Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Claude Chabrol, a man that has distinguished himself for showing the nasty things people do one another, is at it again. Although "Merci pour le chocolat" is not one of his best contributions to the genre, it has a subtlety that shows he is was still up to his tricks when he made this movie.Mika Muller, was married briefly to the man she now calls her husband, the weary-eyed Andre Polonsky, a talented pianist. Mika loves to prepare chocolate, a specialty she has known well, being as she is, connected to the industry. She also loves to lace her brews with a substance that will induce sleeping to whoever she wants to get rid of. Andre's second wife suffered a fatal accident after drinking the chocolate Mika prepared for her, and got her and Andre back together again.Mika gets a dislike for Jeanne Pollet, a piano student, who suspects that Andre is her father. This theory is the result of the revelation that Jeanne's mother tells her about having been switched momentarily at birth with Axel, the son of Andre and his late wife. In fact, Jeanne sees a possibility in her theory because, like Andre, she has a passion for the piano, while Axel shows no interest. The best thing in the film is Isabelle Huppert, who makes another one of her memorable screen characters come alive. One can see in her face the emotions Mika is experiencing. This actress gives a seamless performance about the evil woman who has gone above and beyond to destroy lives. Anna Mouglalis also made an impression as Jeanne, the young woman who solves the puzzle and is, at the same time, an almost victim of the possessed Mika. Jacques Dutronc plays Andre.Another interesting Claude Chabrol film that will please his fans.

Part of the problem with this very interesting movie is carelessness or deliberate ambiguity on the part of director Claude Chabrol. The celebrated French master of cinema really is a bit like Alfred Hitchcock in the way he put this film together. He doesn't care so much about the consistency of detail or logic, instead what he strives for, as did Hitchcock, is effect. Begin with a tantalizing premise, build tension, and then come up with a striking ending.The premise, that of a psychologically disturbed woman of high social and economic status (Mika Muller, played with her usual haunting skill by Isabelle Huppert), whose bizarre nature forces her to poison those around her, satisfies the formula nicely. The tension is maintained by our need to find out exactly what she is doing and why and how it will affect the husband André (Jacques Dutronc), the son Guillaume (Rodolphe Pauly), and the young pianist, Jeanne Pollet (Anna Mouglalis). The ending which is heavily symbolic and deeply psychological however may disappoint some viewers. Note that as the closing credits run down the screen, Mika cries and then curls up catatonically on the couch next to a black Afghan in the shape of a spider web. She is the spider at the side of the web waiting for something to fall into it. She can't help herself. That is her nature. And that is why she cries for herself. And notice that her husband does not hate her or rage against her. Instead he seems to have pity upon her as he plays a funereal piece on the piano.Personally what disappointed me--although I still think this is an excellent film--is the way the ambiguity about Jeanne's paternity is handled. Obviously we can tell by the photos on the wall of the tragically deceased Lisbeth that Jeanne is indeed her daughter since she looks exactly like her. In fact in the next scene Jeanne unconsciously apes the pose in the photo by putting the palms of her hands to either side of her face as André watches. Another problem with the film is that nobody except the audience seems struck by the exact similarity.Additionally, the truth of her paternity is obscured by Jeanne's mother saying that the mixup at the maternity ward was straightened out to everyone's satisfaction, and besides (almost as an afterthought) she reveals that her husband was not the father, that instead she was inseminated by an unknown donor. This silliness could easily be resolved by DNA testing since the movie, which was released in 2000, is set in contemporary France. Chabrol uses a lab to establish what drug Mika is putting in the chocolate. Why not use a lab to establish paternity? Part of the reason may simply be that the novel upon which the movie is based "The Chocolate Cobweb" was written by the American mystery writer Charlotte Armstrong in the 1950's, before the age of DNA testing.The real answer however is that Chabrol didn't bother, just as he didn't bother cleaning up some other ambiguities, like why the son does not confront Mika after he is told by Jeanne that Mika is drugging him. Or why Mika deliberately spills the drugged chocolate intended for Guillaume onto the floor, allowing her to be surreptitiously observed by Jeanne through a reflection in the glass of one of the photos. The spilling seems purely a plot device to allow Jeanne a reason to get the chocolat analyzed. Furthermore, we presume that Mika, who is very rich, remarries André because she loves him or admires him or wants to be with him. And it can be seen that he would want to remarry her because of her wealth, her beauty, her elegance, etc. However, it is revealed near the end of the film that he had all along suspected her of causing Lisbeth's death since he says something like "You also washed the glasses the night Lisbeth died." He knew.One can even go to the extent of analyzing this by saying that Mika is the black widow and André finds her irresistible. Note the scene in which he suggests they make love to have a daughter and she puts him off by saying that he would be ineffective since he has already taken his Rohypnol. She says, next time before he takes his sleep potion they will do it. Furthermore notice that EVERY night he falls into a drugged sleep since he is addicted to Rohypnol. Perhaps this nightly occurrence is pleasant to Mika, in a sense an acting out of the black widow's mating ritual again and again.Nonetheless, this idea of a woman helpless against her own nature seems a bit unsatisfying. We want something more. And what she does to satisfy her urges leaves us a bit mystified. It seems hardly enough. She drugs the chocolate that she lovingly makes for Guillaume and Jeanne. Why only this? Why this at all? The logic is that she needs to excrete her poison, like a spider. The very act of doing it is what satisfies her need. The fact that somebody could take the drug and then fall asleep at the wheel of a car really is beside the point.This tale of the dark psychology within the human soul is the sort of thing that attracts Isabelle Huppert as an actress. She has played in her distinguished career a number of roles that require evil in the human soul. This is one of the more subtle ones. For one of the more striking, see her in The Piano Teacher (2001).(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)

This film dares to be different, and I can really respect that. The film is about a young lady who introjects herself into the lives of a nearby family. Why this occurs really isn't all that important. However, once involved, she stumbles on the idea that the wife in this family is drugging their hot cocoa. Throughout the film, we learn that she is actually the second wife--the first one died from a combination of alcohol and a sedative while driving. When the girl discovers this, she combines her knowledge that the lady had put drugs in the cocoa and realizes she probably murdered the first wife.All this is really interesting and makes for a thriller getting a score of 8 or 9 on IMDb EXCEPT FOR ONE STUPID PLOT DEVICE--how could this young lady have possibly guessed that the cocoa was drugged? It just doesn't make logical sense and she barely knew the family when she had this suspicion. PLUS, incredibly enough, her own boyfriend boyfriend just happens to work at the lab owned by her own mother so he can test a sample to prove that it was tainted. Oh, and minor miracle of minor miracles, the lab just HAPPENS to be a forensics lab. What an amazing coincidence!!!!! Please--next time, show a little more respect for the intelligence of the audience and don't let silly plot elements like this negatively influence an otherwise excellent film! Wow--and this film came so close to being great.Oh, and one other comment. Isabelle Huppert's performance in the film at times appears to be that of a zombie. She stares off into space a lot and when confronted she just sits there. I would have expected that when a murderer is confronted ALONE that there would be a fair likelihood that the murderer would then kill the person who confronted them (or at least make an attempt)--but not this time.

As most French movies, there is more emphasis in the interpersonal relations than action. An interesting plot develops and it seems to have a lot of potential. Unfortunately it leads to a very predictable outcome.Maybe the American remake will capitalize on this weakness and give us at the end the suspense it could have achieved.I enjoyed the traveling, the destination was disappointing.