Recensioni degli utenti

The film's heroine, Camille, a French stage actress left Paris three years ago and found success in Torino, Italy where she became a lead actress for the theater company. She also became a lover of Ugo, a famous stage director. She returns back to Paris with Ugo and his company to act in Italian as a main character in Pirandello's "As You Desire Me", the play that explores the mysteries of identity and memory. While in Paris, Camille confronts her past life and Pierre, the man whom she loved and still can't forget. I found Camille's character (as played by Jeanne Balibar, the stage actress and a dancer) very interesting. She may not be likable in a beginning but she is talented and every character in the movie after watching her performing at the stage leaves with the feelings that they've witnessed something very special. Camille changes as the movie progresses and in the end she becomes like a sister or close friend to both Celine and Julie. Her every movement, gesture, the way she walks, smiles, turns her head, speaks in two languages changing the timbre of her voice are true marvels to watch and to listen to.

Ugo tries to find in the Paris libraries the lost but existing play by the Italian dramatist of 18th century, Carlo Goldoni and is helped by an intelligent and beautiful young student, Dominique or Do and they both seem to have developed some special feelings for each other. Dominique has a half-brother, Arthur who is in love with Sonja, a new woman in Pierre's life or is he in love with Sonja's exquisite jewelry? Do and Arthur have a mother, Madame Desprez who has inherited the library of the rare and priceless old books but she does not sell them, she keeps them as a memory of her first husband. Sonja, Pierre's girlfriend seems to bring the peace and happiness in Pierre's life after Camille was gone but she, too, had a mystery in her rather wild past for which a marvelous ring, an object of Arthur's desire serves as a reminder.

I like "Va savoir" a lot - it is so well constructed and absolutely Rivettesque and it made me smile all the time. It is long (as usual for Rivette's films) but elegantly relaxed. It moves well with its own wonderful pace and we enjoy leisure walkings and spend time with many old and rare books. We feel longing that is in the air - all six characters desire something and someone. We notice once again how much Rivette likes his characters sitting on the park bench where the magic events begin happening to them. We go through many wonderful sequences, ironic, dramatic, and lyrical and in the end we are awarded by the finale which is truly grand and theatrical in the best sense. After all the movie could be viewed as Rivette's love letter to theater. Va Savoir? Who knows?

The play within a play ploy is used in Go Figure to excellent effect. The play is an eighteenth century farce performed by an Italian acting troupe visiting Paris. The farce utilizes six characters, the optimal number to engage in romantic mix-ups, flirtations, and other amorous stuff. And lo and behold, Go Figure itself contains six persons who engage in romantic mix-ups, flirtations, and crimes, both physical and of the heart.

There's the lead actress and her stage manager husband; she, who walked out on her now married ex-lover, whom she meets for the first time in three years (as well as his wife). Rounding out the six are two siblings, one a sexy young lady, the other her caddish older brother. There's jewel theft, a hunt for a missing manuscript, jealousy, and the falling in and out of love. And in the backdrop the acting troupe struggles to remains solvent.

All this is served up in, what I would call a French style. Of course I've not seen that many French romantic comedies, but I can state that were this in the hands of an American 'Hollywood' director it would be an entirely different film. And probably not nearly as good. In Rivette's hands all the action and interactions seem natural and light. There's no 'look at me' style of acting; it's almost understated. And this makes for a very enjoyable viewing that loses little on the small screen.

I was bored to death by this movie. The main character is a self-centered and selfish actress whose problems failed to interest me. I stayed with it for an hour, and walked away; my wife said it became somewhat better toward the end. If all drama must be divided into comedy and tragedy, then in that sense this is a comedy. However, when movie reviewers call a movie a comedy, I think we are entitled to believe they mean it is funny. Tastes differ, and I accept that some might find this movie interesting, but by no stretch of the imagination could anyone in his right mind call it "funny." I wouldn't have rented this video except for a quotation on the box, in which A. O. Scott of The New York Times wrote, "An especially rich and subtle farce . . . resolved with the verve and precision of classic screwball comedy."

