Vortex

Ok, so Gaspar Noe chose this story, a heartbreaking story on its own. But the fact that he himself had a life-threatening brain hemorrhage makes this film much more personal. And this somewhat unique approach (that feels a bit of a gimmick) to filming this family drama makes it all a layer deeper and more interesting.

I just can hope my parents don't go on the mental health issues route at an old age. I can hope that for everyone but for some it is inevitable. Right now I feel incapable of forming meaningful words regarding this film. It was interesting to see Dario Argento as a main character, he did a great job and he carried this movie.

All in all, it's still a very Gaspar Noe film in the sense that it makes you uncomfortable with such ease it turns into a horror movie.

Unlike Noe's previous films, Vortex is an understated, slow-paced, intimate character piece. Who knew that Dario Argento could give such a brilliant performance? And Francoise Lebrun... just wow. The rest of the cast are fine in their roles as well, but this is a movie about two characters, and they were cast perfectly. Where the movie really struggles, however, is in its pacing and editing. It is simply 30-40 minutes too long. Scenes drag on endlessly. There can be a hypnotic quality to some of the mundane scenes, but not enough to justify the drag. A tighter edit would have made a difference. Perhaps one of these days we will get a director's cut that re-edits the movie and makes it a bit tighter overall. However, there is a lot to appreciate in the film. It is worth seeing for the acting performances alone. It takes on an important topic and handles it gracefully. It shows that the director is a versatile craftsman who is not afraid of breaking the mold and taking risks that mostly pay off.

Françoise Lebrun delivers an outstanding and unforgettable portrayal as Elle, a lady in her senior years struck down with dementia and living in a world that's alien, confusing, bewildering and extremely dangerous. So convincing is her presentation that you spend most of the film half believing that she must genuinely be suffering, that this is a documentary, a fly on the wall observation. Similarly, Dario Argento fulfils the role of the loving but ever so slightly irritated grumpy old man, wishing to get on with his life while more often than not, turning a blind eye to his wife's descent, knowing only too well the consequences once others take control of the situation.

This film recognises what most people have gone through, or will go through, either directly or as close witnesses. Filmed in an imaginative style by the progressive Gaspar Noé, my only complaint is that I was extremely keen for the end to arrive as it outstayed its welcome by around 30 minutes and, as such, I'm unlikely to revisit it again any time soon.

Watched Vortex at the very first night it was screening in Paris. To be fair, I don't understand French and there were no subtitles, but it made me feel vulnerable and bitter even in that circumstance.

The movie doesn't contain scenes of any kind of abuse as other Gaspar Noe movies, but still, it leaves you looking blank at the screen. Before going in to the movie theater I knew what the movie was about and I've seen the trailer as well; however, Noe still managed to impress me and others. When the movie ended everyone at the theater was extremely quite, and their faces looked like the movie touched their souls somehow; and I think that's because every single scene is so real. There are no surreal settings or extreme characters that you probably wouldn't meet throughout your life, every scene feels like you could have been there.

Also, the split screen (in my opinion) explains how even though you meet people and spend some, or most of your life with them, at the end, you're all alone. I feel like this is a common theme Noe enjoys reminding his viewers, and to me, this technique did the job quite right. I especially enjoyed watching Françoise Lebrun's facial expression and hand while the screen was splitting: I don't know whether this was done on purpose, but it made me think that she was anxious because she was realizing how they're drawn apart, and tried to prevent it until the very last moment.

Structure-wise, it's nothing like other movies of Gaspar Noe's- I guess it's more of an experimental one; so you might be disappointed if you expect the crazy visuals, the scenes built around 'dirty realism', or that underground feeling in general. But feeling-wise, Gaspar Noe once again managed to draw the audience into their own inner worlds and leave them alone with their staggering emotions. I definitely think this movie is more than another product of the culture industry that you consume mindlessly and instinctively, and rather an actual piece of art that makes you feel emotions. Can't wait to see the English version!

I had the opportunity of seeing Gaspar's newest film at the 74th Cannes Film Festival this year. Being an admirer of his entire filmmography as well as one of my favorite working directors, I was very much excited to see this premiere. I knew close to nothing about it, but the poster and title seemed to offer somerthing both different and promising.

