NOTE IMDb
6,5/10
17 k
MA NOTE
Colin, jeune célibataire fortuné et inventif tente de trouver un remède pour sa petite-amie Chloé dont la maladie inhabituelle est provoquée par une fleur qui grandit dans ses poumons.Colin, jeune célibataire fortuné et inventif tente de trouver un remède pour sa petite-amie Chloé dont la maladie inhabituelle est provoquée par une fleur qui grandit dans ses poumons.Colin, jeune célibataire fortuné et inventif tente de trouver un remède pour sa petite-amie Chloé dont la maladie inhabituelle est provoquée par une fleur qui grandit dans ses poumons.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 10 nominations au total
Aïssa Maïga
- Alise
- (as Aïssa Maiga)
Laurent Lafitte
- Le directeur de société
- (as Laurent Lafitte de la comédie française)
Mathieu Paulus
- Le Chuiche
- (as Matthieu Paulus)
Frédéric Saurel
- Le Bedon
- (as Fred Saurel)
Alex Raul Barrios
- Jésus
- (as Alex Barrios)
Avis à la une
First of all, i must admit that I didn't read the book. So perhaps that's the reason I didn't get the purpose of this film.
I was attending this movie with great expectations, I love the work of Michel Gondry and I couldn't wait to see Audrey Tatou and Omar Sy playing together.
The special effects were great, and as I said before Michel Gondry is one of my favorites. But here's the thing, I was unhappy during the movie. I couldn't develop sympathy for the main characters, because the storyline felt missing too often. Combine that with the weird dialogs and the straying from one scene to another without a proper connection, you'll get why. The dialog, and I understand that this was adopted from the book, but in this movie it just didn't made sense.
I couldn't feel what I wanted to feel about this movie, I wanted to like it so badly but I couldn't. I feel the film was more focused on the special effects than on the actual character development and storyline.
I was attending this movie with great expectations, I love the work of Michel Gondry and I couldn't wait to see Audrey Tatou and Omar Sy playing together.
The special effects were great, and as I said before Michel Gondry is one of my favorites. But here's the thing, I was unhappy during the movie. I couldn't develop sympathy for the main characters, because the storyline felt missing too often. Combine that with the weird dialogs and the straying from one scene to another without a proper connection, you'll get why. The dialog, and I understand that this was adopted from the book, but in this movie it just didn't made sense.
I couldn't feel what I wanted to feel about this movie, I wanted to like it so badly but I couldn't. I feel the film was more focused on the special effects than on the actual character development and storyline.
When I decided to go see that movie, I was really scared. Scared that, somehow, this movie might be bad, whereas the book of Boris Vian is one of my favorite. But when I got out, I was really amazed. I felt almost depressed, exactly the same way when I finished reading the book. For the whole night long, I couldn't keep my mind of the movie, and I was barely able to sleep.
Gondry actually made me open my eyes about some things, that I couldn't imagine or figure out. But when I think about it, it just make sense. Like the fact that Alise is black woman. I don't know why, I've always imagined her as a white and blonde woman. But it's only natural that she is in fact black.
I can understand the fact that some people would not like the movie, being very weird, and being in it's own universe. But I really think this movie deserves a way better grade. Maybe one of the greatest adaptations that I have seen, yet. I gladly recommend to see this movie.
Gondry actually made me open my eyes about some things, that I couldn't imagine or figure out. But when I think about it, it just make sense. Like the fact that Alise is black woman. I don't know why, I've always imagined her as a white and blonde woman. But it's only natural that she is in fact black.
I can understand the fact that some people would not like the movie, being very weird, and being in it's own universe. But I really think this movie deserves a way better grade. Maybe one of the greatest adaptations that I have seen, yet. I gladly recommend to see this movie.
10j_wijnja
To me, this movie does what movies are for: activate the imagination. In this case, touching a theme not as alien as one might wish it to be in a fantastic setting. The 'fantastic' way in which people and institutions appear is far from random; it feels to me like a hyperdream of familiar entities and sensations, their logical extreme. Rich, vivid imagination which enters your brain and puts hooks in it. Loved the book and Gondry made it even more alive for me. Quite a feat. If you do like the movie, please check out the book (and also other titles by Vian). Don't want to generalize too much but if you like movies by Terry Gilliams you will probably like this a lot, too. Rats, writing reviews is hard and I'm not very good at it; but i so disagree with the IMDb-grade for this film (currently 5.8) and the general reviews I've read so far that I had to create an account just to weigh in. So please go see this film and find out for yourself!
Did I mention already that it is beautifully made, and at times very funny?
Did I mention already that it is beautifully made, and at times very funny?
This film tells the story of a young man who lives a great life in his fantastic apartment in Paris. He meets a girl and fall in love, and his life is not the same again.
The film starts off great, with the signature Michel Gondry style of bizarre visual feast. I really like the clash of old and new technology, such as typing into a computer where there are tall people at the other end to process the command. It's imaginative and fun to watch. After an hour of visual feasts, we get to the main advertised plot. The film is not the same anymore, as it moves into a sombre direction. Then the plot derails into a fragmented mess, and I didn't quite know what the plot is really about. Overall, I wish the film was shorter as it really didn't need that much time to tell this story.
The film starts off great, with the signature Michel Gondry style of bizarre visual feast. I really like the clash of old and new technology, such as typing into a computer where there are tall people at the other end to process the command. It's imaginative and fun to watch. After an hour of visual feasts, we get to the main advertised plot. The film is not the same anymore, as it moves into a sombre direction. Then the plot derails into a fragmented mess, and I didn't quite know what the plot is really about. Overall, I wish the film was shorter as it really didn't need that much time to tell this story.
I read the book many years ago and barely remembered it, but I still felt that magic of the absurd or weird that had impressed me so much. The film indeed manages to translate this feeling into visual images, but I felt that it was too much, and while with the book I never felt it tried to be funny, the film did. At least it was my impression that it was a bit slapstick in part, and through some parts I did get bored. However, it did become strong towards the end, in the tragic part. Suddenly the absurdity and weirdness became a proper language for the tragic development, it became a mirror of the protagonists inner world and feelings. It really impressed me there.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe original French title for this movie, L'écume des jours, translates literally to "the foam of the days" but more colloquially means "the froth" or "the remnants" of daydreams. The English-language title, Mood Indigo, is the title of a 1930 jazz composition by Duke Ellington, the musician who is often mentioned in this movie.
- GaffesWhen Nicolas brings breakfast to Chloé and Colin the first time, the long shot from the back of the bedroom shows him entering the bedroom but there are no people up on the bed. The close shot from the end of the bed shows Chloé and Colin receiving the tray.
- Crédits fousThe end credits start on a background of footage of Duke Ellington playing the piano.
- Versions alternativesA shorter version than the 135 minutes original cut has been released in some countries, included France. This alternate version is 36 minutes shorter, and has been edited by Tariq Anwar and supervised by Michel Gondry.
- Bandes originalesTake the 'A' Train
Written by Billy Strayhorn
Performed by Duke Ellington Orchestra (as Duke Ellington and his famous orchestra)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Mood Indigo?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Mood Indigo
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 19 000 000 € (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 303 187 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 26 511 $US
- 20 juil. 2014
- Montant brut mondial
- 10 435 322 $US
- Durée
- 2h 11min(131 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant