París, te amo

Wasn't sure what to expect from this movie considering its amazing collection of stars and directors but in the end it didn't disappoint.

For me one of the highlights was the final episode with the American tourist speaking with a dreadful French accent (which made me feel better about mine) which was actually quite touching and a great way to wrap up the movie.

The story of the paramedic and the stabbing victim was also very moving and for pure comedy the Coen Brothers and Steve Buscemi take the award. The Tom Tykwer clip was also impressive although rather ambitious in its scope.

However, the Bob Hoskins segment was totally cringeworthy and the vampire story was completely farcical. The dialogue in Wes Craven's section also felt very forced and the Chinatown story was completely incomprehensible.

On the whole this film is worth watching for the good bits and has a strong finish. It's not too painful to sit through the bad sections - they only last 5 minutes anyway.

Ca vaut la peine!!!

Although I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in France lately and came across this bizarre gem of a film.

This movie was amazing, to say the least. A creative and unique film, the different directors each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to attempt to fit each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, however, renders the magic of each individual segment obsolete. When taken at face value, with each of the short segments taken as its own individual film, the love stories together tell a beautiful message.

The film is strikingly bizarre at times -- often to the point of confusion -- and each individual segment can be hard to follow. Still, to a watcher who pays close attention to each of the segments, the short plot lines become clear after a short time. The confusion is almost intriguing; it keeps you on the edge of your seat waiting for what will come next. It leaves the viewer wondering "Did that really just happen?" yet also leaves them satisfied that it did, indeed, occur. It's the kind of movie where the viewer, upon leaving the theater, can't actually decide whether they loved it or they hated it. The initial reaction is to go and watch it again and again, just to see these individual lives blend together into a cinematic masterpiece.

The interesting decision to make the movie multilingual adds something to the spectrum of people who can relate. It adds to the reality of the film -- here, the American tourists speak English, the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the film encompasses leads to an understanding of the international language of love.

From sickness to the supernatural, the love of parents to the love of husbands, this film covers all the bases of romantic storytelling. In its beautiful and quirky way, each unique event somehow falls into place to tell a story: that of all types, sizes, nationalities, and shapes of love.

The whole does not even come close to the sum of the parts. No problem. This film features a line-up of some of the most diversely creative directors of our time and some really famous names in the cast. The segments are devised around the same theme, "Love in Paris", but the resemblance ends there. Actually, considering that the approach to the theme from all these different directors takes so many forms, it is amazing that we can even feel we are still watching the same film. No great effort has been made to turn it into a comprehensive whole. This buffet has so many great ingredients, I am glad nobody tried to put them all in a single dish.

Sadly, this is an awful grab bag of mostly trivial stories. Certainly it is ambitious and interesting as a concept, and Paris looks beautiful, but the producers didn't rein in the directors and what appears winning in theory becomes a lazy mishmash in execution. Each director was given five minutes of screen time and two days to shoot their film. Almost all of the directors figured they could dispense with writers and do it themselves. A bit of ego, a bit of film school, and a misunderstanding that even five minutes of screen time requires a writer's hand, especially so since the short time frame demands concise story telling skills.

Indeed, some of these film makers, e.g. Christopher Doyle, have barely sat in a director's chair, much less be worth trumpeting as members of an extraordinary group of visionaries. And the concept involves love stories and the love for Paris. What connection is there with this concept and the filmography of Joel and Ethan Coen? In fact the heavy American and British presence seems more mercenary than visionary from the producing end of things. Ben Gazzara and Gena Rowlands playing two Americans finalizing their divorce in a restaurant could have been filmed in New York or Chicago and shipped over to France for attachment to the movie. Worse, this episode relegates a giant of French cinema, Gerard Depardieu, to the minuscule part of the restaurant owner. There's nothing wrong with having some stories about tourists and expatriates, but this collection relies far too much on it. The bulk of the Parisians in this film are relegated to background chatter and bit parts. Surprisingly, even the city is relegated to background fodder. It appears that almost none of the film makers have any sense of Paris, or what to do with it given the opportunity to make a small film there. Many take place in nondescript indoor locations, or in the case of the Elijah Wood episode, a meaningless dark street straight out of 'Sin City.' Story wise, this is a director's film. Therefore the writing is weak and in some cases almost non-existent. In the case of Cuaron's episode with Nick Nolte, even the direction is non-existent (almost entirely a long shot track of Nolte yakking away to his nubile daughter as they walk down a street -- once again, a heavy American element with no trace of Paris except some dialogue). Some of the vignettes have "punchlines", while others merely fade away or end pointless and lost. The two most "commercial" feature Steve Buscemi in a cartoonish skit in a Metro station, and an absurd tryst between Elijah Wood and a vampiress. Both stand out but for the wrong reasons. Buscemi is forced to say nothing throughout his episode, and to behave like a punching bag for no reason. At least it IS snappily directed, and makes its point and ends with an exclamation. But it's also more clichéd American-in-Paris tourism. The Wood vampiress story not only doesn't belong in this film, it is also extremely predictable as a vampire sketch.

Many of the other stories seem either a small part of a bigger film, or a made-up hodgepodge to fill five minutes. To each his own as to the merits of the results. Certainly this smörgåsbord provides enough promise in its theme to delight those who think they're getting a taste of Paris along with humanistic stories (rather than the usual gangster, spy, or sleaze films using the city for its location). But I think the producers should have demanded that the directors adhere to the concept rather than allow them free rein to indulge in half-thought out skits that have only an arbitrary connection to the locations of the title city.

Just saw this tonight at a seminar on digital projection (shot on 35mm, and first feature film fully scanned in 6k mastered in 4k, and projected with 2k projector at ETC/USC theater in Hwd)..so much for tech stuff. 18 directors (including Alexander Payne, Wes Cravens, Joel and Ethan Coen, Gus Van Sant, Walter Salles and Gerard Depardieu, among several good French/ international directors) were each given 5 minutes to make a love story. They come in all shapes and forms, with known actors(Elijah Wood, Natalie Portman, Steve Buscemi ..totally hilarious..., Maggie Glyllenhall, Nick Nolte, Geena Rowlands ..soo good..and she actually wrote the piece she was in, Msr Depardieu and many good international actors as well. The stories vary from all out romance to quirky comedy to Alex Payne's touching study of a woman discovering herself to Van Sant and one of those things that happens anywhere..maybe? Nothing really off putting by having French spoken in most sequences (with English subtitles) and a small amount of actual English spoken, though that will probably relegate it to art houses (a la Diva.) Also only one piece that might be considered "experimental" but colorful and funny as well, the rest simple studies of sometimes complex relationships. All easy to follow (unless the "experimental" one irritates your desire for a formulaic story. Several brought up some emotions for me...I admit I am affected by love in cinema...when it is presented in something other than sentimentality. I even laughed at a mime piece, like no other I have seen (thank you for that!) The film hit its peak, for me, somewhere around a little more than half way through, then the last two sequences picked up again. Some beautiful shots of Paris at night, lush romantic kind of music, usually used to good effect, not just schmaltz for "emotions" in sound, generally good cinematography, though some shots seemed soft focus when it couldn't have meant to have been (main character in shot/scene). Pacing of each film was good, and overall structure, though a bit long (they left out two of what was to be 20 films, but said all would be on the DVD) seemed to vary between tones of the films to keep a good balance. Not sure when it comes out, but a good study of how to make a 5 min film work..and sometimes, what doesn't work (if it covers too much time, emotionally, for a short film.) Should be in region one when released, but they didn't know when.