Well, I probably anticipated something more with this one. Or perhaps something else. Coming from Roger Frappier, producer of Maelstrom, and director Manon Briand (of Cosmos fame), I expected something more along the lines of Denis Villineuve or Andre Turpin. In other words, something New-Wavey, fresh, and arty. You do get something visually lavish, containing some great humour, and a nicely understated performed from Pascal Bussieres. However, you also get some trite sentimentality, poorly constructed religious iconography, and the overall feeling of something poppy and mainstream. There's nothing wrong with that, and I'm sure that this film will do very well with domestic audiences (I'm speaking of Quebec, primarily). But it hardly makes for the challenging, satisfying artistic experience of "Maelstrom" and "Un Crabe dans la Tete." Maybe I'm expecting too much. Or something it was never intended to be.
15 Reviews
Deceiving
Tokyo_ghost26 April 2003
When I saw the trailer of the movie and read the synopsis, I thought "Wow! This is going to be such a great movie!", but let me tell you I did not get what I was expecting.
The movie is a never-ending circle: at each time there is a new element, it ends up just like the other one before "because it's a movie about the resemblance of love and the tides, the sea" (as Manon Briand said herself in French when I saw her). It was a falsely profound movie, falling into total esotericism.
There were some funny parts, but the movie was not a comedy. The scenery was nice and the quality of the images was good too. The actors were good, but they were playing characters for whom I was unable to develop any kind of sympathy.
I believe this movie will be appreciated by many (and I was already proven that), but I think it's only OK to watch but not great at all.
[Actually, Luc Besson did about nothing in the movie. It was only his studio that helped a bit at realizing the film.]
The movie is a never-ending circle: at each time there is a new element, it ends up just like the other one before "because it's a movie about the resemblance of love and the tides, the sea" (as Manon Briand said herself in French when I saw her). It was a falsely profound movie, falling into total esotericism.
There were some funny parts, but the movie was not a comedy. The scenery was nice and the quality of the images was good too. The actors were good, but they were playing characters for whom I was unable to develop any kind of sympathy.
I believe this movie will be appreciated by many (and I was already proven that), but I think it's only OK to watch but not great at all.
[Actually, Luc Besson did about nothing in the movie. It was only his studio that helped a bit at realizing the film.]
Poetic But Too Explicit
Lex-1327 August 2003
This film has a lot of good things going for it. The cinematography is awesome if too artificial at times. Some of the takes are too clearly references to classic images but still make for a nice overall look. The acting is generally convincing and precise although a few lines drops the ambiance too abruptly.
The plot itself is interesting if taken as an artistic process. Suspension of disbelief helps greatly as it's best to immerse oneself in the overall experience rather than nitpick on details. Quite a few counterfactual errors are to be expected in such situations. In a way, this could have been a great film if some things had been taken out. At times, the viewer is spoon-fed an interpretation of the "poetry" of the film. Letting the art speak for itself would have helped greatly.
For some reason, the same is true of the previews. Simply put, they seem to say too much although it's hard to tell what effect they would have on someone who knows nothing of the movie.
Let's hope that, next time, Manon Briand will let her artistic sense free and not impose it on the viewer.
The plot itself is interesting if taken as an artistic process. Suspension of disbelief helps greatly as it's best to immerse oneself in the overall experience rather than nitpick on details. Quite a few counterfactual errors are to be expected in such situations. In a way, this could have been a great film if some things had been taken out. At times, the viewer is spoon-fed an interpretation of the "poetry" of the film. Letting the art speak for itself would have helped greatly.
For some reason, the same is true of the previews. Simply put, they seem to say too much although it's hard to tell what effect they would have on someone who knows nothing of the movie.
Let's hope that, next time, Manon Briand will let her artistic sense free and not impose it on the viewer.
