Boobirt Stylish but barely mediocre overall

Bereamic Awesome Movie

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Robert Stuhr I really tried hard to like it... but the film simply is boring. In spite of a charming Binoche and a promising story, Akerman fails to create any true atmosphere. She manages to create some funny scenes, but a couple of funny scenes do not make a comedy. Neither does the viewer care about Hurt and his psychoanalyst nor do we feel any warmth and human feelings in his beginning relationship with Binoche. No romantic sparks flying, at least I didn't see any. The dialogue is also not funny. This is the second film by Akerman I viewed, the other being The Captive, which also fails for the same reasons. Akerman may have delivered nuanced portraits of persons, especially women, in earlier films, but Un divan in New York lacks everything a comedy needs.

mifunesamurai A romantic screwball farce with some intelligence. A perfect role for William's style of vague acting that works up against the energetic and childish Juliette. Flimsy at times but fun to watch those awkward human moments caught in the love vacuum.

TxMike Wealthy, successful, fastidious NYC shrink (William Hurt) trades apartment with a French lady (Juliette Binoche)for a few weeks, they cross the Atlantic at the same time, never meet. Some of his patients visit her at the NY apt, end up on the "couch", they tell her all their troubles, pay in cash as she leaves, astonished at the unexpected income.Meanwhile the good doctor is having all kinds of problems in Paris, a water leak, a messy apartment, a jealous boyfriend who punches him, looking for his girl, so he goes back to NY, shows up unannounced, doesn't tell who he is, and promptly starts to fall in love with her. After a lot of posturing, and she saying she is returning the next day to Paris, he catches a flight there and beats her back by one day. He messes up the apartment to make her feel at home, she figures out who he really is, they kiss and share small talk in French as they go from the balcony into the bedroom.Binoche is just perfect as the sloppy and charming French girl. Hurt is a good actor but doen't have enough range for this type of role. In contrast, consider Kevin Kline's role in "French Kiss." Still, it is a somewhat enjoyable film, but pretty simplistic in its approach and climax. It reminds me more of the old Audrey Hepburn type of movie, much ado about nothing.

donalohanlon "Juliette Binoche cannot act", according to 'anonnymous' below. That isa ridiculous assertion. As is to link this film with Kieslowski's'Blue'. The problem with this movie is that neither Binoche nor Hurt aregiven the material in the form of a good screenplay nor the direction tomake the film work. It seems to me that Akerman, who is an excellentdirector, see La Captive, does not have a good enough command of Englishto write a screenplay in the language.The film, which starts out nicely quickly gets bogged down in thepsychoanalyitical. Endless "yes" and "mmmmm"s loose their amusementvalue quickly. The romance angle is badly developed, just why hasBeatrice fallen for John Wire aka Henry? It doesnt work.But Juliette Binoche can act. In fact in Europe she is regarded withIsabelle Huppert to be the finest actress working today. But she canonly produce the goods when she is given the material and the carefuldirection necessary. Go rent "Rendez-Vous", "The Unbearable Lightness ofBeing", "Les Amants du Pont-Neuf", "Three Colours Blue", "Alice &Martin", "The Widow of Saint-Pierre" and especially "Code Innconnu" andtry arguing otherwise.