
share[deleted]
Jackie Chan has been influenced by French mime and the old silent films. His stories might not be original but his action sequences are.
Irony? Tut-tut.
Who really...I mean really gives a rat's ass that some dude hung up on Jackie Chan likes or doesn't like this flick?? I don't listen to critics or other ill informed pricks. I'm gonna see this film and do what everybody should do....make up your own mind!?!?! DUH!!!
shareYou didn't see the movie. Period. Its not like Jackie Chan movies and it's not like a silent film. Sure, there was some mime but really there were more MINES. You saw the trailer, maybe. But you didn't see this movie. I thought this film was thoughtful, beautiful and satisfying. The cast and crew did a great job. Wonderful gadgets, costumes, stunts, special effects, its just really wonderfully conceptualized. It is really about sticking it to the man in the most creative way imaginable.
shareI'm only half an hour into this movie and I can already tell I'm going to like it. I like the sort of "silly humour" and the fact that it's about misfits coming together and becoming a family together makes me feel able to relate. I think this movie is great for children who maybe don't have many friends and are different than the average kid.
shareJust saw the strip club scene... I take back the idea that it's a kid's movie. But still, a feel good film for the lonely and different.
sharelol, I was going to comment on that in your previous post but decided to see if you had posted anything further.
As for the topic, I thought the movie was funny all the way through. It wasn't about character exploration, just a fun ride. A lighter version of Delicatessen, with even a scene from Delicatessen thrown in.