And I think we will all agree this is different. I was expecting a new version of "Enter The Void" this time dealing with old age instead of DMT, but this wasn't the case at all. This film isn't exactly completely new territory for Gaspar, but it's the first time he lazer focuses on making an emotional impact mainly through his actor's performances. In so many of his other works, his directing style is bold and brash, making use of several filmmaking techniques to match the style of his films in accordance with their substance. In "Irréversible", he filmed every scene in one take to add a sense of immersion and show both the ugly and the beauty of the events with little artifice. He also showed the events backwards, to add to the theme of time being the ultimate destructor. In "Enter The Void", he used POV shots and special effects to make the camera go through walls, in "I Stand Alone" he made great use of transitions between shots etc...

All of his previous films have had something to do with violence, drugs, sex, trauma, the human condition, time and death. His cinema now has the reputation for being intensely extreme, filled with shocking content and insane stories offering one-of-a-kind experiences for the viewer. And although this film is definetly a Gaspar Noé film, it truly doesn't fit in neatly with the rest of his filmmography.

Forget all the neon lights and the stroboscoping effects, forget the explicit sex scenes. Forget the hallucinogenic escapades and the nightmarish parties. This film deals with an aging couple comming to terms with their deaths and the impending doom that awaits them. In short, it's a film about old age, dementia and death. The first 20 minutes or so will clearly set the tone for the rest of the film, as they are almost completely silent, long takes of the two characters waking up and starting their day while someone on the radio explains the ways in which people cope with death and the meaning behind how we deal with grief.

There are still traces of Gaspar's filmmaking, most notably in his signature transitions using a black screen for one second between some shots, as well as the decision to have the entire film happen in split screen. According to him, this choice was to showcast the character's different expriences happenning at the same time, since, to quote from "I Stand Alone" : "we are born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Alone with your flesh, alone with your life which is like a tunnel that's impossible to share". Here, the split screen serves as a way of constantly reminding the spectator of this "tunnel".

However, these are the main two stylistic choices and the rest of the film rests entirely on the shoulders of the actors to carry the emotions in every scene, especially with a subject matter this bleak. When it comes to this, every one of them did their job perfectly (especially Françoise Lebrun), allowing for some of the most tragic, personnal and saddest moments in Gaspar's entire career. Never before had we felt this level of intimacy in so many scenes. You could find similar moments in "I Stand Alone" with the father/daughter relationship or the brother and sister love in "Enter The Void". Here, these moments are the core of the film, and when they come, they sure do it their mark.

However, there is one major problem I had with this film, which is something I have said about some of his other films, notably "Enter The Void" : it's just way too damn long. So many scenes and sequences drag out for minutes without any noticeable action or involvement. The characters are seen in their daily life and we are shown the incidents that come with living with somebody's dementia, notably Alzheimer's. As I've mentionned before, the film begins with very long takes of those daily actions, and how Françoise Lebrun's character copes (or rather how she fails to cope) with her disease. This goes on for the entire film, and the only moments breaking from this excrutiatingly slow pacing are the scenes of dialogue between the couple and their son, played by Alex Lutz. These scenes are incredibly well acted, and just like most of Gaspar's films, they were mostly improvised and you can tell. This felt right, since it adds to the sense of naturalism the film was clearly going for.

Unfortunately, I think the film falls short of greatness because of this. This reminded me of two other films : the first one is "Amour" by Michael Haneke for obvious reasons, but Haneke's style seemed more fit to tackle this topic in this manner. The second one is David Lowery's "A Ghost Story", which deals with grief and most notably, explores death and how we cope with it from an existential point of view. In "Vortex", Gaspar also explores these themes, but with a 2h20min runtime, he bores and eventually loses the spectator before the film's final minutes can truly have an impact.

I still enjoyed it for what it tried to be, and for the performences. It's also very refreshing to see a more personnal film from Gaspar, away from his usual reputation and for the first time without an R or NC-17 rating. But I simply cannot put aside how long this film seemed. Just like with "Irréversible", he wrote a 10-page script and ended up with a 2 hour film, which is one of his shortcomings. I will probably watch it again sometime, when I'll really be in the mood for this again, and maybe I'll give it a 7 instead of a 6 after a few more viewings. But for now, this will definitely not be his masterpiece.