Angel-A

Besson's intention by directing this movie was good. There is, it seemed to me, a big effort to make his film deep considering the discourse. It can be perceptible through the plenty of plays with symbols that are contained in it. The main problem is that by writing such dialogs, certain scenes seem too artificial and often too long. This has to be added to the fact that if you see the film in french, you"ll quickly notice that the dialogs that often concern both J Debbouze and Rie Rasmussen are more than sometimes incomprehensible and require a permanent attention to decipher them. Rie Rasmussen, even if she's quite a wonderful creature on a physical aspect, is however an average actress and the scenes that deal with emotions are spoiled -this is rather surprising considering Besson's job on The Professional- by a clumsy actor's direction. However cinematography by Thierry Arbogast is astounding and foreigners will find a wonderful black and white postcard of Paris as they'll see the movie. It is also regrettable that Besson didn't appeal to Eric Serra for the soundtrack. For Besson's defense, it must be said, I think, that his staff and himself have worked in such constraining circumstances to shot in Paris that the number of shots was counted and couldn't allow actors to give their full potential. This is the first time also that a director has full access to production and budget resources by himself so he can write a screenplay that does not have to be selected by instances like CNC allowing himself to direct a personal but too poorly "collaborative" project. Anyway, this is a film that has definitely to be seen.

This film made me shed a tear or two (but then I am an emotional soul!). The comedic aspects, such as the total physical difference between the leads and the strength of the Angela were well placed. The reason for Angela coming into the life of Andre and her true identity could have been very tactlessly handled and cheesy in a Disney kind of way, but Besson made it seem as natural as catching a bus. Subtitles normally irritate me, but I didn't seem to notice them in this film. Paris in black and white is also very evocative and the filming was great in my opinion. I would recommend this film to anyone who fancies a fairly short film that makes you think about whether you appreciate your inner beauty and qualities.

A beautiful, breathtakingly shot movie with a touching storyline. Besson often talks about his feminine side, and he is in full touch with it here. Those expecting another Nikita with lots of guns and car chases should look elsewhere. I'm sure they will find at least 10 other movies like that now in the multiplex, but nothing like this. Serious Besson fans will not be disappointed. Besson has filmed a Paris that is at the same time both beautiful and real. We see the beauty of Notre Dame, Parisian cafés, the city's bridges, but we also see its ugliness and the difficulty faced by those who do not fit the stereotype of what it means to be French. Anyone who has ever felt like a stranger in their own home will find a kindred spirit in Andre. It is a struggle to fit into a culture and a struggle to value one's self as a part of it.

First, to all you grumpy smurfs who are slamming Besson for "ripping off [...]", chill out! Don't you recognize a pastiche when you see one? If you bear that in mind, you'll thoroughly enjoy this carefree ride through angel territory, whether it's Frank Capra's funny cliché of meeting a suicidal angel by diving off a bridge, Wim Wender's suggestion that angels must always be filmed in black & white, or possibly even a touch of Christopher Walken's good-angel-bad-angel gimmick from The Prophecy, it's all in there plus more. Most of all, I think Besson tips his hat to the classic Der Himmel über Berlin (1987) by showing not Berlin but the glory of Paris in one of the most flattering presentations of that city I've ever seen. It's funny, we're trained to imagine a colourful Paris in the spring, but I never realized how breathtaking it can be in monochrome.

The plot of ANGEL-A is simple & charming. It has a few twists to keep you guessing. Most of all what captivated me (well, besides Rie's long LEGS!) was the chemistry between Rie and Jamel, two people you'd never expect to see on a date; yet together they light up the screen like they're MFEO. Their dialogues are brisk & cheeky, almost like Audrey Hepburn & Cary Grant in the old days. And at the same time, there's a lot of intensity behind every word, and you may find yourself rewinding or watching the film twice to catch everything that was said, especially if you're reading subtitles.

And Rie is freaking HAWT.

Let me say that again. Rie is freaking HAWT. Sexy but not slutty ...and with a mean hook kick. Just the way you'd expect your angels to be.

The film does hit a few bumps, particularly when it touches on the spiritual themes like where angels come from, what's their function, and the biggie: who's running the show? I was surprised to see Besson shy away from these topics--maybe because he got in some hot water for his iconoclastic ideas in his earlier film The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc (a film which I really enjoyed, despite the critics' hissing). But just as well, I think it was his intent to keep this film on the lighter side this time.

And I think that's the point. Don't expect Leon the Professional or La Femme Nikita, and certainly don't expect an atheistic Dustin Hoffman dressed up like a monk. This is Besson's time to go easy & have fun. Again, don't get caught up in whom he's "ripping off". Don't get bogged down in the spiritual/religious significance of it all. Don't even try too hard to understand the ending (though there's much room for interpretation). Just relax and enjoy the show; you won't be disappointed.

Angel-a can be described as a romantic comedy, as a movie about angels and as one about therapy. As a romantic comedy it is a good and charming film, which stands far away from the omnipresent and boring Hollywood romantic comedies. As a movie about angels it is not convincing, and the best it can be said in its favour is that the movie is an heterodox rendering of angels, half divine and half too-human.

But the best use that can be given to this film is to adopt it as a manual of cognitive or rational-emotive therapy. A well respected field within psychology, cognitive therapy looks for transforming distorted thinking, which it is said, affects the mood, the behaviour and the life of people. That is simply what Angel-a does with Andre, giving him reasons to love himself, and teaching him techniques to change the way he thinks or speaks of himself. If we go to cinema some times to enjoy ourselves and some times to bring something to our lives, this movie allows us to do both. Art and cinema have also ethical consequences -in the sense of Foucault- giving us clues about how to live our lives better. In this sense the best description of Angel-a is given above by Elizabeth Arthur when she says that this is "a film about learning to love yourself".

Only one question remains: Why a director like Besson, who has been making movies about violence, decides to read about cognitive therapy and bring angels to earth and make a film like this?