Reviews

Ben is a murderer. Remy, a director, and his crew try to make a documentary of Ben's life. An absurd central idea and it makes you wonder how it will eventually work out. In 'C'est arrivé pres de chez vous' it works out pretty damn good.

What the audience gets to see is a 'documentary', the 'actual footage' of Remy and his crew. The interesting aspect of this movie is that first of all Ben seems a psycho - but in the course of the film the crew also gets pretty psychopathic. The question arises whether this crew gets accessory to the crimes that Ben commits.

The main focus of this film is on a philosophical level. What is reality? Do we see the truth or do we see an exaggerated form of reality? Belvaux plays with this question. It makes it a postmodern movie with postmodern philosophical questions. A beautiful example is the encounter with another murderer, that is also followed by a film crew. This is not only enormously hilarious, but also clear proof of the multiple realities that this movie tries to hand out to the audience. There are dozens of other examples of this postmodern approach of reality.

Normal ethic morals lose their significance. Violence and humor collide into a never ending hilarious stream of images and dialogues. It makes us feel comfortable with all the violence. Child killing, rape, robbery - the audience simply can't seem to stop laughing. The taboo breaking character of this film, makes us think of our own morals? "Do we still have them when we laugh about these serious matters?" Again a postmodern issue: what are ethics, what is morality?

For those reasons 'C'est arrivé pres de chez vous' isn't just a joke from a few filmmakers. It is a question for it's viewers. What are you watching? And why the %&*@#$ are you laughing?

There are but a few movies that really leave me dazed. It is this film, 'Lost in Translation', that (since quite some time) made me think about the importance of characters and their internal communication. A question rises while evaluating this movie: is the charm of this movie product of the script or the actors? Or is it both? Maybe neither? The beauty of this film is the setting in another country and another culture. Man is accustomed to look for familiar bits and pieces, when he or she is put in unknown surroundings. Bill Murray, who plays an unforgettable role, seeks just a little recognition and affection when everything he does is misunderstood and uncomprehended. He finds it in the beautiful Charlotte (Johansson). The openings scene, where Charlotte is pictured all alone is confronting, but showing us the atmosphere of the film: alienation and growing lonelier when facing unknown settings. This is the reason why 'Lost in Translation' isn't a comedy. Hell no! The main theme, in my view, is communication. The problem is the fact that were dealing with two sexes and that loneliness can be pretty hard to handle. So the inevitable consequence is love? Not entirely, I'd call it friendship. Helping each other through a period they both don't want to be in. But then again, now they've met each other... Coppola made a beautiful movie, that puts the characters in the centre. And that is what should happen more in movies nowadays: it's not about the story, really, it's about falling in love with the characters.

Five of five... 'nuff said.