Some years ago Sophie Marceau explained her move to Hollywood in more or less the following terms: I am tired of doing the same French movies where all in all there is a love triangle and in the end the three of them have dinner together. Well, Va savoir is exactly that kind of movie. It is more complicated because there are actually four love triangles, but yes, they all have a cake to share in the end; all the six people who were involved in the triangles. So nothing new here. The good thing, however, are the characters. Except for the brother-and-sister duo who are kind of stereotypical and possibly present the spectator with the cliché of male and female libertine Parisians, the other two couples arouse our curiosity with their insufficiencies: Camille is a little too absent-minded to be completely sane, Pierre is a typical academic dork who falls into furies of sophisticated frustration, Ugo visibly carries the burden of his unattractive appearance and compensates for it with his thick Italian accent, while Sonia obstinately tries to keep to the level of those intellectual pricks and prove how much more she knows about real life. This is a good melodrama if you like the genre. I do, and I liked it. Marceau probably wouldn't.

This is an interesting, yet at times boring movie. It is not boring necessarily because you get bored while watching, but it's because you don't get attached to any of the characters for a long time. There are two stories going on. They are intertwined. The story of the play that we don't understand much about, except seeing the possible alterego of our main woman character and also of course there is the story of these six individuals, three men and three women. They are all in search of something literally or symbolically.

While watching this film, you might pause, have some dinner, go back, continue. The phone rings, you forget about it, start watching again, and fall asleep. The next morning, you wake up, decide to watch, you think of looking it up at IMDb and you just do that. Throughout the film, there is a huge amount of feeling going back and forth, but we all (together with the director, the movie cast and the crew) watch it all happen as if it's not even happening. In a way, the movie is too French-cool, which also makes it unique. This attachment I am talking about, because of its non-existence, you might just end up finishing the film in three days, but maybe the more crucial thing is that no matter what, you do wanna go back and see what's haunting you. You can't let go. In a way, that's exactly what the main character feels. She can't let go either. There is something calm about her, something serene. We are not impressed at first, but slowly she becomes a goddess of determination and genuineness. Yet, there is something that triggers her mind and it steals her peace.

Luckily as time goes on, we observe her internal-peace-movement. In this sense, this movie is either very successful and it gave me the exact feeling, or maybe I am overly empathetic : )

It did take me 3 days to watch, with numerous interruptions of daily life, and I even stopped watching now and started writing this review.

Yes, I do not know the ending yet. Do watch it, if you are someone who does a lot of thinking about the complexities of interpersonal relationships (especially about romantic ones), but make sure you are patient, interested, and ready to think.

Having read many of the comments of "Va Savoir" here, (admittedly mostly from the other side of the Atlantic), I was surprised by the amount of hostility towards this film.

Whilst I admit that it may have benefited from a little judicious editing, perhaps down to around two hours, this seems to me to be a well acted and entertaining slice of french life. The fact that the main characters are involved in the theatre is entirely secondary since their "real" lives depicted here are infinitely more interesting than the characters being portrayed in the Pirandello play. Perhaps that was the point.

There are enough sub-plots and unanswered questions relating to the fully rounded, three dimensional characters to keep the average viewer engrossed for the length of the film. They do not conform to stereotypes and it is not possible to pigeon-hole them. We find out much more about them as the film progresses. This is a film about people, their interwoven histories, and the formation of new relationships.

Jeanne Balibar's performance, seemed to me, complex and mature. Initially, I found her portrayal cold and unemotional, but this I believe was intentional and as the film progresses, she is revealed as a complicated and enigmatic character, capable of intense emotions but also of granting sexual favours just to create a diversion.

There is also a fine performance from Sergio Castellitto as Ugo, entirely convincing, except perhaps in his refusal to bed the truly delicious "Do" played by a ravishing Hélène de Fougerolles, (surely another French actress destined for greatness). Indeed, Jacques Rivette seems to have nurtured excellent performances all round.

Whilst this is not a perfect film, it offers more than enough to warrant a few short hours of your time. This is a fine French film, which will remain in your memory for sometime to come and compared with much of Hollywood's current output, is a mature and thought-provoking piece of film making. Open a good bottle of red Bordeaux and settle down with its cinematic equivalent.

While in Paris in a tour of the Italian play "Como Tu Mi Vuoi", the lead actress Camille (Jeanne Balibar), who is living with the director Ugo Bassani (Sergio Castellitto), recalls and misses her former love Pierre (Jacques Bonnaffé). She visits his apartment and meets his present mate Sonia (Marianne Basler). Meanwhile Ugo is searching a lost play by Goldoni, and meets the charming French Dominique (Hélène de Fougerolles) that helps him to find it in her mother's private library. Meanwhile, Do's smalltime crook stepbrother Arthur (Bruno Todeschini) seduces Sonia to steal her expensive ring.

