Worth to watch?


Les salauds (a.k.a Bastards) quite depressing movie, especially when you find out what was "the corns" about. The very dark side of the human nature! Worth to watch! What do you think?

reply

I enjoyed it, though it did not end with the justice I assumed would happen. Yes, indeed, the darker side of humanity, especially when the daughter's claim, "But I love him" is explained.

I got a little confused as the sister, Sandra (Julie Bataille) and the neighbor, Raphaelle (Chiara Mastroianni) look quite similar in the darker lighting.

I'm afraid I needed some help from one of the reviewers - Maurice Yacowar - to make better sense of the movie, otherwise it would have been a muddy conclusion, for me.

I thought Vincent Lindon played his part very well. I might now try to watch, "Anything for Her", which I have avoided being as I couldn't get through the American version, "The Next Three Days".

Worth to watch?? Definitely, though not if you're seeking an uplifting movie!!

reply

When I was watching, I confused as well about Sandra and Raphaelle, but I guess Director made it deliberately.
I just want to ask - I watched it with English subs-
Jacques, the father, was her own father or step father?
I've watched "The Next Three Days" but I wasn't aware of the other original movie at all. Thanks for the occasion to learn that, I will definitely watch it.

reply

I watched it with subs as well, but it was my assumption that he was her own father.

Making matters worse, I think the mother knew. She says something like, "Things got muddy", to which Marko replies, "I'm glad I'm divorced so my kids don't have to be a part of this."

reply

what did he mean by that? btw this had nothing to do with colonies.

reply

As Marko is divorced, his children would have much more contact with his ex-wife's family, a presumably better bunch than his own dysfunctional kin, and only nominal contact, if any, with his own.

Regarding the colonies: I can see where the reviewer is coming from, having done a four-day side trip to Harare Zimbabwe, during my recent South African vacation. However, what I took from his review... *spoiler*... as I wondered why Raphaƫlle shot Marco and not LaPorte, was "the colonized (or 'victims') kiss the hand that stifles them, or caress the rod that rules them."

reply

ty. i think that is a stretch.anyhow, human relations are far more complex than politics. where in the movie or commentary does it say anything about colonies?

reply

It isn't stated explicitly, but it's implied symbolically throughout (i.e. men = colonizer, women = colonized). What is explicit is that this film is a pretty scathing critique of patriarchal gender relations. Those same relations apply rather well to colonialism, in that the colonizer shows up, conquers, uses up, and abandons. It could even be said that colonialism is a rather natural extension of patriarchy in general.

reply

men is his worst enemy. im tired. let me repeat my previous statemet. why use a metaphor to represent something less complicated ty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkHA1PxisSQ

reply

nihanakcali, I think Anything for Her, the French original of The Next Three Days, is far better, but I'm a fan of French cinema in general, so it's possible I'm not a great judge.

As for this movie, it's definitely worth the watch. Count me among those who were confused because the sister and the neighbor were almost identical, and the daughter bore a striking resemblance also except it was obvious she was younger once you saw her in good lighting. My only problem with the movie was that it seemed a bit disjointed at times. All in all, it was good, but as others have said, it is certainly not a happy movie.

reply

Oo yes, definitely Mother was aware of everything; she had to know that her husband has carnal issues, she knew they borrowed money from Laporte in order to keep the business afloat; as long as the business was alright she was in a dead silence.

"Incest" is kind of taboo for Hollywood but European directors have no boundaries with these kind of themes. They are all about life, and cinema is not only entertaining people, the real cinema is not.

I couldn't say I'm a big fan of French movies, because of the lack of language skills. But I'll definitely watch all the Claire Denis movies... Thanks for your kind advices...

reply

The only French words I'm certain of are oui and merci, but I don't mind subtitles. Clare Denis' movies are a bit hit or miss with me, but she always seems to have a worthwhile story to tell.


Last Movie Watched: Kimssi pyoryugi (2009)

reply

[deleted]



corn ? ?

please explain

reply

Have you watched the movie kennellygerard, corncobs lie on the floor, used for what?

