99 francs

Yesterday, I saw this movie in a sneak preview of a German cinema. In Germany this film is called 39,90 like the title of a book from Frédéric Beigbeder that is also an impeachment against the advertising industry. 99 francs is a funny, cruel and "sloping style" satire. It provides an funny and terrifying real insight into the world of advertisement. Coevally, this film is something like a personality profile of a man that is a victim the world he created. A unreal, pseudo-world, in which you can get everything for money.Nothing in 99 francs is subtle, like advertising isn't subtle. Advertising is mostly one: No, not annoying. It's repetition. The repetition of itself and - in content - of references in movies, literature and art. And so it's logical that this movies refers to all different culture historical things to charge consumerism. So there are allusions to "A Space Odyssey" or "Fight Club". I think you have to see this movie to make up your own mind because it's really hard to describe this visually stunning movie because feels like a roller coaster with lots of loops.

This movie was made like a giant advertising with very rhythmic effects and fast moving pictures. At least, it will keep the eye entertained during the whole movie but there's more in it.

It describes in a fun way what everybody knows is a sad world. Drugs, sex parties, late work hours, pretentious people, and meetings with stupid people, this is the way it works in the advertising industry.

It's a very funny criticism of advertising and the way it's made. I feared it would not do justice to Beigbeder's excellent book but in fact it's quite good.

Most of all, Jean Dujardin is very good in his role. He could be one of those mens you see working at Publicis on the champs Elysees !

Some people may not like the movie because there is a lot of sex and drug taking inside the movie. Yet, it's a good social depiction of this world. Don't go with the children's (the rating is not very explicit about the real content of the film) and enjoy yourself.

This movie is in a way better than the book. That does not mean much because it is obviously a subjective remark, but there is a plot you can enjoy, and enough creativity in the montage and the way the film is made to obtain an original "product". Visually it is new, and good. It is all very artistic and graphic, without hindering the scenario. You get to see the beauty of superficiality and the cold hard reality of depression and drug abuse behind excessive behaviors. It is a succession of canvases with an elaborate plot. The acting is just great (Jean Dujardin, Vahina Giocante,...), and you follow the characters into their life introspection without doubting a second of how much real they all are. Paradoxically, you will laugh. The few appearances of the author, F. Beigbeder are, you could think, to remain you of the fact that this film was inspired from a book since you tend to forget that fact and enjoy a new story. There are so much novelty in the narration that you enjoy the film with a new eye, as a new story. If you read the book, you'll find some nice reminder and an inch of novelty to adapt the film to 2007. If you have never heard of the book, you will have a nice display of the secrets of how to sell anything through commercials thanks to the advertising business. You will also get to grasp the meaningless of it all. The film is slightly political, but it does not force your judgment with subliminal messages and ready-made ideas. That way, it's always entertaining. It's sometimes a loud movie, but it's definitely worth the ticket seat. This film is truly original and provides a real cinema experience.

The first question that comes to mind when you ear about this project is : what the hell is Jan Kounen doing as a director of such a movie ? Jan Kounen was a french talented and trendy director of the 90's, just as his friend Matthieu Kassovitz. He released "Doberman" when Kasso brought "La Haine" on french screens. But after this violent/cartoon movie, Jan Kounen had discovered Shamanism while directing his experimental trip out of (the blues) "Blueberry" and then made a documentary about inner journey and other substantial trips. "99 Francs", on the other hand is an auto-fiction by the french intellectual bobo Beigbeider, that narrates his experience as a publicist in a satirical and fashionable style. So, my question was : what's the link between this director and this book and what the hell is Jan Kounen doing as a director of such a movie ?

First, from a factual point of view, Kounen and the main and incredibly credible actor of the movie, Jean Dujardin, have them-self been publicists, and decided to take the book as a starting point, and to go on completely different directions. Beigbeder, who appears several times in the movie, agreed to this betrayal. But this critic of the advertising world isn't the best part of the movie, and only seems to be a support for more experimental journey that only drugs can give.

The character of the movie inhales himself several time a gargantuesque quantity of cocaine, unknown pills and other drugs, that makes him have gigantic visions that the movie emphases. A large parts of the movie is just a description of absurd visions, that links the cartoon and trash violence of "Doberman" with the experimental form of "Bluebberry" in the funny and cool package of a critic of advertising and a large public comedy. The best part of "99 Francs" is to me an improbable escape to the tropical forest of "Bluebberry", with Jan 'Pydjhaman' Kounen like guide. If Yan Kounen defines is movie as the "Yogourt Fight Club", the film is also near from Gilliam's more experimental and crazy works.

I pretty much hated the movie right from the start. You just know quite fast when you start watching a film, any film, whether the film rings true or whether it's full of sh*t. 99 francs was the latter.

The film was full of clichés and bad jokes. Probably some of the "funny" stuff was France-centric and don't mean that much to others, but that can't really explain the staggering dumbness I had to witness. I felt like I was treated like a 10 year old who has never seen a film or read a book, or really knows nothing about the realities of the world. Actually it felt like the makers were 15 year old teens who felt like they wanted to set the record straight of what the advertising world reaaalllyyy is like. But the problem is that there was absolutely nothing new here. We've seen this stuff million times before.

Like other reviewers have pointed out here this was apparently a successful book transformed to film. That explains a lot, because usually it's really hard to achieve the atmosphere successfully. And this film tried really just too much. In a way I appreciate the franticness of the film, and of course I do appreciate the obviously high production values, but to me it was all just a waste. The knowledge of those can't erase the disappointing feeling the film gave me, and that's why I only give it 3 stars.