I saw "Va Savoir" with great expectation, but I was quite disappointed with this pointless film. The charming cast and the good direction are lost in a promising story that goes nowhere. I do not dare to say that it was a complete waste of time, but I regret the terrible conclusion, which gives the impression that the writer got lost with the entwined romances. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Quem Sabe?" ("Who Knows?")

Self-obsessed tedium of thespo lovey spouting melodramatic drivelling monologues is presumably par for the course with a film centred around a neurotic has-been stage actress. Aside from that, the sub-plots, particularly the relationship between the young academic woman and the play's director, and her assistance in his quest for long-lost script, are far more engaging than the main plot. The tender tension of their relationship and the director's (almost) single-minded drive for literary holy grail salvage an otherwise disappointing film.

This was very good film. Although it was lengthy, the events never slowed down. There was always a progression of the plot from scene to scene and the characters are well-figured into their surroundings. If anyone knows the piano melody played during the opening credits, and I believe also in the first ballet teaching scene where Sonia and Arthur talk, PLEASE tell me the name of the piano piece, its wonderful and I HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS! I must say that the film is overall brilliant and very refreshing from the modern Hollywood films I am usually exposed to. The best part of the movie in my opinion was how all the pieces of the plot are connected and resolved at the end, leaving me with an appreciation for just how perfect the plot was. There are also unusually funny moments in the movie that provide for a breath of air since the film is not very fast paced and long. PLEASE SOMEONE FIGURE OUT THE PIANO PART IN THE OPENING CREDITS.

If your attention-span is severely traumatized by Police Academy then best give this one a miss. Keeping track of all the separate threads is like keeping track of individual strands of spaghetti after it's doused in sauce. On the other hand if you make the effort you may decide it's worth it. In one sense it revolves around Camille (Jeanne Balibar) a French actress back on French soil for the first time in three years via a European tour of Pirandello's As You Desire Me. Camille is, in fact, the first thing we see as a pin-spot picks her out of the darkness reinforcing the theatrical quality we are in for. Ostensibly an item with Ugo (Sergio Castellitto) the director of the play and leading actor opposite her, Camille has it in mind to look up her ex-lover, a Professor of Philosophy who, in the interim has married and become a devoted husband. Neither is Ugo as open as he might be about his quest for a lost manuscript by Goldoni and the young girl Dominique who is 'helping' him in this quest. The plot thickens when we learn that Dominique's brother, Arthur, is not only enamored of the Professor's wife but has eyes also for an expensive ring she wears. Rivette and his two screenwriters - both, incidentally, actors themselves - keep the balls spinning and throw in a series of set-pieces as well as ringing the changes on duets, trios and quartets a la opera bouffe and all is resolved a la Shakespeare when le tout ensemble come together in the empty theater and dance off into the night as a haunting lyric performed by Peggy Lee implies that this is not the end of anything. Jeanne Balibar is the main attraction, Castellitto, so warm in Mostly Martha, turns down the heat on his natural charm but still turns in a solid performance. At two and a half hours it's clearly not for everyone but if you're one of those it IS for then this is for you (and let's face it, could Pirandello himself have put it better).

I felt I should like this film more than I did. It is set in current day Paris where a theatre troupe is putting on a Italian production. The story revolves around a French actress in the troupe who is married to the director of the theatre group who is returning to Paris for the first time in years and still has unresolved feelings for an ex who resides in the city. The acting is solid if not very good, and the plot does hold interest and hangs together well. Having said this I could not help but feel the whole thing was somewhat slight and the payoff in time (it is or seemed like a very long movie) was somewhat unjustified. In some ways the characters seemed almost distant to me, they were real but I couldnt get inside their head, which in some ways is a silly criticism because life is like that and that is not necessarily a detraction for the film but I felt as though they were drifting through a series of set pieces with not all that much at stake. Having said this it is definitely worth a look and certainly should be sought if you enjoy cinema that goes beyond the pedestrian plot lines and pyrotechnics of all too many mainstream features today.

