Léolo

Which came first, the disturbing or the disturbed? This is a difficult film for me to assay. Certainly I did not enjoy "Leolo" but then there are many films I have appreciated which I did not enjoy. Despite being tagged as such, this film was never a comedy for me, outlandish scenes too often were tainted by a ring of tragic truth. Well, I should clarify and say "at least an emotional truth."

This film reminded me of Baudelaire and Rabelais. I remember in my late teens, seeking out those poets feeling that I should appreciate them from the little I had heard about them. Someone probably mentioned Iggy Pop in the same breath with 'em. Anyways, their poems never did connect with me, I remember thinking that something in translation or in the transatlantic crossing was lost upon me. This film has many moments like that (despite a shorter journey down from Canada), but cast amidst shining gems of genius. One example, the recurrent use of the refrigerator light, and other illumination, shining over Leolo's shoulder.

This film slips and dips into the "rabelaisian" in the reduced definition, i.e. a fecal focus. A childhood is deprived more than depraved, but a little of both. If any sexual appetite is offensive for you, than this film is not for you... Spend your time on some counseling instead.

And yet for me, much of the film was grotesque...and I think that's a nearly perfect word for it, what with its stylish franco-suffix... gracefully covering over its seamier stewings. Like a sauce over spoiled meat.

But as I think more about this film: the merd, the bugs, the dead dog in the canal...all of that waste, is not wasted. Instead the images, the reviling of an earthly existence drive us off the screen and into the voiced-over poetry of Leolo. Even in translation and subtitle, the words had a precise beauty. A beauty I feel was intentionally and successfully accented by the sordid scenarios stitched together.

It would be an interesting test for someone to read the poetry from the screenplay first and then watch the film. Would the words be strong enough without the sights, sounds and implied smells of Leolo's world to suffice?

While I cannot honestly recommend this film (too many times I found myself hoping that a fade-to-black was final), it would be interesting to hear/read others' comments. I'll come back to the reviews here, and maybe the film in the future.

Til' then, I 'll give it a 6/10

PS Interesting. In posting my review the "s-word" now appears to be banned...so let them read "merd."

Perversity. Strangeness. Absurdity. Violence. Insanity.

Just like real life, eh? While many may feel "Lèolo" is way over the top, the film doesn't contain a single incident (excepting "Leo's" conception) that couldn't have happened. Some families are simply stranger than others! And what is one man's reality is another man's nightmare...

Add to that, a soundtrack of unmitigated brilliance, Tom Waits and those basso-profundo Mongolian bison-impersonators (or something). The auditorium was shaking in its foundations!

For the cutting edge of the term "bizarre", look no further.

I found this movie on a used VHS tape the other day and decided to check it out since it was a Canadian production.

Man, I can't decide whether I love or hate this movie. It's just plain weird! Sometimes it had me laughing (like in the beginning with the tomato, later when Leolo trades his flies for his sister's turd, etc); And then sometimes I was totally grossed out (like the cat scene). And the raw meat incident was sick, then later hilarious when it got served for dinner. There's definitely some "toilet" humour throughout this film.

Almost always I watch movies for enjoyment and I try not to analyse too much because it often spoils my enjoyment. But I've noticed some really deep analysis from previous reviewers regarding this film. And honestly, some of it is way too deep for me. (Maybe I'm the ignorant savage in the art museum.).

I wouldn't really class this movie as a comedy although it has some humorous scenes (very dark humour). I'd say this movie was more like a trip through a mental institution. It is a very haunting movie and I did find myself reflecting on it every so often for a while. It's a thinker for sure. It seemed sensitive, but in a very harsh way.

Acting was very good in my opinion. Any actor who can pull off roles like the ones in this movie has to be good.

Normally, I'm not fond of narration. But for some reason it didn't seem to bother me in this film. It sort of fit in better I guess.

This movie could freak out a lot of people. It's really worth watching, but not for young kids. I gave it 8 out of 10 because it was well acted, made me think on it, and it was certainly unique. Also I respect a person who goes against the flow to make something original.

To me, 'Léolo' is like a rare gemstone. A unique, surreal fairytale, which you can look at from many different angles and yet it remains hard to describe. Although there clearly is a structured narrative, I believe this film is more to be felt than understood. While it's often tragic and disturbing, it's also very funny and darkly comic. Somehow fitting for a story inspired by childhood memories, reality and fantasy are seamlessly interwoven to create an often dream-like, sometimes nightmarish atmosphere.

This was only director Jean-Claude Lauzon's second film, and sadly he never got to make more than two; he died in a plane crash while he was preparing his third film.

A beautiful, unforgettable work of art, albeit not one for the easily offended.

My vote: 10 out of 10

Favorite films: http://www.IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-known Masterpieces: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070242495/

Favorite Low-Budget and B-movies: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls054808375/

Favorite TV-Shows reviewed: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls075552387/

An honest portrayal of childhood from a young Montreal boy's perspective. Some truly great scenes. Redefines the meaning of a dysfunctional family and avoids the usual scenarios of telling the story of growing up in poverty. Highly recommended.