not horrible nor great

Absolutely brilliant

The acting in this movie is really good.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

The film was okay, not brilliant but good enough to watch if you want an easy time with not much tension. It felt more like a soap opera episode. From the trailers I knew they would kill the original story but I thought it would still be a good movie, because of the actors. It's not horrible, the acting is fine and I like this way of filming, but the plot is quite shallow at parts and the characters do inexplicable things. There are serious plot holes, because the film makers spent lots of screen time showing us naked behinds of dead bodies and there was no time left for giving the characters some depth and consistency. The writers go straight to the point before the first ten minutes and then try to build tension on things that couldn't support it. All the plot holes are explained in the book.*spoiler*The scare wasn't in the possibility of a plague outburst but in not understanding how the trails were connected and why.If you've read the book or intend to do so, don't watch the film. Don't even think about it. It has changed EVERYTHING and reveals vital parts of the book in the first four minutes. Different characters, different plot, different ending. Only the basic story is the same, but that's like saying 'it's about a serial killer'. EVERYTHING is changed, this movie is definitely not based on F. Vargas book. In fact, it's the opposite for 75% of it.

The story is taken from a novel in a series by Fred Vargas. Inspector Adamsberg figures in most, but not all of those novels, each of which has an odd plot. I felt that I knew Adamsberg from the several novels, six in all. José Garcia is perfect. Adamsberg is vague, lonely, uncommunicative, and – at times – brilliant. He would be an irritating fellow to work with or for. Only his lieutenant Adrien Danglard has the patience and persistence to put up with his eccentricities, one of which is an inability to remember people's names, including his subordinates and colleagues. Perhaps the author intends this feature to indicate his unwillingness to commit to others. Adamsberg is at least as remote and annoying as Sherlock Holmes, but in different ways.The film makes the local community a character in the story. The Bar Viking, the plaza, the boarding house, the regulars all add to the texture of the story, and to some degree determine events. There are chases for those who must see movement and color on the screen to stay tuned, one over rooftops and another on roller skates. There is a shoot out for those who must have noise, though it seemed to add nothing to either plot or character.But the center of the film is Adamsberg, brooding and intense without saying a word very often. It is an unusual approach these days to rely on acting, rather than shouting, guns, or special effects, but it works. Garcia is compassionate and dedicated, but he is also guarded and vulnerable. He makes mistakes, but presses on. He does not defy authority, but occasionally asserts it slowly and steadily.When Adamsberg's famed intuition does occur, he is as confused by it, as the viewer is, but he works through it, as do we along with him.I hope the film leads to more the Vargas books being filmed and that José Garcia plays Adamsberg again, and again. This film was the last credit for the great Michel Serrault. He gave us much to think about over the years and a great deal of pleasure, too.

Parisians wake one morning to find black 4s painted on their doors. Later, a town crier (those still exist?) in Paris receives cryptic messages about the return of The Plague and, sure enough, people start dying the blackest of deaths. It is up to Commissar Adamsberg (José Garcia) to find out just what is going on. This is in the same mold as the CRIMSON RIVERS films and starts off great. But when the full mystery is finally revealed an hour in, you will be pleading for the complexity of a SCOOBY DOO episode. Seriously, the last 10 minutes actually features the killer basically saying, "And I would have gotten away with it too if it hadn't been for you..." Director Regis Wargnier (INDOCHINE) handles the multitude of characters well and there is a thrilling rooftop chase, but the film's reason for existing is a joke. The film adapts a novel by Fred Vargas, the pseudonym for Frédérique Audoin- Rouzea. Apparently Adamsberg is a recurring character in her stories and, just from what I have read briefly online, the guy is a bit more interesting that the lonely cop sketched here.

There are tons of movies based on books. Some are good, some are fine, and some are bad. As someone who read most of Fred Vargas's novels, I was quite disappointed by this movie adaptation of "Pars vite et reviens tard". There are too many plot and character changes, but, most importantly, the movie fails to seize the spirit of the novel - which effectively turns it in a bland and unoriginal police thriller.At its core, "Pars vite et reviens tard" (translated as "Have mercy on us all" in English) is a not-so-traditional police thriller in which we follow Commissaire Jean-Baptiste Adamsberg as he tries to catch a mysterious murderer who makes it seem as if the plague kills his victims. The general storyline is followed in the movie, but most of the finer points have been modified; arguably to make the story more accessible to people who haven't read the book. Indeed, there are lots of details in the book and it would be impossible to include everything. Still, they made some very odd changes that somewhat disturbs the flow and character development.In the same line of thought, the casting came in as a surprise. The much missed Michel Serrault delivers erudite Decambrais pretty well, but others are blatantly different (both in physical appearance and personality) than their book counterparts (Danglard, Adamsberg's sidekick, was particularly botched in my opinion: even calling him a foil is giving him too much credit). For the most part, I found the acting to be generally bland and uninspiring.Of course, it's impossible for a movie to be made as a carbon copy of a book (and then, such a thing could turn out bad). Minor edits to the plot line and the look of the actors are things that can be forgiven, at least up to a certain point. What really kills the movie in my opinion is how it turns the unique style of Vargas's writing in a run-of-the-mill thriller. Before being about a police officer who runs after a bad guy, Vargas's novels are about the psychological depth of her characters, particularly Adamsberg. In the movie, Adamsberg is a bland cop whose distinguishing feature is his need of a woman at night to be able to make progress in the case.Overall, "Pars vite et reviens tard" is a disappointing movie for those who read the book. For others, it could pass as a decent police thriller, although the average acting and flow issues make it less interesting. I would warn those people though not to judge Vargas's novels on this adaptation, as it would be a big mistake.