Un amigo irremplazable

Jean-Pierre is a grumpy doctor who falls sick and his way to cope with bad news is to ignore them. He works in the countryside with younger female doctor Nathalie and their patients are very realistic country people.

The story is simple and treated with realism. Perhaps a bit slow moving, but moving in the right direction. Jean-Pierre goes out of his way to get an elderly patient out of the hospital, so that he can die at home, with his dog. Not the sort of scene easy to digest, but nevertheless part of a doctor's life.

When Jean-Pierre conditions are not improving, he doesn't want to pursue further treatment. My interpretation is that he has nothing to live for... until - as to be expected - something starts to grow between Jean-Pierre and Nathalie and with that, a will to live.

A quiet, somber movie without the usual French excesses. Well worth watching.

Other reviewers here have written about 'A Country Doctor' far better than I can. Still, I want to add a big thumbs up. This is a great, very well-acted movie that touches and warms the heart. It's about a country doctor who has devoted his life to helping his patients in the small village he lives in. When he is diagnosed with a cancerous brain tumor, he is assigned an assistant, who happens to be a female. There is some obvious tension between them at first. The script writer wisely uses their developing relationship, both professional and personal, in a totally tasteful way.

One thing I like about some French movies I've seen is that the plots are simple, but the results are profound because of the script, acting, etc.; also, there are many sub-plots that enrich the movie and give a lot of actors an opportunity to be in a movie. All the minors actors in this movie do a great job.

Because it's a French movie there's no discussion about money, what any treatment costs, etc. The French have a great health care system. They value human beings. Who wants to worry about money when one's health is involved?

The lives of doctors. Most of the film covered from the professional aspect and between two. A junior and a senior doctor. When I decided to watch it, I anticipated either fun or an inspiring film. But it was like too serious and a casual storyline. I mean it could have been a documentary, but the presentation was clearly a cinematic. Then all cinemas need a writing, so does it. More like from someone's real life experience. It had the ingredients, but everything was straightforward without twist and turn.

If you consider the story progressing to the next level is a twist or turn, then the film had a few of those often. Though they are not effective as what a viewer actually meant a real twist in the storytelling. Nowadays, twist means a mind blowing development/scene. The characters were well designed. Between the main two, the narration keeps hopping, revealing their lives as doctors, especially in the rural. There's more to it, that theirs commitments and differences within their passion for their work.

A single doctor who has been dedicated all his life to the poor patients from the rural, now discovered he has a brain tumour. He begins his treatment right away, but he was advised to retire and rest. That's where a junior doctor comes in. His replacement. The two work together, where she learns all his patients, but it was not a smooth ride. Since he's not happy to be replaced, particularly his patients are unique, their different style of treating the patients brings a crack in the relationship even before they had one.

❝What I call nature may be something else for believers. But don't tell me nature is beautiful.❞

One thing that unites them is the medicine. Despite the differences, they make their best effort to contribute from their field of expertise. They are the best doctors, but joining the hand at the wrong time is what the English translated title meant. That's almost the entire story of it. Along with their struggle in the rural settings like it be commuting from place to place, at day and night, whenever the service required.

The film justifies on the roles it focused on than the concept it deals with. So most of those who watches it won't say they saw a very good film. Even me too felt that way. That does not mean it was bad flick. Some people surely would enjoy it being as it is. I think the real doctors or their friends and families and patients, to see their similar experiences on the screen. What I had liked was, highlighting the work ethic between the rural and the city doctor. It was like a two different world.

I have rated it better, because of the quality of the content than what I wanted to have a nice time. Besides, it's almost free of clichés. Like no romance, no medical miracles or the unexpected subplot developed to brighten up the narration in places. That kept me going. Like I have already mentioned, it was practically a documentary feature, with a cinematic experience.

The trivia say, it was made by a doctor turned filmmaker. So what do you expect from such director. His previous flick too was about the same theme. Usually when such films are made, the writers, director do research for depicting the contents perfectly. That has not required here. Nicely made film, but not for everyone. One of the under- noticed film, and that's reasonable for such a film, but bashing it even after watching it like what illiterates does. So watch it and respect it or else do not think about it.

