Saint-Narcisse

The nature seems be the main virtue of this film. Far to be a bad one, it seems too ambitious, reuniting, mixing different themes in eccentric manner, offering a ball of cliches and eccentric fantasies, suggesting improvisation and exploring, in not the most smart manner, old cliches, from Narcisse to Saint Sebastian significance in gay sub culture.

Sure, beautiful details, nice references to classic stories, not uninspired - forced in few scenes - links between erotic and horror. And, no doubts, interesting work of Tania Kontoyanni, not bad try to define his characters - and the seductive body - of Felix Antoine Duval.

So, I admitt, it is not fair or easy to be very critic about this film for me. Sure, not perfect, not brilliant acting but, as admirer of Gothic culture - the thoughts about The Monk by Matthew Gregory Lewis are the first- , Saint Narcisse is more than decent.

A film that has a lot of imagination in it's premise. The cinematography is well done. There is a lot of beautiful nature within the film, especially the lake. I enjoyed how the plot of the film was centered around nature and a small town. Andreas Apergis's performance stood out to me. There was depth to each of the characters in Saint-Narcisse as well as to the plot. Each character had traits that could be considered less/more desirable within my estimation, perhaps this was done intentionally. Additionally, I enjoyed the music and how the music complemented each scene (sometimes dreamlike, but the plot draws you back to the course of the film). The ending had me asking one question though. I am glad that Saint-Narcisse was made and that I got to see it.

Well LaBruce has done it again. Another woeful tale which could have used a good rewrite. The actors do what they can and there are a couple of moments that could have been downright spooky, but the plot is so inane, it cannot suspend disbelief. Plotting is plodding and when at last, you glimpse the eyes of the statue, you just can't help but laugh.

I look about 250 so called Indie movies a year. I am 60 years old . I finally found the most bad movie ever seen. I even have no power to tell why everone should avoid this movie. Is it for the total lack of inspiration in the story telling, the pace of the movie that even a child at primary school can improve, the irritating repeat of a flash forward in the first 20 minutes, the extreme boring camera angles , the fact that you shall cringe your fingers and toes about the script and meaningless dialogues? I don't know. I pay 10 times the price back for what I for paid to see this 'movie' To anyone who can get my money back from where I bought it.

I was actually surprised by Saint-Narcisse. Having seen other films by this director I was expecting something more transgressive, although it seems that other reviewers were offended by the frankly mild content in this particular film (don't watch Hustler White if you can't take Saint-Narcisse). The film certainly attempts to draw your eye with the cinematography and the curated images, for example of Beatrice teasing her son's hair from the comb he used out of longing after he's left. Sometimes directors pay closer attention to the cinematography when they recognize that the plot is a little thin or progresses slowly, or they otherwise have some issue with the narrative, but whatever the case is it works in this film.

I think the casting was perfect and the actors really sold this film although there is an issue with the dialogue being often stilted and unnatural, which is presumably due to the actors being French-speaking and the film is in English. Frankly, Saint-Narcisse is more of an art film and if you're expecting explosions or a homicide in the first five minutes you'll be disappointed. Essentially this is a film about a young man who reconnects with the mother who abandoned him when he was very young. The young man also comes across his doppelganger in the form of a monk at a local monastery. The film is imperfect like everything is and it stumbles into David DeCouteau territory in the second half, but I found it visually compelling and I daresay more sedate than other offerings from this director. Sedate but not joyless. 8/10.