Vendredi soir

Vendredi Soir (2002), directed by Claire Denis, is a film about two

residents of Paris who come together because of a horrendous,

citywide traffic jam. The movie is slow and deliberate, but not

boring. The film's power derives from the interaction of two

attractive strangers who are temporarily trapped--and yet

liberated--by the fact that mass transit is shut down, and auto

traffic has come to a standstill.

Valérie Lemercier portrays Laure, a young woman who has left her

apartment to move in with her lover. Ms. Lemercier owes a great

debt to Ms. Denis, who could have cast the part with a more

traditionally beautiful woman. (In the U.S., the role would probably

have gone to Demi Moore.) Instead, the director chose an actor

who is undeniably beautiful, but in an interesting, complex way.

Lemercier is an outstanding actor, and she is given enough time

on screen to demonstrate her professional skills.

Don't see this film if you're looking for excitement, graphic sex,

violence, or a strong narrative story line. See this film if you want to

view Paris--and human relationships--portrayed in a serious, but

almost dreamlike, lyrical, fashion.

Claire Denis uses close-ups better than anybody since Sergio Leone. Agnes Godard is amazing. A Denis film almost always has a human warmth few other filmmakers achieve with their films, even if it's their intention to do so. All these qualities are present in "Vendredi soir", yet I felt it was significantly weaker than the three Denis films I had already seen: "Chocolat", "Nenette et Boni", and "Trouble Every Day". It's not that the film is 'slight' or that it doesn't have much narrative drive that bothered me, either, but that it never took on the sort of gravity I thought it should have. Moreover, the film falls apart toward the end, when it should have come together. The opening stages of the film, with Godard's camera taking us through Paris were absolutely gorgeous, the first few scenes after the two main characters meet were great, especially the brilliant impressionistic montage after Jean unexpectedly takes over driving Laure's car (accompanied by a Hitchcockian musical score), but when they actually get together and have sex the film just falls apart. Here's a film which is technically brilliant (direction, cinematography, acting, Dickon Hinchliffe's great debut score), formally interesting, but which just doesn't have enough in it to justify even its short length.

This movie is not for the sort of casual movie-goer who must have a plot driven, dialogue heavy entertainment vehicle in order to be satisfied. This film is typical Denis: intensely visual, with sparse dialogue and a very minimal plot.

The premise of the film is a simple one. A woman about to move in with her lover is caught in a traffic jam during a Paris transit strike. She picks up a stranger, and they have a one-nighter.

The film's focus is the little things that make up sexual attraction, the situations, the glimpses, the attitudes, the predilections, etc. It manages to present this in an almost completely visual way without ever becoming dull, pretentious, or difficult to watch. The film has a minute logic to it which manages to pull the viewer along from scene to scene using humor, suspense, and a good deal of empathy for the central character.

This film invites one to reflect on the way in which sex relates to the variety of life's anxieties: anxieties over self-image, anxieties over one's future, anxieties over one's significance, etc. It also provides an interesting vantage point from which to view the over-romanticized over-serious status that sex is given in main-stream American cinema.

Go to this film with the intent of viewing a wonderful piece of art. There is some work required on the viewer's part, but it's worth the effort.

1st watched 3/9/2010 -- 7 out of 10 (Dir-Claire Denis): Beautiful film about a woman preparing for a new life, getting stuck in a traffic jam, picking up a stranger and then having a night together with him. This film is like watching a ballet with it's beautiful depiction of everything from the city of Paris, to the hotel room, to the main characters. The camera is like a peeping tom into the heart of the main character played by Valerie Lemercier as we feel and see everything she sees and feels. Except, of course, the emotions are a little restrained -- which is typical of the French. With French films, you never expect a cut-and-dry ending and they take their time letting you experience every moment(this is unique to this countries films). The film has a very simple premise and it lets you think thru what's going on in the character's minds and never gives away anything. There is very little dialogue which lets you breathe in and experience every minute. Sure -- not much happens, but it doesn't have to. Sometimes life is "exactly" like this and Claire Denis captures it beautifully. Do we know what happens to the character's when it's over?? -- no, but we can guess and that's where the fun lies in a film like this.

This was a damn good movie. Very different, the closest movie that comes to the feel and over all effect is The Loss of Sexual Innocence. Movies such as this catch many off guard because they don't follow the de facto movie format. Meaning, an event happens, people react to said event, drama, conclusion, resolution.

This movie takes a totally different approach, and that's what makes it shine. This movie defies being labeled as a movie altogether. People say this movie is boring, that nothing happens, there are almost no words. They'd be right, there is no real drama, conclusion, resolution. I don't believe that's what this movie is even about.

From the opening moments of the Paris rooftops I knew I was in for something special. The long shots, the turning off of lights, the gazes at the Paris skyline. This was a visual feast with poetic credentials, and I expected as much.

Folks, this movie was not about Jean and Laure. I believe thats where all the critical flack stems from. This movie isn't about a brief encounter that is over by sunrise. The plot that you all speak of, that's secondary.

The movie tends to focus on their surroundings more so then them. A cluttered car, a heater, traffic, boxes. A best example of this is their skin, during the sex scenes there are close ups of their skin rather then showing them making love. As if the plot, in this case, making love, is secondary to the poetic element of the story.

In any given event, the surroundings are just as important as the story itself. This movie displays that perfectly. That is the purpose of this movie, that is it's beauty, that is what it is about.

If this movie is about the surroundings rather then a plot or story, then what would be the purpose of showing rooftops, skin, lamps, boxes? Because is it life, and it is poetic and beautiful. What is the purpose of a rose? Why take a picture of it, or give it to someone? A rose simply is, this movie simply is. The nuances of life deserve appreciation and this movie pays homage to that fact. That is what this movie is about.

It is life, it is the beauty of everything around you.