Les rivières pourpres

I really liked LES RIVIÈRES POURPRES.

When I first heard of this movie, I thought: "What an unusual, interesting and poetic title! I wonder what this movie might be all about! It could interest me." Then I saw this absolutely fantastic movie poster, which I still like a lot: a beautiful red - I had to think of the title again! - with the two protagonists in the background and some red blurs (the blood cells, of course, but I didn't know that then).

Then I learned something about the movie's content and thought: "Usually, I don't like serial killer movies at all, because often they're too violent, but that mostly concerns Hollywood movies. So, let's see, what the French made out of it!" Which I did shortly thereafter.

And what shall I say? I really liked the movie, because it was full of suspense. It had two great lead actors: Jean Reno at his best (Watch his face, as he looks at the first corpse!), and a great Vincent Cassel, whom I didn't know before. The two stories in Guernon and Sarzac were well intertwined (save for the end, on which I will comment later on).

The cinematography was overwhelming (for example the shots in the mountains, when Niémans drives to the crime scene in the very beginning, and those, when he and Fanny climb through the snowy mountains before finding the second corpse). And finally the soundtrack by Bruno Coulais was brilliantly adjusted to each scene.

Moreover, I liked the movie for not being too violent. Although the victims were drastically tortured, before they were killed, neither the torture nor the killing is shown. And the violence is not "celebrated", which means it's not shown, as if it were any kind of fun or something the viewer also should do.

Once again: Watch Niémans' face, while he looks at the first corpse; this scene shows clearly what he thinks of the torture and the killing and that it's absolutely barbaric and immoral to do a thing like that. Hollywood movies often don't show that as clearly (e. g.: Is John Doe in David Fincher's absolutely disgusting and way overrated SE7EN not in a way shown as being "sympathetic"?).

Are there any weaknesses in this movie? Yes, of course there are. Firstly, there are the first scenes of the movie, while the credits start: The camera shows a rotting human corpse, which was a) quite disgusting, b) totally unnecessary, and c) in no connection to the movie. Because, of the corpses in LES RIVIÈRES POURPRES not one had the time to rot! (Think about it for thirty seconds - you will see that I'm right!)

And then there's the end of the movie; let's say the last fifteen minutes. I must admit that I didn't really understand it completely, which in other words means that I don't think it's absolutely logical. In my opinion, it's quite stupid and very disappointing compared to everything in the movie that happened before (though I can't and won't tell you about the end in detail here; go see the movie for yourself!).

Shakespeare wrote: "All's well that ends well." Does that mean everything's bad that has a bad end? (And let's face it: The end of LES RIVIÈRES POURPRES can in my opinion only be described as really bad!) The answer is no! Because for 90 of 105 minutes the movie is absolutely great and worth a watch.

Behind BILLY ELLIOT and CHOCOLAT it's my third favourite movie of 2001 so far. And if not for the end, it could have easily taken the first place of this list.

I'd like to rate it an 8, but because of the end I can't. So I rate it a 7. But it's a strong one.

Echoes of "The Boys From Brazil" and "Name of the Rose" in this fast-moving, gorgeously-set (small alpine towns near Grenoble) French thriller, which has a really nasty conspiracy in a closed community as an underlying subplot. Two interleaved storylines involve two detectives in towns 100 km apart. Young, feisty Kerkerian (Cassel) is investigating the desecration of the tomb of a young girl. Meanwhile, supersleuth Niemans (Reno) is drafted in from Paris to assist local gendarmes in solving a nasty torture-murder of an academic at a small private University. More bodies turn up, suspects become victims, and eventually the paths of the two cops cross. Visually utterly beautiful, particularly the College, the Library, and the glacier/ice tunnel scenes. Characters strongly drawn and sympathetic. One pretty straight fight scene, little dwelling on active perpetration of violence, but much lingering on the unpleasantly gory aftermath. This is particularly the case with the rather gratuitous opening sequence, which is overdone relative to the rest of the film. My main cavil involves the poor ending, where a last-minute surprise twist creates more loose ends than it ties up. Nevertheless, so watchable that this one gets 9/10.

The novel by Jean-Cristophe Grangè on which this film is based is simply one of the best thrillers ever written,in the same league as The Silence of the Lambs and Misery,and with the help of writer/director Mathieu Kassovitz(who was also supposed to be one of the actors)the author has successfully brought his masterpiece to the screen.

From the very beginning,thanks to the location and Bruno Coulais'unsettling score,we realize French people can make good horror thrillers: Pierre Niemans(Jean Reno) is in Grenoble to solve a couple of weird and brutal murders,while Max Kerkerian(Vincent Cassel)investigates a damaged tomb somewhere else. Soon they discover the two cases are connected,and the two men have to run against the clock in order to uncover the awful truth about what's been going on in the local university for years.

The book has been simplified(the first chapter is entirely missing,as well as some of the details about Cassel's case),but the movie manages to be very interesting,and the chemistry between Reno and Cassel is great.

Special praise for Dominique Sanda,her creepy cameo being the film's best sequence(Sissy Spacek appears in a similar scene in The Ring 2).

Only defect:why did they make the sequel?

Mathieu Kassovitz's film featuring the incomparable Jean Reno (The Professional) and Vincent Cassel (Ocean's Twelve, Ocean's Thirteen) is a thrill ride that never stops.

The French countryside with the spooky houses is a feast for the eyes. Thierry Arbogast's (The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc) camera made this entire film a joy to watch. The scenery was complimented by the music of Bruno Coulais (The Chorus).

But, it was Jean Reno that brought me to this film. His Commissioner Niemans was just what I expected from him. He has a way that makes the perfect cop. That is not to dismiss Callel's Lieutenant Kerkerian, who was a perfect partner.

The story was definitely creepy with some graphic scenes of tortured bodies, but it was not off putting. It was essential to the story, which really had some extremely interesting twists and turns.

Niemans and Kerkerian prevail, of course, but it was the journey that was so satisfying.

I'm a big fan of the genre (and "Seven" is still one of my 10 favorite films of all time), but "The Crimson Rivers" just didn't cut it. It is undeniably directed with enough skill and confidence to rival any Hollywood blockbuster, it is filmed on wonderful locations and it has great performances by both leading stars. But the pace is slow and the plot is muddled. Supposedly the DVD "making-of" documentary clarifies matters somewhat (and I plan to watch it right now)....but still, that should never be the only way you could interpret a movie. (**)