Un homme et une femme, 20 ans déjà

Sometimes Claude Lelouch makes good films or masterpieces, sometimes not at all.

This sequel of "Un homme et une femme" is useless. It's not a bad movie in itself, because it's well acted, well made and very refined -high quality is a trademark in Lelouch movies. That's why I give 4 stars out of 10...

But it's a useless project. Was it necessary to go back to the story and spoil the original picture? The 1966 film is very simple -it's a masterpiece because of that. There are only Jean-Louis Trintignant and Anouk Aimée, the chemistry is incredible. The film is really poetic, we don't want to know how their love story goes on.

In the 1986 sequel we find them 20 years later -Lelouch tells us what they have become and how they meet again. There are other characters and facts which intersect with them.

As I said not a really bad movie, but it doesn't stand comparison at all with the original. It would have been better not to produce it.

I have a copy of this film and I do watch it from time to time. While I don't think it's so horrible, I could definitely do without the whole crazy patient/doctor/murder storyline. The rest of the movie, I like.

It's interesting to see Jean-Louis and Anne interacting with their now grown up children and to see what paths their lives took after their very brief fling. I think the chemistry is still there between them, and I think they actually look like real middle aged people, not the "perfect plastic botox people" that we so often see in today's films...

I gave this film a 8 out of 10 because(despite it's flaws)it was nice to catch up with the lives of Jean-Louis and Anne.

If you saw "Un Homme et un Femme" and loved it, do yourself a favor and don't watch this one.

I believe Lelouch needed a few extra bucks because this film ruins the story of the first. Did we need to know what happened to Anne and Jean-Louis 20 minutes after the first movie is over? Not really.

And even if you consider this film alone, its still a very boring flick. And pointless. The story makes too many detours with their every day life: what they do now, how they evolved, and constantly needs the support of the first film to make a little sense. At the end of it, one is left with a bitter aftertaste of having betrayed the beautiful first story. Second parts are seldom good, and this movie proves it perfectly.

Hi just greetings.. I was born in 2002, and it is amazing to see how time flickers... hope all reviewers have a good life.

Having exquisite memories of the first film, "A Man and a Woman", I looked forward to seeing the sequel, "A Man and a Woman: 20 Years Later."

Yes, there were the famous faces and superb actors (Aimee and Trintigant), looking very little the worse for wear; in other words, wonderful. So expressive, both of them, in facial expression, mood expressions and fantastic acting. However, they are in a losing vehicle, with this film. It is so unmoving, that it relies on several subplots to impart to it some action. Hardly fair to two such stellar actors! They deserve better. And the viewer, alas, deserves better. I am, however, grateful for small things - and if seeing those two magnetic characters again thrilled and elated me...what's a plot? Yes, I would recommend it to any viewer who feels as I do about great actors. Just don't look for anything more; simply bask in their respective glows. Hence, my title: A Bittersweet Viewing Experience.