If life has taught me anything it's that 95% of the people are always wrong!

reply

i read a couple of cannes film fest reviews

they were used for,, nothing good :(

reply

Yes tough movie and she still keep saying "I love him..." Hurtful obedience:(

If life has taught me anything it's that 95% of the people are always wrong!

reply

'WHITE MATERIAL' is a better film imo

reminds me of 21 grams

reply

Nothing new regarding corn. Read Faulkner...

reply

I got a couple questions if anyone is willing to help me out. Fist of all I saw the movie just now and I really enjoyed it. But my deal is

1. When the big secret about the daughter's relation to Laporte is revealed, I was a bit unclear on all that. I assumed that she was being pimped out to him (hence why she was with Xavier) but judging by some other posts in this thread I'm starting to think I read that incorrectly. Damn you Claire Denis.

2. What is the corn thing all about?

reply

2. What is the corn thing all about?

Uncle: Operate?
Doctor: To repair her vagina.



Not Laporte, it was her own impotent father...

If life has taught me anything its that 95% of the people are always wrong!

reply

Was this movie worth watching? Most emphatically - NO!

I found this film to be an absolute train wreck:

1. If the beginning had opened any more slowly, it would have been going backwards.
2. The scenes were so disjointed that it appeared to have been someone's school project in Film 101 which had received a failing mark.
3. The lighting was dismal. Rather than looking "artsy", it looked more like a low-budget film that simply could not afford proper lighting.
4. If they were trying to use plot revelation, they failed there too. I had to go back and look at the elapsed time on my copy to see if some scenes had been omitted.

This was one of the first movies that I have ever had to spend so much concentration just to figure out what was happening, but not in the way of suspense. In fact, it was not in any way filled with suspense as to who did what to whom, it was rather more a case of trying to muddle through what was even going on. More confusion than suspense! What an absolute mess!

reply

"train wreck", "school project","low-budget film", "confusion " "mess" I guess you've forgotten "sh..t":)) What else?:))

If life has taught me anything it's that 95% of the people are always wrong!

reply

Was that a comment agreeing with me or a bit of sarcasm?

reply

As far as I understand, you mentioned that the use of lighting was not proper, and that it didnt seem intentional for you, but rather you thought it was a budget issue. I can agree with that statement partially, but the version of the movie which I saw had a clear and satisfying use lighting. Id like to recommend that you check your copy again, maybe find a new one. I thought it was effective to set a gloomy aura as a parallel to the story.

You have labeled the movie a "train wreck" and a "school project", but I think it's your personal view. People who have watched many movies do not agree with you, and so, this movie does not deserve that evaluation.

I didn't find it "confusing". I only think the main actresses' similar appearance was a conscious choice by the director and it was a great idea.

The toughest part of this movie was that it was her own father, and it stirs up too many emotions or thoughts inside of you. It makes me think about human darkness a la Marquis de Sade, which I cant disagree with. Incest is not a taboo in European cinema, unlike in Hollywood, and even for this reason I guess it is worth a shot to tell this story. I do like movies which make us think and face our dark side instead of "Oh yeah it was great movie." And for me, this movie is one of these...

Tastes differ, here is the proof. Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts...

If life has taught me anything it's that 95% of the people are always wrong!

reply

You have labeled the movie a "train wreck" and a "school project", but I think it's your personal view. People who have watched many movies do not agree with you, and so, this movie does not deserve that evaluation.


