O Interrogatório

When I see Benoit Poelvoorde's name on a movie, I always watch. He's become the new Pierre Richard, if you remember The Blond Man With a Brown Shoe from the 70's. Only thing, Poelvoorde is much tougher than the benign Richard. Watching him can be a little exhausting.

Whatever, here we have a surrealist caper masquerading as a police procedural. I think Dupieux must have been influenced by Bunuel and by Argento, for the surreal aspects and the violence. What happens to Philippe in the office has to be seen to be believed (it involves a protractor). The acting is first rate, from Poelvoorde as the bullying detective and Gregoire Ludig as the harried suspect. There's a wonderful turn by Anais Demoustier as Philippe's girlfriend, constantly saying 'actually' to everyone's exasperation. I'll be looking out for more of Dupieux's work.

A police station, a suspect interrogated for hours and hours by a nasty inspector..., the scene has been shown over and over in hundreds of crime movies. One could go as far as to consider the thing as a sub genre in itself, its most masterful illustration being Claude Miller's classic "Garde à vue" (Under Suspicion). No one indeed has forgotten tough inspector Lino Ventura psychologically torturing an artful Michel Serrault over a night's time. Well, there is no denying that "Au poste" (Keep an Eye Out) adds to a long long list but the good surprise is that it does it in its own, singular way. One can even affirm that such a "police interrogation movie" has never been seen before! Not so surprising if you take into account the fact that Dupieux has never once made what could be called a "normal" movie, let alone told the type of story that lazily unfurls between a beginning and an end, featuring stereotyped characters with predictable reactions. Such a conversion to stale conventions would in fact have constituted a total disappointment from a man who dared (and managed) to make a film around a... tyre killer ("Rubber") or else about a director who has 48 hours to find the best... groan of pain in film history ("Reality")! Well if conventions and clichés there are, they are here only to be challenged, mocked and demolished. And although one may in a way say that this is Dupieux's "most normal" work of all, you are sure to find a lot of oddities sticking out from the rigid frame of the police interrogation genre: dreams, flash forwards encased in flashbacks and others I will refrain from detailing not to kill the surprise effect. What you'd better not do is mistake "Keep an Eye Out" for a "normal" movie. If you do so, you are likely to be taken aback and reject the whole thing. On the contrary, il you consider it as a reflection on a coded genre, you are on the right track to enjoyment. For, if you look closely, you will find that Quentin Dupieux's last opus works on no fewer than three levels, which is for those who perceive it a threefold source of pleasure:

• a plain crime story which, despite being crossed by whiffs of irrationality, remains basically believable. The situation itself, the story as well as the characters, minus their eccentricities, are indeed quite realistic. Moreover, the dialogues are well written, funny and uttered with talent by two masters of comedy, Benoît Poelvoorde (the bad-ass inspector) and Grégoire Ludig (the helpless suspect), both more sober than they usually are.
• a satire challenging the clichés and set pieces of the sub genre already mentioned: the charmless interior of the police station; the worn out, a bit sadistic interrogator and his dubious jokes ; the suspect maintaining his innocence without being able to prove it, the cigarettes, sandwiches, colleagues dropping in and out, ... It is all here, but in a slightly offbeat, farcical way.
• a commentary on the theatricality of such "in camera" dramas. Dupieux shrewdly plays on the fact that as soon as a murder is committed and suspects are interrogated, each of the protagonists seems to play a role written in advance and is at a loss as to how to extricate themselves from having to live out that role.

To make a long story short, you will find "Keep an Eye Out" either an exciting or a senseless movie, depending on whether you play the game or not. I wish you to be in the second case.

Wanna be really really confused while watching a comedy, then you gotta see a Quentin Dupieux movie. Just to inform you how weird all of his movies are, he made another movie about a car tire. Yes, you read that right, an entire movie about a car tire, that started a life on it's own, because that car tire started to kill people. Weird enough for you?

This movie is one of the least weirdest movies Quentin Dupieux has made though, but I GUARANTEE you, that you will be freaked out at some point anyway, because his stories are uniquely weird and bizar.

Oh, you still wanna know what this story is about? It starts out as a simple inquiry at a police station about a dead man found on the doorstep of someone's house. Things go off into all sorts of weird AND funny directions after that seemingly innocent start...

Any bad? Well, the reason I only award it with 7 stars is because of the fact that being a weird picture isnt enough to keep me interested for 90 minutes. Any comedy, however weird, for me personally, also HAS to be true to life in some kind of way. This movie isnt and therefore I will only award it with 7 stars.

But if you are dumbfounded and delighted by this movie then please do check out some of the unique other Quentin Dupieux movies though, because this director WILL CONFUSE YOU in ways you have never experienced before... I am not kiddin'...

Director Quentin Dupreux's "Keep An Eye Out" is familiar territory from his other films, so I understand. I've only seen two-"Rubber," which I hated, and "Wrong," which I liked, but it had its flaws. But I do see the resemblance, as they are all weird and unpredictable. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. In the case of this film, I loved it...but ironically it was the twist at the end which was, I suppose, meant to explain the craziness of what we'd just seen but ruined it for me overall.

It's really difficult to synopsize this thing, because it's just so nuts. But basically, a man walks outside his building to buy bug spray and finds a dead guy. He calls the police and a detective interrogates him late at night in the police station. The man explains his story, all the while going back and forth in time having conversations with people who aren't there or who are dead. The man is certain he's innocent of the crime but his scattered state of mind even makes him question himself.

The acting is very good and I laughed frequently at the absurdity of what was happening and enjoyed the creativity. At only 85 minutes, it clipped along at a brisk pace and I was never bored. But it almost feels as if they got to a point where they just didn't know how to tie the ends together and end it. To some it may be brilliant or clever, but to me it was a disappointing cop out. Perhaps if the scene had wrapped quickly, but it went on too long, way past where we've already said, "No way!"

But, up until the last few minutes, I really liked this film, so I give it a 7.

If you are aware of the body of work the director has created, you probably don't need to read what I or others have to say. If you are not sure check the biography/filmography of the director. Anything familiar there? This right here may feel familiar but also almost feels "normal", especially considering this has a story that is quite coherent.

I say quite, because there are still a lot of things that are "weird" to put it mildly. You can't even begin to guess all the twists and turns, because we get treated with something unexpected from time to time. I personally love to be challenged like that. You have to know if that is your thing or not. If not, then I'd obviously advice you not to watch this. It would be a waste of time for you and a bad review for the movie obviously.