Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Wordiezett So much average

ChanBot i must have seen a different film!!

Pluskylang Great Film overall

runamokprods A kidnapping thriller that has a dark noir side, as well as an interesting look at wealth, politics and morality. Throw in a complex family drama and a deeply flawed main character, and you have a familiar situation raised into a well above average film. Visually sharp, suffused with an intense energy, even in the quiet scenes, the kidnapping of super wealthy industrialist Stanislas Graff opens a Pandora's box of questions about the man's lifestyle; his mistresses, his gambling debts, that leave his powerful 'friends' backing away from their desire to pay to get the man back, and makes his steadfast wife question the complacency with which she has accepted how things are. The film makes the very dark point that the kidnappers, while awful and terrifying, in some ways are more honest, direct and even human than the upper-class .1% of the world that Stanislas is usually surrounded by, and is part of himself. There are weaknesses. Some of it gets repetitive, and the ending is intentionally telegraphed (why?) and not very satisfying or thought provoking. Also, in attempting to deal with so many themes, ideas and story threads (cops, the business people, lawyers, the family, the kidnap victim, the kidnappers, etc there isn't much of a chance to really dig beneath the surface of all these very intriguing characters and ideas. Stanislas' daughters, for example, are pretty much ciphers.But still a very worthwhile trip into unsettled, disturbing and questioning darkness.

rdescartes101 The players, the family, the business men, the politicians, the kidnappers, the police, the solicitor and of course, the victim. All with agendas, all seeking resolution and some seeking personal gain. Was the kidnapping the sole motivation? Was the avarice and greed of the business associates a prime motive? Were the family really the ideal family unit?Ans, none of the questions were answered. The wife's disdain for the apartment, the police motivation for showing it to her, all contribute to an ending that seeks more answers.The collapse of the kidnapping, Stan's business position, the police case and the kidnappers' demands. If it was his own doing would the "calypso" note have appeared? For the French, the affairs of the heart are common place. the younger daughter's manner through out the episode. Did the family love the man or the riches and life style? The complex but seemingly simple plot lines gave way to a multitude of questions and who would most benefit from the escapade? Who was responsible?

Rogermex I think some of my good friends here with the other reviews need to watch the film again. Some, not all.Yes, it's a somewhat slow and quiet film, beautifully shot and acted. Though supposedly of some sort of "thriller" genre it is actually a "thrillingly" excellent character study. Not the sort of example of humanity that is gratifying to see however.The main character's kidnapping and two months in captive isolation are essentially a metaphor for his own solitary confinement in his cold narcissism. He is no less his own prisoner than if he had contrived the kidnapping himself, as the police have reason to suspect.When his wife, and daughters, seek some sort of contact and contrition from him for the fact that his betrayals are now a matter of public disgrace, he quite coldly declares that it is himself alone who deserves pity and solace, and that he will explain to no one. His faithful dog is treated with more affection and care.You would naively think that his "ordeal" would effect some sort of transformation of his personality. Sorry, personalities, especially this kind, do not change so easily. He loses one of his fingers, but otherwise is intact. (Want some cheap symbolism? The finger is gone, but he easily lights up that big cigar of self-indulgence.) He knows, and we know, that the kidnappers have left him with a means not just to satisfy them with his money, but to "do the right thing" in preventing the further violent mayhem they threaten. Innocents will be killed at random. He does have the money: his shares of the company have been sold and his lawyer congratulates him for how extremely wealthy he still is. The kidnappers want their full 50 million.The film ends perfectly, I think. He sits alone in his palatial room on a regal chair, with his cigar. His wife is divorcing him, his daughters have been distanced by his coldness and empty claim of love. The "Calypso" message arrives. He sits. My understanding of his character, as it has been portrayed so consistently, is that he thinks to himself something like "that is no concern of mine."

John Raymond Peterson You may read the movie's official site's outline and the IMDb storyline/summary but you will never get a feel for what this motion picture is really about until you view it for yourself. The storyline is merely the backdrop to what is actually happening. French audiences are use to the kind of scenario and the subtle direction method of a Lucas Belvaux this movie clearly is stamped with, American audiences not as much. That does not mean American (North American that is) audiences won't 'get it' but it does imply many of you reading this review may be disappointed by the movie if what you were hoping to watch was another kidnapping for ransom movie, as advertised; that, it simply is not.In my opinion, the film is a work of art in the way the characters are brought to the audience, one thin layer at the time; there are many layers peeled away during the kidnapping for ransom in progress. Like the movie "Proof of Life", the story takes place over a long period of time, compared to most all other ransom movies; that is the first of many elements that make the picture feel so real. In order to achieve its goal, the real drama experienced by the key characters, the pace has to be slow at times so we can focus on the players. I could swear the director has studied magic; who knows, I did not bother to check.The movie ends most abruptly if you are not peeking at your watch. I felt short-changed for a minute after the movie ended before I realized the point of the movie was not at all what I had fooled myself in believing. Yes, it's true, many French movies, like this one, dare to make you think even after the movie is over. What you get is not what you see but what you look for. A celebrated French author wrote long ago "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away", and this movie says a whole lot with, relatively speaking, very little fanfare.At the end of the movie, I cursed it for a few seconds, then, rewinding it at warp speed in my mind, played it back in much the same manner over a nice cup of coffee; I concluded it was brilliant. Yvan Attal delivers, as usual, a flawless performance; it is not easy to capture both the sympathy and contempt of the viewer in the same movie, but he did here. What few action scenes are needed for the kidnapping story to unfold, the movie did not quibble and delivered. The way the movie ends will have you conjuring up several more scenes to suit your idea of what should have been the better ending, but there isn't a better more purposeful ending; that sort of thing reminded me of a style more popular in French movies of a few generations ago, but it is still effective today. Enough said; you know by now if it is the kind of movie for you.