"Va Savoir (Who knows?)" is for Eric Rohmer fans, though it's even slower and with less humor than Rohmer's intellectually romantic talk fests.

Director Pierre Rivette is a contemporary of Rohmer's whose penchant for long, slow films has hampered his success in the U.S. And I guess this is his most accessible film, as the last half-hour suddenly becomes sweeter and filled with coincidences so the interplays of three couples become intertwined almost in a drawing-room comedy.

But first are all kinds of references that went way over my head as I hadn't realized until late in the movie that the play that we keep seeing long chunks being performed in Italian by one of the couples is a Pirandello piece, with the gimmick here that we sort of see it backwards, mostly from the last scene to the start, so I missed some points.

The well-acted characters do get more and more interesting as we slowly learn surprises about them such that we start rooting for different combinations than we started out understanding.

It doesn't help that the subtitles are stiffly translated by a non-native English speaker, such that "kimono" is translated as "kimono" instead of as "bathrobe" or "l'aggression' as "aggression" instead of "a fight."

(originally written 10/21/2001)

This is another classical-french comedy movie. Very strong characters and an intrigant plot with lots of twists and crossed-stories. The dialogues are very consistent and funny almost all the time. The end of the film, is excellent!

I really appreciated this film.

Who Knows? (2001), directed by Jacques Rivette, is a charming and intellectually stimulating film that weaves together themes of love, art, and human deception. The story follows a group of highly cultured and quick-witted individuals whose lives intertwine in a world of theater and romantic intrigue. At the center of the narrative is a complex love triangle, a theft, and the blurred lines between reality and performance. Rivette's direction and the film's sharp screenplay keep the viewer engaged, as it deftly explores the overlapping relationships and emotional undercurrents of the characters.

Jeanne Balibar delivers an excellent performance as the lead character, a woman caught between love and professional obligations, balancing vulnerability and strength with grace. The supporting cast, including Sergio Castellitto and Marianne Basler, further enriches the film with performances that enhance its intellectual and emotional complexity. Their chemistry and interactions create an atmosphere where love and deception are intertwined in a fascinating dance.

The film's pacing is deliberate, with much of the story unfolding through dialogue-heavy scenes that invite the viewer to reflect on the nature of relationships, identity, and personal desires. While this slower pace may not be to everyone's taste, it allows the themes to unfold naturally, and the clever script gives each scene purpose, layering the narrative with subtle nuances. The dialogues are rich and filled with meaning, offering insights into the characters' inner lives and their complex motivations.

Visually, the film makes use of long takes and intimate settings, emphasizing the tension and dynamics between the characters. Rivette's direction, paired with the script's sharp wit, elevates the film into a sophisticated narrative that blends theater and film effortlessly. The cinematography complements the intellectual and emotional themes, with its focus on close-ups and small, evocative details that draw the viewer into the world of the characters.

Who Knows? Is a film that rewards patient viewers with its exploration of love, deception, and art. It's a film that challenges its audience intellectually, offering a sophisticated look at human relationships and the layers of truth and performance that shape them.

Rating: 8/10. A witty and engaging exploration of love and deception, with strong performances and a well-crafted narrative that invites reflection.

Critic Roger Ebert said something like: One 'settles into' this movie and the characters, even though not much else 'happens.' He, and perhaps some others, seemed to like "Va Savoir" and its "settling-in" requirements of the audience. I DID see what they meant--- one does kind of settle-in to the thing, and find a bit of texture, even a bit of depth and fleeting, moderate interest from time to time. Overall, I kind of, almost, liked it. But I also found the movie dull superficial. I was more bored and impatient with the story than intrigued. Contrast this movie with the superior Italian movie "Bread and Tulips."

"B&T" is equally "non-eventfull," in that film style that somehow is supposed to convey reality and "art" to us, but "B&T" is vastly more interesting than "Va Savoir." "Va Savoir" was tiresomely thin and drawn out, like a Rotary Club luncheon speaker who just takes forever to make the most trivial of points. "B&T" was innocent and fresh. It not only embodied the vaunted artsy "anti-movie" naturalness, it also vibrates with sexuality, beauty, charm, and grace. I truly LOVED "B&T," and plan to buy my own DVD copy when I can afford it. "Va Savoir," on the other hand, is "OK," but I wouldn't even want to SEE it again, let alone own it.

