Um Casal Admirável

Although "Un couple épatant" is just 1 installment of Belvaux's impressive "Trilogy," I'm going to review it as a standalone film. This is because Belvaux deliberately made each film very different in story, genre and style, so we can guess that he intended for each film to be its own independent "dot" which we, the audience, must connect on our own time. Whether you're watching all three, or just this 1, here's what you can expect...

"Un couple épatant" is broadly a romantic comedy. But it has a very characteristic bite to it. The film is marketed in the USA with the title "An Amazing Couple", but the literal translation is more like "a shocking/unconventional couple." That might better prepare you for what is to come. The story hits the ground running and doesn't let up for a second. In the opening scenes we see that our hero "Alain" (François Morel) learns that he may have a terminal condition. He loves his wife deeply and wants to protect her from worry, so he hides this knowledge by telling her a passing lie. However our heroine "Cécile," who also loves her husband incontrovertibly, catches him in this tiny fib and this sets off a chain reaction of bigger lies & deception. In a WONDERFULLY orchestrated Shakespearean comedy of errors, these deceptions escalate to outright paranoia as Cécile's suspicious nature itself arouses Alain's suspicious nature, and bizarre coincidences give off appearances that each is having an extramarital affair. As each scene gives rise to more & more hysteria, we reach a fever pitch where actual infidelity, violence and murder aren't out of the question.

Maybe now you understand the title of my review. This is a dark, dark comedy. A romcom for cynics or at least for people who can laugh at the dirty underbelly of love. The tension builds almost painfully, even though we can't help but chuckle at how bizarrely perfect this series of events is. It brings to mind the great writer/director Francis Veber ("La cage aux folles"/"Birdcage") as far as mapping out a wonderfully tangled web of lies and misunderstandings. And although I wouldn't call this laugh-out-loud funny, I would definitely say this is one of the most cleverly written romantic comedies of its decade.

A few words about the acting and casting. François Morel is absolutely perfect as our hero Alain, portraying the role with a sort of goofiness while at the same time being intelligent and painfully intense. His schtick is that he is narrating his own life by talking into a small tape recorder the whole time, and this technique works magnificently; we really see and hear him losing his mind in a hilarious way.

Ornella Muti ...wow, a moment of silence for the talented and supernaturally beautiful Ornella Muti (Emperor Ming's daughter in 1980's "Flash Gordon"!)... um where was I? Right. Ornella Muti plays her role very seriously, with no hint of any comedic twang, and this lends itself to a very unusual and bipolar sort of comedy. Just as François's scenes are goofy and surreal, Ornella's scenes are powerfully gritty and realistic. If you grasp what this film (and the entire Trilogy) is trying to do--portray the same reality in starkly different ways--then you'll get it. Is this a romantic comedy, or is it a romantic horror story? Both at the same time.

There are supporting roles (actors who play major roles in the other 2 films) which are expertly played, but I have to make a special note of Gilbert Melki who plays the villain "Pascal". Wow. At first I hated him. He hits us with an extremely menacing, threatening, outright loathsome character... especially if you know his backstory from Part 1. But after the film ended I realized that he was perfect for the role. This story really did need an element of dark menace otherwise it would've been too breezy and silly for what it sets out to accomplish. But the character Pascal, as much as you want to reach into your screen and punch him, is what pulls this together and ties it in with the rest of the trilogy.

Yes, this is a "romcom". But it's a romcom in the same way that Tang is orange juice. In other words, beware of toxic additives. Things are not what they seem.

Alain is the manager of a small company. He is on the way to be have a surgical heart operation and he his convinced that he is on the point to die. He hides his disease to his wife and records his testament. His wife who perfectly knows him has suspicion and asks herself if he has relations with other women as Claire, his secretary, for example. In order to be sure, she asks to Pascal, the husband of his friend Agnes, to conduct a survey on Alain comportment. But Pascal has also another most serious inquiry about a gangster escape, Bruno Le Roux. All these characters will be mixed in various situations. This first episode pf the trilogy is very interesting and well realised and it is a good beginning for the entire story, but can be seen independently.

I'm not sure how "Two" could be the 1st instalment of a trilogy, but none-the-less I watched it after (my reviewed) "On the Run" (or 'One').

Hypochondriac compulsives always have the potential to make good comedy subjects and (can't remember the character's name) a possible cancer scare causes him to update his will and testament constantly on his portable voice recorder. Hiding his paranoia from his wife naturally causes erratic behaviour, and thinking a mistress being involved she employs a police friend to investigate.

It is weaker than the terrific thriller of On The Run, but this often farcical comedy of modern errors is fast-moving, tipping its hat occasionally to Jacques Tati and has frenetic and furtive people dashing about in cars. It all gets a little messy and complex and after a while the connection with On the Run blurs with this one.

Some scenes have been edited into 'Two' - unfortunately, they don't make any revelations but, neither do they detract. It's actually a good way to re-use locations (the alpine lodge, for example), cars even and many props and of course, actors. This allows cross-continuity but might all seem a just a bit too clever.

I'm looking forward to the 3rd part (Afterlife) to see how this aspect gets taken further and hopefully, to see another terrific film in its own right.

The Belgian director's trilogy, number two as shown in the US, but shown first in French theaters, this is a domestic comedy (the title is ironic) about a hypochondriac and increasingly paranoid small tech business owner Alain (Francois Morel) who runs around hiding from his wife that he's going to have a very minor operation because he absurdly thinks it's going to be the death of him. His wife Cecile (Ornella Muti) senses that he's sneaking around and, thinking he's having an affair, gets her friend Agnes' cop husband (Gilbert Melki) to follow him, which makes him more paranoid. Eventually things end up at the chalet where Belvaux's escaped political prisoner character (central in the Cavale/On the Run panel) is hiding--the chalet being the main link with other episodes. This is generally and not without reason considered the weakest of the three films in The Trilogy. It's thin and repetitious pretty much throughout, and though poised as a comedy, its main character's obsession with death is hardly funny.

As one French critic wrote, he might have done better if he'd just made one good film. Mahohla Dargis wrote that 'The Trilogy' was "more conceptually fascinating than cinematically engaging." "'The Trilogy'" (she also wrote) "is nothing if not a logistical coup. Inspired by the way genre determines meaning, Belvaux used three editing teams to shape his overlapping stories and the results are (these three films)." In the third, which I haven't seen yet, 'Apres la vie'/'After the Life,' the genre is drama (or melodrama) and in it Melki, the cop, falls in love with Cecile, the wife who's hired him to investigate her husband. It's generally agreed that Melki shines in 'The Trilogy'. I also like Catheriine Frot, who is important in 'Cavale.'

Belvaux's 'Trilogy' is good potential material for a film course (comparison of genres, alternate takes, etc.), but the basic content of each film could be better. The hope with Belvaux's 'Trilogy' has to be that the whole is more than the parts.

Lucas Belvaux approached this film with a lot of ideas. This is the second of the trilogy that was recently released. Being curious as to what it was about, I ventured to see this installment and the next one, but will not see the first one.

At the beginning of the story, we see Alain, a successful lawyer, who goes to pieces when his doctor tells him, a small operation must be performed. When he asks if it is serious, the doctor reassures him, it's routine. Well, this news makes Alain reconsider "what if" this procedure is cancer.

Alain goes to extremes to keep it from his wife and family, thus triggering the mechanism for this comedy of errors he embarks. Some of it is mildly funny, most is tedious. The only redeeming feature in the film is that Ornella Muti plays Cecile, Alain's suffering wife.

It would have been much simple for Alain to confide in Cecile at the expense of not having the comedy thus created by his misjudgment.