Of course it's my personal view. I too have watched many movies and I stand by my original view that the movie definitely deserves that evaluation. To me, it was nothing but a mess and that was the toughest part of the movie for me. As to the theme of incest, it was so poorly displayed in this movie that it was no more than anticlimactic and predictable.

reply

[deleted]

This isn't just incest, it's BDSM and actual mutilation; a lot more than playful 'degradation', and no 'safe words' here.

reply

I totally agree with you Supermachead. I was really disappointed. The obscurity is accepted by many because it is "artsy" and "French" - but quite frankly, as one who usually loves artsy and French, this movie was ugly and pretentious.
I can't think why they deliberately cast actresses who looked so similar (and i believe this was by design, not accident)as it only added to the confusion unnecessarily.
The plot was non-sensical, the characters motivations were not explored and the the camerawork was shoddy and ameteurish.
BIG thumbs down!

reply

How is it pretentious?

ce n'est pas une image juste, c'est juste une image

reply

I love French films (as well as all foreign films) but this one was not only too dark, but as some say, we don't know about the characters' motivations. We can only guess. And it was too confusing, not only because the actresses looked similar (I could tell them apart), but also because scenes were juxtaposed, out of order, dreams were treated as "real"... Too bloody for me (and I love Tarantino and Game of Thrones!)

reply

yes thank you supermachead, you just said it better than i could. totally agree with you.

reply

[deleted]

Very disappointing effort from Denis and her (usual) team. Somewhat like an extended episode of Engregages/Spiral and no more interesting for it.
Disjointed narrative was effective in The Intruder being that was one of her most beautiful-looking (and impressionistic) films. But such opacity in a genre film? because this is what Bastards is- a noir.
Lindon plays this part over and over, so it's more a problem of what's around him. And it's not J'ai pas sommeil (strong social overtones) or Trouble Every Day (sex and death in horror genre) - it's an European noir somewhat influenced by Get Carter of all movies, and it cannot just meander for 100 minutes held up by unsavoury crime details, a little moody eroticism and Paris in the rain. And the colonial/patriachy tropes - give me a break. What is this, the 1970s? Is this where we still are in critical art?
White Materials had narrative issues but the production team seemed to return to a milieu with which they were comfortable. Les salauds is only indicative of a troubling malaise in current French cinema. An older generation become irrelevant, a younger one too tied to TV money and corresponding audience demands.





reply

[deleted]

Yep, maybe Claire Denis should start doing sequels, relearn her craft in a more work(wo)manlike way, lol:)
No, I think all her films are cinematic, it's just alot of similar French films are being made every year (often with Kristin Scott Thomas) and if there were a world cinema director who's been genuinely unique in style over the last 25 years it's been C Denis (and Bela Tarr).
I wonder if she's seen 'Get Carter' errr... at least the Mike Hodges version... But being that Lindon and his character are the only well written thing in this flick, you could check out Soderbergh's 'The Limey' to see how this story has been done far better (or Paul Schrader's 'Light Sleeper' which has many imdb fans but oddly disliked on Guardian boards, if we take a Brit perspective, ouch). I don't know Skins but do recommend the first season of Spiral for a Paris crime setting (and I do think this is at least an inadvertent influence on the production in question).

reply

[deleted]

At just after 49 minutes in, Mastroianni's moving and sensitive nipple reaction when Lindon touches her breast is a great reason to see the film, if for NO other reason. It goes from 'flat button' to beautifully, fully erect in just seconds. Entertaining, informative, educational, and quite responsive! Now THAT is acting at it's finest! Begs the questions: When she had to rehearse that, how many times? And do they teach this in acting schools, or, is this 'method' at it's very best? I do know you won't see a scene/shot like this in any mainstream Hollywood stuff!

reply

All Denis films are worth watching. Like Welles: you might like some of them (The Trial, Mr. Arkadin) and loathe others (Citizen Kane), but they're all worth watching.
So: Bastards is really a horror movie, a continuation of the world of Trouble Every Day, where anything erotic bites (as with teeth). The "contamination" of Gallo and Dalle in the earlier film has spread to everyone, and Alex Descas is back as a doctor who can't do anything. It's also a Faulkner film, not just Sanctuary, but think of the Snopes novels and their monstrous incest-infected world. It reminded me of a mash of demonlover, Lost Highway, Twin Peaks and Trouble Every Day, and others I'll have to think about, and if those types of things appeal to you, then Bastards probably will as well.

reply