Jacques Rivette's acclaimed La belle noiseuse (1991) is a masterful meticulously crafted portrayal of a painter, his model, his friends and family in a complex and climactic drama. Ten years later, Rivette is even more riveting with an astonishing screenplay working again with long-time collaborating writing team of Pascal Bonitzer & Christine Laurent.

Va savoir (2001) - aka Who Knows? - is a story we have heard before of an actress dating the plays director and theatre group owner. They happen to be touring Europe and we see them in Paris, which brings back memories for Camille, the main actress. However, as we advance in the story and see the main character quirkiness, hopes, fears and dreams and feel the tension of their past, present and future love interests intertwine we enter an alluring drama way beyond conventional clichés of performing art in cinema.

A lot of details are in the screenplay with funny twists and turns, discomfort, joy, questioning and dismay. We find unconventional and uncompromising story lines that are curious and captivating. Moreover Rivette's directing and some fine acting from all the cast elevates the piece and allows tension and storytelling threads to weave a tight deliciously unpredictable narrative.

There is a play being performed that has some relevance to the world outside the theatre. The rhythms and tones of the play feel somewhat exotic performed in its native Italian in France and with more or less convincing depending on the performance night and mood. The real life events of the the characters outside the theatre are even more theatrical and has never been done quite as well, although Iñárritu's Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014) came close as a theatre actor backdrop. Aronofsky' Black Swan (2010) also come to mind but for dance.

Va savoir (2001) has so many interesting elements with side stories of a life that lead to prison or the central search for a unpublished and never performed play. There are many sexual and emotional tension building between the strong central and secondary characters over the course of two and a half hours and an unexpected funny and fitting finale.

Rivette's choices make the situations intense and bring the viewer into an in intellectual, emotional and physical experience of high calibre that is not quite like any other. An understated masterpiece to be enjoyed.

A touring theatre group are performing in Paris. The film switches between the actors' performances on stage and their lives off stage. Off stage we are treated to amusing, farcical situations involving secret desires, infidelity, confused relationships and dishonesty. Things settle down nicely by the end of the film.

A light and amusing film with entertaining characters that interlink well with each other. An enjoyable main plot with creative sub plots. The idea of a play within a play is nothing new but it's generally well done here. The film is perhaps too long for the story it is telling. An entertaining film but not a classic.

This film has pretensions of being an art film. I am a believer that art should delight and entertain as a result of its excellence. The reality of "Va Savoir" is that it delivers an absolutely dreadful movie, badly made with insipid performances. VERRRRRY boring and overly long. This movie is not a pleasure to watch, which disqualifies it as art, in my view.

In an brazen attempt to grab the viewer's interest, the makers of the movie inserted a shower scene with Jeanne Balibar followed by a flash of her muffy, around the middle of the film. The shower scene doesn't clarify or advance the plot. Plus Ms. Balibar's scrawny body is the wrong subject for this desperate attempt at commercialism. When gratuitous nudity fails to redeem a movie for me, then there's something definitely wrong.

My French isn't fluent, so I must watch French films in subtitles. I still enjoy following the French soundtrack and evaluating the quality of the English translation. The subtitling of "Va Savoir" is generally good, using the best colloquial English equivalent to the French. Some of the rawer French is slightly sanitized, however. Unfortunately, the soundtrack for the subtitled version I saw was muffled and indistinct. I prefer subtitled foreign films to dubbed movies to hear the expression of the actors delivering their lines. The soundtrack of the version I watched was so bad that I couldn't connect with what the actors were trying to convey. Or perhaps there wasn't anything to convey.

The Italian play didn't add to any understanding of the film. These scenes could have done with some heavy editing and perhaps something coherent could have emerged. Jeanne Balibar's Italian sounded synthetic, monotonous and wooden to me. I don't know Italian stage conventions but Sergio Castellitto was quite expressive in the play. In fact, to see how to show expression in one's second language, one need look no further than Sergio Castellitto's performance in the French language. As a final comment, I've had enough of the genre of actors portraying actors. To me, that's not a stretch. It's not just the French that bore me with this kind of story. Hollywood and the TV Networks fall into the trap of displaying their own tiny little world. When an actor or actress does working class and does it realistically, then that's art. Check out "Frankie and Johnny", "Tampopo" or "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" for the best of the working poor on film.