7/10

To urban eyes, the rural doctor stereotype is a walking museum of what village medicine used to look like in bygone days. French filmmakers excel in portraying this endangered species and they have done so yet again in the delightful character-rich film The Country Doctor (2016) (Médecin de campagne). To enhance our sense of the fading rural life, the story is framed around a doctor whose own time is fading as the irreplaceable linchpin of his village community.

Made by medic-turned-director Thomas Lilti, the plot is best described as a series of insightful vignettes of rural medicine practised the old-fashioned way. The greatly admired Dr Jean-Pierre (François Cluzet) has been caring for the village most of his life and now learns that he has a life- threatening tumour. Ordered to slow down for treatment, medical authorities send an assistant doctor, Nathalie Delezia (Marianne Denicourt) who quickly proves unnervingly competent and willing to lighten his load. Predictably, Jean-Pierre does not take well to losing his role as sole-carer for the village and mischievously makes things difficult for her. He sends her into farms and homes with known annoyances to discourage her from staying, but when she proves her worth in medical emergencies he is forced to accept her help. As his prognosis worsens, the growing respect between them becomes noticeably warmer as they both confront an uncertain future.

In many respects, this story is a predictable cluster of clichés made attractive by a picturesque rural setting captured perfectly with camera-work sympathetic to its natural beauty. Like in many countries, a rural doctor's life is a public script of farmyard and roadside accidents, comforting home visits, and a surgery full of patiently waiting regulars with ailments both serious and small. The village community adores their doctor and the doctor in turn is a caring father to all. But this is a film where the simple plot and its constructions are less important than its characterisations. François Cluzet is France's version of Dustin Hoffman, an actor who radiates open warmth, compassion and understanding. His almost musical face can express emotion with a single note consisting of a slight raising of an eyelid, or a wry turn of a lip that hints of a smile, or a faintly furrowed brow that speaks concern. Marianne Denicourt is perfectly cast as the late blooming nurse turned doctor, whose big eyes converse at first hesitantly then warmly with the reluctant senior medic. While the plot may be clichéd, their relationship has none of the conventional hallmarks of romance. Indeed, it is only in the final minutes that we sense their comfort in one another's presence.

This is a fine example of classic French romantic drama. It is totally driven by characterisation that is earthy, understated and open-hearted with a rich rural aesthetic that evokes the mutual dependencies that are typical amongst country people. It speaks of the unstated and unseen organic wholeness of community that is rare in urban life. It is also a film where most viewers leave with an unmistakable smile.

This is old school French cinema,which displays an humanism recalling Christian-Jaque or even the sometimes unfairly demeaned Jean-Paul Le Chanois.And Except for the rather unlikely abrupt happy end ,it works from start to finish: it is definitely the kind of the movie we are in need of today : it's not overtly optimistic -like the feel-good movies which mar the contemporary French scene : however Marianne Denicourt's warm smile can lighten the darkest night;François Cluzet's commitment to his work is extraordinary : the first sequences ,consisting of very short scenes ,show it all .But ,in an admirable sequence ,exhausted and disheartened ,Werner tells his colleague (us )how hard his prestigious occupation always involves sufferings,death: nature( some people call God) may be a wonderful thing ,but it(He ) makes mistakes or even monstrosities and our task is to correct them.

And correct ,mend ,both of them do: the old man dies in his home ,and he could not ask for more;the boy who passes for a half-wit may be an autistic with an exceptional memory -he is a scholar,as far as WW1 is concerned-: someday ,he may learn to read and to write .So it's not overtly pessimistic either.It's life and life only.There's a wonderful truce in their ceaseless fight ,when the people dance to Cohen's "Hallelujah",a moment when an infinite tenderness emanates from the fete .

It does not always avoid clichés:the first Cluzet/Denicourt confrontation follows the usual pattern: seasoned veteran/modern rookie,it's the same old song ,be they militaries, cops,teachers,or physicians : see the scene of the ganders ("put their beak into their a........");and Cluzet's family is cliché itself.And Nina Simone's superb "wild is the wind" does not fit the bill in that context as well as Cohen's song as a finale .

But after 15 minutes ,the movie hits its stride ,and the words often rings true;except for an old TV series ("Cecilia Medecin De Campagne", sixties),a whole movie was never devoted to the country docs' thankless work in France,and it's much to Thomas Lilti's credit to have broached the subject ,with a valid documentary side which is never dull,thanks to the two principals .Both will win you over.

It's life and life only;as the good old French cinema I like was.