Uneven but interesting film
Frank Khi Dou16 September 2002
This beautifully photographed film tells the story of a scientist woman trying to explain an unusual phenomenon taken place in the Saint-Lawrence river in a recluse region of northern Quebec. Her work will take her to a journey she was not expecting which primarily deals with her own private longings. Some may say that the film takes way too long to get to the point which, from that perspective, must be the love story. Others may argue the exact opposite; that the love story is secondary to the natural disaster plot it therefore dilutes. I tend to believe that both stories are moving along at the same rate which is fairly slow and might even be perceived as hesitant. The overall effect is one of a very well done piece of cinema with a powerful dramatic finale but also of an almost lazy script that should have went through a couple more rewrites. In short, an uneven film with still lots of charm.
Much more than I expected
lauclair200012 December 2002
When I saw this was a movie produced by Luc Besson, I was reluctant to see it, because his choices are obviously not mine. But the topics and the Canadian location made me see it anyway. And, for the first time, a Besson production (through his company Europa Corp.) is a movie worth seeing! Amazing! Of course, you can't go without the obsessive Asian sub-plot Besson seems to put in all the movies he produced (is it in the writer's contract to add it???), but the slow pace of action and the ethereal music takes you in quite an interesting universe.
A good surprise, then, that I don't recommend to fans of other Besson productions (Watch out: No martial arts and no poor dialogs in this movie!!!).
A good surprise, then, that I don't recommend to fans of other Besson productions (Watch out: No martial arts and no poor dialogs in this movie!!!).
A Small Art Film from Quebec
ronchow16 November 2012
This is not a 'great' film from Quebec but I find it worth my time. At places it was uneven, but the storyline and the characters portrayed in the film are interesting enough to hold my attention throughout.
Acting by actress Pascale Bussières was a bit constraint at times but she was fairly convincing as a scientist with a troubled past. The opening of the film showed her working in Tokyo but this portion of the plot is later on proved to be totally unnecessary and irrelevant to the story.
The film has other shortcoming too. But if you keep in mind this is a low-budget art film, you will still get quite a bit of enjoyment out of it.
Acting by actress Pascale Bussières was a bit constraint at times but she was fairly convincing as a scientist with a troubled past. The opening of the film showed her working in Tokyo but this portion of the plot is later on proved to be totally unnecessary and irrelevant to the story.
The film has other shortcoming too. But if you keep in mind this is a low-budget art film, you will still get quite a bit of enjoyment out of it.
I love this movie.
wse4 February 2003
A beautiful, thought-provoking and sexy film about what happens when a seismologist returns to her home town to investigate the mysterious cessation of the tide.
This movie surprised and intrigued me. I never knew where it was going, but I was satisfied by where it took me. The opening sequence alone (set in Tokyo) was worth the price of admission.
Funny and tragic at the same moment.
I can see why Pascal Bussiere is a star in Quebec. She brings us into her story even as her character holds the world at arm's length. When she began to feel the effects of the tidal disturbance, I felt them too.
I found director Manon Briand articulate and charming when she came to the Vancouver International Film Festival, but by then I had already seen and fallen in love with her movie.
This one is definitely worth watching.
This movie surprised and intrigued me. I never knew where it was going, but I was satisfied by where it took me. The opening sequence alone (set in Tokyo) was worth the price of admission.
Funny and tragic at the same moment.
I can see why Pascal Bussiere is a star in Quebec. She brings us into her story even as her character holds the world at arm's length. When she began to feel the effects of the tidal disturbance, I felt them too.
I found director Manon Briand articulate and charming when she came to the Vancouver International Film Festival, but by then I had already seen and fallen in love with her movie.
This one is definitely worth watching.
I love this movie.
wse3 February 2003
A beautiful, thought-provoking and sexy film about what happens when a seismologist returns to her home town to investigate the mysterious cessation of the tide.
This movie surprised and intrigued me. I never knew where it was going, but I was satisfied by where it took me. The opening sequence alone (set in Tokyo) was worth the price of admission. Funny and tragic at the same moment.
I can see why Pascal Bussiere is a star in Quebec. She brings us into her story even as her character holds the world at arm's length. When she began to feel the effects of the tidal disturbance, I felt them too.
I found director Manon Briand articulate and charming when she came to the Vancouver International Film Festival, but by then I had already seen and fallen in love with her movie.
This one is definitely worth watching.
This movie surprised and intrigued me. I never knew where it was going, but I was satisfied by where it took me. The opening sequence alone (set in Tokyo) was worth the price of admission. Funny and tragic at the same moment.
I can see why Pascal Bussiere is a star in Quebec. She brings us into her story even as her character holds the world at arm's length. When she began to feel the effects of the tidal disturbance, I felt them too.
I found director Manon Briand articulate and charming when she came to the Vancouver International Film Festival, but by then I had already seen and fallen in love with her movie.
This one is definitely worth watching.
way too corny
dmmism7 August 2010
This movie is unbelievably corny, and it's pretty disappointing at the end. I didn't mind it for most of the movie, but I was sort of appalled come the end--or, rather, a few minutes before the end, when the whole thing comes to wrap (or, in my opinion, completely unravel).
In fact, this movie is what inspired me to finally register at IMDb to write a review.
Julie Gayet earns the first three stars. The fourth goes to the rest of the cast and a fifth to the overall production being decent.
But yeah, this script seemed to be written by a high school junior who just got dumped and was trying to woo back his love...or otherwise attempting--and failing fantastically--to be profound.
In fact, this movie is what inspired me to finally register at IMDb to write a review.
Julie Gayet earns the first three stars. The fourth goes to the rest of the cast and a fifth to the overall production being decent.
But yeah, this script seemed to be written by a high school junior who just got dumped and was trying to woo back his love...or otherwise attempting--and failing fantastically--to be profound.
Wow!
babecat8 August 2003
This movie was announced in the Gothenburg film festival catalog as "a philosophical thriller", something that caught my eye as being quite a mix...
This is a movie that surprises and gives more than you expect. Mysterious, sexy, unpredictable. I suspect though that this type of movie doesn't appeal to everyone, one has to be open for the mysterious part of it, and let go of control, not trying to set up in your mind what you think the movie ought to be. Instead, keep an open mind. This mind-turning movie is quite an experience!
This is a movie that surprises and gives more than you expect. Mysterious, sexy, unpredictable. I suspect though that this type of movie doesn't appeal to everyone, one has to be open for the mysterious part of it, and let go of control, not trying to set up in your mind what you think the movie ought to be. Instead, keep an open mind. This mind-turning movie is quite an experience!
This movie is just too inconsistent
sansay9 October 2005
First it starts with a great sci-fi looking introduction set in Japan. Then we get thrown into a little place in Quebec, and everything falls apart into a mystic's delirium. Oh well. I don't need to add anything to this comment since Greg Novik wrote it all in here already. Thanks Greg for saving me the effort with your excellent review.
I also was quite puzzled and disappointed since this movie was rated 7 at the time when I rented it. I just don't get it, usually high ratings at IMDb are well deserved. Not so in this case.
I can add this though, I have watched a few movies from Quebec lately and this is definitely one of the worst. Save your time... watch Quebec-Montreal for example, much more clever and fun!
I also was quite puzzled and disappointed since this movie was rated 7 at the time when I rented it. I just don't get it, usually high ratings at IMDb are well deserved. Not so in this case.
I can add this though, I have watched a few movies from Quebec lately and this is definitely one of the worst. Save your time... watch Quebec-Montreal for example, much more clever and fun!
Does the word "Tripe" translate into French?
gnovik26 May 2003
Here is a film that starts with a great deal of promise and winds up leaving the viewer miserable, thirsting for a real ending.
If you are like me you will wonder if the producers of this film got government money to splurge on a trip to Tokyo. I suspect that was the only reason those expensive opening scenes could have been shot there. The Japanese scenes didn't make a bit of difference to the film and could have been faked for a lot less money.
As Canadian films go this one is really no different. Too much dialogue and pretensions to be an important work of film making. The plot seems to be some sort of Twin Peaks reincarnation, but without the real intrigue. As the movie plods along with some silly investigations of the quasi paranormal the viewer is lulled into a sense that nothing is going to happen. And really nothing does.
Then too late in the film an extremely important scene, perhaps the pivotal scene in a newspaper office comes along. By this point you'll be so bored you might miss it. The direction so dull that what should have been an extremely dramatic turning point, with intense lighting and close-ups and a sensible pace to allow us to absorb the importance of this scene. But no, it's an over lit room with a cliche newspaper editor. Who ever heard of a newspaper office in this day and age keeping a clipping file for a specif ic story? Even in Quebec they use computers. The whole film suffers from this kind of lack of attention to detail. Do they expect us to believe this stuff? Script doctor required.
The film might be about sex, or love, but it's so catholic and reserved about the sex it's something that no one at Disney would blush over. Count the kisses..are there two in the whole film?
The female lead is struggling with some deeply seated emotional trauma and this apparently is causing her to be callously casual about sex on one hand and in a bizarre turn around later, suffer a schoolgirl crush....madly trying to locate the object of her desire. The male "lead" if you can call someone who gets 15 minutes of screen time a lead, comes across one minute as a devil-may-care, jaunty risk-taker and then later he claims to be "shy". This kind of unexplained inconsistent character may be realistic to the director but for the viewer this guy comes across as a goof who acts like a sexy guy one minute and a fool the next.
The film could have been reduced by about a half hour and several characters cut without losing anything. In fact it would have been tighter and better paced if the editor had been a bit more ruthless. There are some puerile dabblings with a lesbian sub-plot which really goes nowhere. Incidently who ever heard of a police woman kissing a member of their own sex in a squad car. Then there's the singing nuns. That's how weird this movie can get. Oh did I mention the fact that the lead cannot swim? Who ever heard of this? She must be a rare creature indeed. The writers should learn that you can only stretch the disbelief of the audience so far---then it snaps and the whole film begins to look infantile.
The best guess is the writers decided they wanted to have some fun time in Japan so they wrote that in. They also wanted a nude scene, so they gave the lead the improbable role of a non-swimmer. You'll notice the male lead is never naked. Men always have time to get dressed before they panic. Women seem to be slow-dressers.
There is something distressingly childish about the direction of this film. Canadians aren't really this afraid of love and sex are they? If you last until the credits roll you may be just as disappointed as me. Another low for Canadian film making.
If you are like me you will wonder if the producers of this film got government money to splurge on a trip to Tokyo. I suspect that was the only reason those expensive opening scenes could have been shot there. The Japanese scenes didn't make a bit of difference to the film and could have been faked for a lot less money.
As Canadian films go this one is really no different. Too much dialogue and pretensions to be an important work of film making. The plot seems to be some sort of Twin Peaks reincarnation, but without the real intrigue. As the movie plods along with some silly investigations of the quasi paranormal the viewer is lulled into a sense that nothing is going to happen. And really nothing does.
Then too late in the film an extremely important scene, perhaps the pivotal scene in a newspaper office comes along. By this point you'll be so bored you might miss it. The direction so dull that what should have been an extremely dramatic turning point, with intense lighting and close-ups and a sensible pace to allow us to absorb the importance of this scene. But no, it's an over lit room with a cliche newspaper editor. Who ever heard of a newspaper office in this day and age keeping a clipping file for a specif ic story? Even in Quebec they use computers. The whole film suffers from this kind of lack of attention to detail. Do they expect us to believe this stuff? Script doctor required.
The film might be about sex, or love, but it's so catholic and reserved about the sex it's something that no one at Disney would blush over. Count the kisses..are there two in the whole film?
The female lead is struggling with some deeply seated emotional trauma and this apparently is causing her to be callously casual about sex on one hand and in a bizarre turn around later, suffer a schoolgirl crush....madly trying to locate the object of her desire. The male "lead" if you can call someone who gets 15 minutes of screen time a lead, comes across one minute as a devil-may-care, jaunty risk-taker and then later he claims to be "shy". This kind of unexplained inconsistent character may be realistic to the director but for the viewer this guy comes across as a goof who acts like a sexy guy one minute and a fool the next.
The film could have been reduced by about a half hour and several characters cut without losing anything. In fact it would have been tighter and better paced if the editor had been a bit more ruthless. There are some puerile dabblings with a lesbian sub-plot which really goes nowhere. Incidently who ever heard of a police woman kissing a member of their own sex in a squad car. Then there's the singing nuns. That's how weird this movie can get. Oh did I mention the fact that the lead cannot swim? Who ever heard of this? She must be a rare creature indeed. The writers should learn that you can only stretch the disbelief of the audience so far---then it snaps and the whole film begins to look infantile.
The best guess is the writers decided they wanted to have some fun time in Japan so they wrote that in. They also wanted a nude scene, so they gave the lead the improbable role of a non-swimmer. You'll notice the male lead is never naked. Men always have time to get dressed before they panic. Women seem to be slow-dressers.
There is something distressingly childish about the direction of this film. Canadians aren't really this afraid of love and sex are they? If you last until the credits roll you may be just as disappointed as me. Another low for Canadian film making.
Loved it--2 big thumbs up
thayes-1631 March 2008
What a cool movie! I can't wait to watch it again. Watching Pascale drive her big truck down the road while 'Hey Good Lookin' plays on the 8-track---it doesn't get better than that. Except when Julie Gayet explains the attraction between the earth and the moon to little Camille. Or when Pascale yells 'Encore! Encore!' to the delight of the singing nuns. Or the magical ice cream cone that never went down more than 1/4" even though Camille was licking it all during the time her dad was making out with Pascale on the beach.
Quite the fantastic movie, and one I will have to see over and over again.
Quite the fantastic movie, and one I will have to see over and over again.
Nostalgia...
sborj29 May 2005
My comment is very biased. I am from Baie-Comeau, but I left the town 10 years ago. Watching the movie on TV was just an excuse to have a glimpse of the nice Côte-Nord scenery. To me, it was like a game...trying to find where each scene was shot. The very short cemetery scene was filmed in my home village! (Pointe-aux-Outardes) To me, it was a good opportunity to see some familiar landscapes.
I liked the movie very much. As usual, Pascale Bussières does an incredible job. However, like a few other viewers, I was left with the feeling that a lot of my questions remained unanswered at the end of the movie. I would have liked to get clear answers to all the "unusual" phenomena that occur in the movie. Finally, it was nice to see Geneviève Bujold back on the screen! I always wondered what had happened to her since I saw "Anne of the Thousand Days" as a teenager. Bravo Manon Briand! Continue ton beau travail!
I liked the movie very much. As usual, Pascale Bussières does an incredible job. However, like a few other viewers, I was left with the feeling that a lot of my questions remained unanswered at the end of the movie. I would have liked to get clear answers to all the "unusual" phenomena that occur in the movie. Finally, it was nice to see Geneviève Bujold back on the screen! I always wondered what had happened to her since I saw "Anne of the Thousand Days" as a teenager. Bravo Manon Briand! Continue ton beau travail!
A warm and humorous film with a powerful resolution
howard.schumann10 February 2003
In the warm and humorous Quebecois film, Chaos and Desire, shown at last year's Vancouver Film Festival, Alice Bradley, played by the lovely Pascale Bussieres, is a seismologist working in Japan studying the factors that can predict earthquakes. When the tides mysteriously stop flowing on the St. Lawrence River in her hometown of Baie Comeau, she returns to investigate and comes up against the bizarre behavior of local residents. In one instance, a little Chinese girl (Ji-Yan Séguin) sleepwalks every night at the exact same time. In others, a woman chops down every tree in her front yard, and the phone number of a fire-fighting pilot named Marc Vandal (Jean-Nicolas Verreault) has been ripped out of every phone book in town.
Running from a troubled past and consumed by loneliness, Alice must now deal not only with the problem of the tides but with a growing involvement with Vandal and the not so subtle advances of her journalist friend Catherine (Julie Gayet). When Alice uncovers the film's central mystery, the presumed drowning of Vandal's wife, the investigation turns away from science to the world of spirit and achieves a resolution of surprising power.
Running from a troubled past and consumed by loneliness, Alice must now deal not only with the problem of the tides but with a growing involvement with Vandal and the not so subtle advances of her journalist friend Catherine (Julie Gayet). When Alice uncovers the film's central mystery, the presumed drowning of Vandal's wife, the investigation turns away from science to the world of spirit and achieves a resolution of surprising power.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
