Esperando a míster Bojangles

This film could easily be passed by in and American mindset but it has so many truths in it. The relationship between Camille and her son is one of the most touching on screen mother/son relationships I've ever seen. The unraveling of Camille is heartbreaking and also has so much honesty to it with mental illness and how it takes down whole families. George and Camille's story is one of the great love stories- and the music is fun, heartbreaking, and helps tell this epic tale. The cinematography is beautiful and really spot on with the era it's portraying. It's too bad more people in the US haven't yet seen it. It's a must watch.

Wonderful world, louis armstrong once preached, and relatively spoken it is. Even in a mad mad world as portrayed in this french drama flick, about a man and a woman and a child that rides the wave of the present present, and doesnt delve a minute about any worries in the world. But something aint right in this world and the story takes us deep into the world of the schizophrenic, a story walking on the borderline of manic depressive tensions of a young female ad/hd'er, an unheard of state of mental state back then in the 1950's, and this familys fight against the monsters ,in the name of love...

its a very warm and emotional production, the cast is spot on target french and the location seekers have really done their job making this something special to watch. It will play on all your emotional strings so beware that it might slap you in the face. Musical score and dancing setups are full of flare an bouchet, so set your mind 60 years back and watch and feel. Grumpy old man did and recommends.

Yes, it's a drama. And those who don't know what that is or don't know how to appreciate it .. just don't write comments-- ok?

I'm not really a drama fan and so I can't judge about "quality" of drama. The only thing that matters to me is story and how actors tell the story. If I can identify with story and if actors make story believable, then I call that a good drama movie.

I can say, I've seen quite a lot of movies so far.. also some dramas. But I can easily say that "Waiting for Bojangles" is one of the best in past 20 years.

Ok, it's starts kinda silly, which made me thinking it's "another cheap" try... but soon we realize the beginning makes so much sense and the tempo of the story is just right.

Both main actors are quite new to me and truth to be told, my first visual impression was, that Romain Duris is probably wrong choice. How to say, his appearance next to Virginie Efira just didn't "fit in". But how wrong I was -only these two excellent actors could make this movie authentic.

Highly recommended for mature audience!

I give 9 out of 10 stars -because I'm picky.

En attendant Bojangles, the book as well as the film, is in my point of view a masterpiece, and yes, nothing less! The film made a particular impression on me, I came out of it completely overwhelmed. The music, the settings, the actors: everything is there to poetize Olivier Bourdeaut's novel. Maybe I didn't have enough imagination when I read the book? Taking us from laughter to tears without warning, En Attendant Bojangles portrays two lovers, Camille (Virginie Effira) and George (Romain Duris), who laugh at norms and preconceived ideas. Coloured by this "Insoutenable légèreté de l'être", this film explains the importance of preserving innocence, joy, and of always continuing to dance in a world that is far too serious and responsible. If the fantasy and imagination of Georges is beautiful and poetic, it seems that he fights against his reason for love so as to never disappoint his Camille. Yet, the two lovers are caught up with reality as Camille gradually sinks into madness. Maybe there are some lengths, especially during the scenes in the middle of the film in the psychiatric hospital? Maybe some of Camille's madness episodes are a bit exaggerated ? Or maybe it was just not what I wanted to see? In any case, all this will never change my opinion on this film which is the highlight of my year!

I think the problem here was that a) the author of the book was involved with the screenplay and b) the director/c0-screenwriter was in awe of the material/author. If ever something needed more distance from the material, this was it. Someone suggested that, unlike the book, they didn't need a narrator. This was the fatal flaw. Without the audience understanding that this was the son's retelling of the family story, his parents just came across os self-involved narcissists. The film was so desperate to capture a charming effervescent mood that everything was leaden. When the story turned dark, it was hard to know how to react. The performances were OK, if rather forced. I wanted to escape the cinema after 20 minutes.