Maidexpl
Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast
Seraherrera
The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity
Sameer Callahan
It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.
edward dardis
Our film festival in Vancouver keeps bringing his films (which I have sat through a few and never been impressed), so he must be a critic's darling, but this is terribly dull.I agree completely with Moustache review. Someone else suggested Elegant, but Decadent might be closer to the mark. What does an old man make a film about? An old man, of course! Not that an old man can't be interesting of course, but he seems to have nothing to say that I can decipher. There's certainly no fire in the belly, candles burning out would be closer! The female lead is completely successful, but I can certainly see why Catherine Deneuve would have given this a pass! Edward Dardis Van BC
Roland E. Zwick
Running just a little over an hour in length, "Belle Toujours" is Portuguese director Manoel de Oliveira's homage to "Belle De Jour," the classic French film from the 1960s, written and directed by Luis Bunuel. The original featured Catherine Deneuve as a beautiful bored housewife with masochistic fantasies who whiles away her afternoons working as a prostitute in a Paris brothel. In the "sequel," Michel Piccoli returns as Henri Husson, the friend who first suggested the brothel to Severine, and who, all these years later, has decided to have a rendezvous with the woman.Though Piccoli reprises his role from the first movie, Severine is played by a different actress (Bulle Oglier), a casting imbalance that plays havoc with the symmetry of the piece. At least for "A Man and a Woman: Twenty Years Later," yet another misguided attempt at recapturing the magic of an earlier film, both Anouk Aimee and Jean-Louis Trintignant showed up for the reunion - though one can certainly sympathize with Deneuve's reluctance to lend her talents to this film, which is smug, self-indulgent, talky and inert, and does nothing to enhance one's memory of the original work (happily, the utter innocuousness of the film also prevents it from HARMING that memory as well).Henri basically spends the first two-thirds of the movie vainly trying to "connect" with Severine (they keep just missing one another, like in one of those Feydeau bedroom farces), and the last third dining with her in an opulent private room where they talk at length about the past and she tries to convince him that she's a "different" woman from the one he knew before - which should be perfectly obvious to anyone who remembers Catherine Deneuve. Then it all culminates in a fizzle-out ending, and we're left dumbfounded and openmouthed, wondering what the purpose for any of it could possibly have been.One thing, however, is certain: "Belle Toujours" is a complete waste of time and film.
RainDogJr
Last Thursday start the most famous film event in Mexico City: La Muestra International De Cine. This event show recent films that were in the biggest festivals like Cannes and others. This year there are two films that i can't miss: Paranoid Park and The Darjeeling Limited and also i want to see 4 months 3 weeks & two days, but for me is always nice to can watch the rest of the films.Last weekend i have the chance to see Belle Toujours and i was a little disappointed about the film. Luis Buñuel make Belle De Jour in 1967 and this film is like a second part and a tribute to Buñuel. I have to say that i haven't see Belle De Jour and after see this one i don't feel the need to do it.Well about the film: Is about this same characters of Buñuel's film that have this secret affair and now 30 years later they met again. The film start in the opera and is very good because is like you are in the concert and when the song ends i almost clap. Later the film doesn't have a real point and for me was a little boring, more in the part when they are eating is a very strange scene. I put 6.6 out of 10 to this film, just for the part in the bar that i really like, is like a film of Jim Jarmsuch, slow and with excellent dialogs between the characters in strange situations.So i found this as a very strange film that maybe work better without the need to be a tribute to Luis Buñuel.
xzeta
I remember reading somewhere that Oliveira's film works as a symbol of the impossible reconciliation between past and present, between cinema (with its passion for manipulation) and reality (with its relentless curiosity for the truth), two dimensions that clash irremediably in modern times.Personally, I found this to be a excellent comedy, full of delicious winks to symbolic surrealism (the Joan of arc statue, the rooster scene!), a mayor work in Oliveiras impressive catalog and a proper tribute to Buñuel's work. It's a bit sad that it has been terribly underrated by "major" critics around the globe (Cahiers, etc.) *Taken from a comment I made to filmref.com
