La fille de nulle part

Regardless of any criticisms that may be voiced about the film, I have developed a profound love for it. There are numerous reasons behind this sentiment, most notably the fact that proponents of postmodern art theory and those who understand the ever-changing artistic elements within temporal and digital contexts cannot craft a cinematic image that is simultaneously realistic, sensitive, and imbued with a sense of strangeness. Even in terms of execution and with a nearly nonexistent budget, it is sheer nonsense to claim otherwise. Those who support such claims are individuals who fundamentally fail to grasp the profound significance of experiencing a cinematic image as a living expression of what individuals convey when they bring their ideas to life on a moving canvas.

This film, likewise, is a creation borne out of nothingness, much like the girl born from the void. It presents intimate dialogues concerning thinkers who do not believe in the metaphysical realm, yet peacefully sway within the aesthetic mysticism of history and self, driven by the natural human desire for fulfillment. They dream, they contemplate, and they philosophize because they are humans who cannot be easily confined within the boundaries of reality. They are experimental.

The context of the film speaks to this form of human empathy within a cinematic framework, crafted by a director who attempted to compose his entire cinematic history through an individual project that, despite years of anticipation, failed to secure the necessary funding. Consequently, he decided to take on the role himself, alongside a girl and a friend, within the confines of his own home, utilizing a dilapidated camera.

Priso, a director who is madly devoted to his artistic world and philosophy, is incredibly captivating in this film.

The narrative dialogues vividly illustrate the fragility of consciousness at times and its strength at other times, as well as the formation of human desires that drive individuals towards belief despite their lack of faith.

It is a profound philosophical exploration within an era where films of this nature are no longer afforded genuine presence.

It is a film about the isolation of individuals when they engage in creative thinking, regardless of the closed boundaries of their creativity and its intersection with a domain that is not their own, as exemplified by the living element of the film itself. The presence of Priso as an actor allows him to fully acknowledge that he is not an actor and does not fulfill the expectations placed upon him. It is the very idea that the film presents through the measurements of conceptual models it showcases.

This is a film that is not easily embraced, simply because it does not conform to the conventional requirements of mainstream cinema within the context of postmodernism and digital systems.

I watched this film on video and was going to come back to it later, as it was already late when I started. I ended up watching it to the end, captivated by the actors and the various elements woven into the "action" (the word action only being partly appropriate). You may find yourself wondering, should you watch it, how much was left out of the final cut: For several elements touched on as the film unfolded were left open-ended. For would-be actors (or directors) an example of the power of understatement.

After watching this film I can't quite decide how I feel about it. Jean-Claude Brisseau might be a genius. Or he might be a flawed old pervert like some of his controversies would suggest. Regardless of reality there isn't much of the perverse in this one at all. The nudity isn't there to shock and there isn't nearly as much as some of his other films.

The whole thing is equal part's old man's fantasy and a hopeful wish for some meaning to existence. Or at least that's what I came away with. I think every man who knows he is past the time when he can easily attract the attentions of a young beauty has had at least a fleeting fantasy of a relationship suddenly appearing. Maybe it's platonic or maybe it's not. That would depend on the one doing the fantasizing.

At any rate this particular relationship is platonic, which makes it more believable. Virginie Legeay does an admirable job of making us believe that she really cares for the old man of letters. And the director, Claude Brisseau, does an admirable job of portraying a man who feels that he is nearing the end of his cycle.

My indecision comes from feeling some irritation with the meandering philosophical discussion while at the same time feeling somewhat uplifted. I do think it is a very good film on balance.

Basically I think you should watch it for yourself. I can't predict how you will feel about it but I think it's worth the time to find out.

When you have lost a love I think you can understand this movie. Reaching for an illusion and wrapping that illusion in your everyday life. Very interesting story.

This film is mostly drama...it has a tad bit or horror in it. But this is not a horror film. I found the story entertaining. The acting was great. It is a French film. I did not mind reading the subtitles.

I rate this film and 8 because it feels like an 8 compared to the other films I have viewed recently.

Good choice for leading man. He seemed effortless in his acting and I was easily absorbed.

The leading lady was attractive and charming. All her scenes were believable.

The story was obviously fiction. But to me that true virtues of this movie is that you allowed yourself to be absorbed and suspended reality to be engulfed in the movie.