Va savoir is a film that could be skipped by someone living in New

York City, Chicago, or Los Angeles. We get only a handful of

French films each year in Upstate New York, and I try to see them

all. At 154 minutes, this movie does tend to run on. Still, the

legendary Jacques Rivette is known for his l*o*n*g running times;

he probably considers this 2 1/2 hour film to be a short.

I have noticed that the great majority of people who rated the film

are men. This surprises me, because there is nothing about Va

Savoir that would make it a traditionally "men's film." I would think

people of either gender would be pleased that all three female

leads are presented as capable women leading productive

lives--actor, dance teacher, graduate student. Rivette has chosen

three women who are fascinating to watch on the screen; this to

me was the strength of the film. I think the men fared less well--in

fact, it is hard to believe that three such competent and attractive

women would be drawn to men who appeared (at least to me) to

be far inferior to them. (One character--Arthur--probably has

anti-social personality disorder, is a compulsive gambler and has

incestuous feelings towards his sister. Other than that he's OK.)

My suggestion--don't go to this film expecting "Rules of the Game," but see it because it is French, it is directed by Jacques Rivette,

and it gives ample screen time to three excellent female actors.

The cover of the box said it was a comedy. NOT ONE funny moment, I assure you. Bad acting, especially the main brunette girl who is unfortunately also extremely uninteresting to look at. Static indoor shots of people standing and talking to each other. (Only one good exterior shot, on the Seine.) You can practically hear the director shouting action at the top of each shot, it looks so stagey.

I had no idea the French and American sensibilities could be so far afield of each other. Did French audiences really laugh at this.

A light Rivette; Va Savoir (2001) is a film that features many of the director's most recognisable traits and characteristics familiar from the unwieldy and progressive films that he made in the late 1960's and early 1970's, but done in such a way as to suggest a more frivolous or throwaway tone with the emphasis placed more squarely on the elements of comedy and farce. This doesn't necessarily mean that the film is bad, or that it fails in some way to compare to the more iconic likes of Paris nous appartient (1960), L'amour fou (1969), Out 1 (1971) and Celine and Julie Go Boating (1974) - all of which are referenced here - but rather, that it shows a process of simplification; with Rivette taking his chosen themes - such as performance, miscommunication and the battle of the sexes - and allowing the characters to take precedence over the story, as opposed to the experiments with the film-making form. Perhaps this is emblematic of Rivette's more recent work over the last twenty years, though having only seen La Belle Noiseuse (1991) from his post Celine and Julie projects (admittedly missing out on a great deal of the man's career), I can only make the obvious comparisons.

Nonetheless, the relative simplicity and emphasis on character worked well here; with Rivette keenly following the trials and tribulations of a small collection of characters all bumbling about the woes of modern relationship difficulties from an upper-middle class perspective. Along the way we have the usual self-reflexive comments on the nature of performance and of film-making itself, with the story revolving around an Italian-language production of Luigi Pirandello's "As You Desire Me" that the central couple are appearing in. In some respects the film reminded me of the work of Woody Allen, with the ensemble nature of the narrative and the film's social milieu suggesting elements of Hannah and her Sisters (1986), Husbands and Wives (1994) and the more recent Melinda and Melinda (2004), while the idea of a play (or film) that is both a part of the story and also a subtle comment on it reminded me of Stardust Memories (1980), The Purple Rose of Cairo (1984) and Bullets Over Broadway (1994). As with those particular films, Va Savoir offers a narrative in which the subtle juxtaposition of the characters thoughts, feelings and social interactions creates a comedy of errors to undercut many of the more dramatic or self-consciously self-reflexive elements of the film.

As ever with Rivette - or at least the work of his that I've so far seen - the film moves perfectly between the various characters and their roles and interactions, as the skillful sense of choreography between the different layers of the narrative and the impeccable comic-performances of the cast help to draw us in to the story and lead us towards that quietly brilliant final act. I can certainly understand why many would dislike the film; it's long, deals exclusively in character interaction (on at least two separate levels) and creates a world that is stuffy and intellectual, no doubt seemingly horribly pretentious to those unwilling to spend more than thirty minutes with these characters or the world that Rivette creates. Regardless, I personally think that Va Savoir is a fine film; both intelligent and entertaining and with that spark and spirit so recognisable in the director's work from Paris nous appartient to the celebrated Celine and Julie.