Le bruit des glaçons

and that is all because , in many scenes, it seems be a project who must be made but nothing more. the theme is very special and the scriptwriter/director has not courage to decide if it must be a comedy or a drama. so, the decision is the public problem. and entire work seems chaotic. that explains why Jean Dujardin is not the most inspired option for the role of lead character. his efforts to give credibility to story are full of good intentions but not more. because something important is missing. because all seems be an improvisation. and because the subject is out of movie team possibilities. result - French cold style and a lot of good intentions.

The idea of having death played by a character is not new but still very good. It is certainly difficult to master and could have easily been a disaster, but Tavernier made a masterpiece of it.

The actors performances are truly outstanding, Dupontel is especially brilliant, and the whole thing is an UFO in the movie industry. It plays between sadness, black humor, comedy but remains always deep, intimate and clever.

If people you love have died recently you will be touched. No doubt.

Now that I have seen this movie I remember the other movies I have seen from him, and the fact is that they are unconventional. I am already downloading older movies from him, I guess that I will enjoy them as well.

The movie has no computer effects, very few actors, only one location and demonstrate what is necessary for a good movie. Talent.

This movie is an absolute must see.

Bertrand Blier is definitely always filming unconventional movies and this one is using love, sickness and somehow solitude as central topics with a good trio of actors (I want to put Anne Alvaro at the same level than Dujardin and Dupontel) putting the scene in a dramatic set up.

I sat through this entire film during the French Film Festival at the Director's Guild. Writer + Director Bertrand Blier was present during a Q&A after the movie and that's about the nicest I have to say about the experience. There might be snobs and movie critics who say this is art in its finest form, like brown nosing Jon Amiel who did the interview. Let me be the first to say it is NOT!! Symbolism is one thing, surrealism another and there's nothing wrong with either one. But using some silly actor to represent a person's cancer?? Wow, REALLY?? Besides a few giggles and the few people who left the theatre in pure anger, I sat there in the dark in disbelief.

As I was watching this movie, I couldn't help to think how better it would be if it were a play on a theater. It would not surprise me to learn that it started that way before becoming a movie script, but unlike "Closer" or "Doubt" it just does not translate well into a cinematic language. If it weren't for Anne Alvaro (Louise) this would be worse than what actually is. Dujardin doesn't save it with his charm at all and I think the director is the one to blame since it's not very clear whether it's a comedy or a drama with lighter tones. Don't get me wrong: I love movies that mix genres, but in this project it seems like actors perform as people "acting" instead of playing people under those circumstances that for us, as an audience, could be perceived as funny or tragic. I would blame the director/writer since the scenes where Charles is fighting with no one are the most painful to watch. It's not dreadful but I don't think I would have missed anything by not watching it.