Two pairs of parents hold a cordial meeting after their sons are involved in a fight, though as their time together progresses, increasingly childish behavior throws the discussion into chaos.
Director:
Roman Polanski
Stars:
Jodie Foster,
Kate Winslet,
Christoph Waltz
An adaptation of the classic Dickens tale, where an orphan meets a pickpocket on the streets of London. From there, he joins a household of boys who are trained to steal for their master.
In a hotel room in Paris, a doctor comes out of the shower and finds that his wife has disappeared. He soon finds himself caught up in a world of intrigue, espionage, gangsters, drugs and murder.
Director:
Roman Polanski
Stars:
Harrison Ford,
Betty Buckley,
Emmanuelle Seigner
In search of help, two wounded gangsters on the run find refuge in the secluded castle of a feeble man and his wife; however, under the point of a gun, nothing is what it seems.
Director:
Roman Polanski
Stars:
Donald Pleasence,
Françoise Dorléac,
Lionel Stander
Thomas:
She taught me the most valuable thing in the world.
Vanda:
And what did she teach you?
Thomas:
That nothing is more sensual than pain. That nothing is more exciting than degradation.
See more »
Crazy Credits
Behind the credits are images of classical artworks depicting Venus. Titles, in French as per the credits, are as follows - Titian: Vénus a sa toilette (1555) (National Gallery of Art, Washington) Ferdinand Bol: Vénus et Adonis (1658) (Rijksmuseum) Titian: Vénus a sa toilette (1555) Rubens: Vénus au miroir (1616) Rubens: La Toilette de Vénus (1608) Diego Velasquez: Venus au miroir (1651) Hans Memling: La vanité (1485) École de Fontainebleu: : La Toilette de Vénus (around 1550) Sandro Biotticelli: La naissance de Vénus (1485) Alexandre Cabanel: La naissance de Vénus (1863) Emil Jacobs: Vénus allongé et Cupidon (1839) Nicolas Poussin: Vénus dormant avec l'Amour (1628) Titian: Danae (1546) Rembrandt: Danae (1636) Joseph Helmz l'ancien: Vénus endormie (around 1600) Alessandro Allon: Vénus et Cupidon (16th century) Titian: Danae (1544) Lambert Sustris: Vénus et l'Amour (1515) Domenico Zampieri: Vénus (17th century) Jacopo Palma: Vénus allongée (1520) (Bridgeman Art Library) The final image is of the "Venus De Milo". See more »
There is a lot in the book that is never said or explored. Perhaps the repressed nature of the time and place, of the characters, of the situation is what makes it such compelling material. The play, and the film, bring out all that can be said, and more. The blurring between the modern day actress auditioning for the play as the director/writer reads the male part and the actual play based on the book is done exquisitely. Seigner is an excellent Jackal and Hyde; she basically plays three different women, and a fourth hidden one that comes out in the end. Amalric is a superb choice for this role with his mousy, intellectual temperament a perfect complement to Seigner's looks and physique. Both actors deliver a mesmerizing performance.
What was most surprising for me is how much we laughed during the film. It was really hilarious, and the whole theater laughed throughout the film. The contrast between the modern day woman and the character in the book/play, the helplessness of the director against the force of the exquisitely lower class actress, the phone conversations with his "fiancée," and the list goes on... Of course, the film is not without its serious moments. In fact, I'd say it is the see-saw nature of the whole thing that really captivates, where one moment you are laughing at the name of the fiancée's dog, and the next you witness the director reading lines on his knees asking to be enslaved unconditionally and the next the actress and the director are having a yelling match about the sexist nature of the book/play.
Recommended for those who are not afraid of the intellectual analysis of art combined with the absurd and ridiculous juxtaposition of the modern and the outdated, the philistine and the intellectual, male and female.
36 of 45 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
There is a lot in the book that is never said or explored. Perhaps the repressed nature of the time and place, of the characters, of the situation is what makes it such compelling material. The play, and the film, bring out all that can be said, and more. The blurring between the modern day actress auditioning for the play as the director/writer reads the male part and the actual play based on the book is done exquisitely. Seigner is an excellent Jackal and Hyde; she basically plays three different women, and a fourth hidden one that comes out in the end. Amalric is a superb choice for this role with his mousy, intellectual temperament a perfect complement to Seigner's looks and physique. Both actors deliver a mesmerizing performance.
What was most surprising for me is how much we laughed during the film. It was really hilarious, and the whole theater laughed throughout the film. The contrast between the modern day woman and the character in the book/play, the helplessness of the director against the force of the exquisitely lower class actress, the phone conversations with his "fiancée," and the list goes on... Of course, the film is not without its serious moments. In fact, I'd say it is the see-saw nature of the whole thing that really captivates, where one moment you are laughing at the name of the fiancée's dog, and the next you witness the director reading lines on his knees asking to be enslaved unconditionally and the next the actress and the director are having a yelling match about the sexist nature of the book/play.
Recommended for those who are not afraid of the intellectual analysis of art combined with the absurd and ridiculous juxtaposition of the modern and the outdated, the philistine and the intellectual, male and female.