Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Even though it's quite clear from reading the premise that the film is surely not for everyone, that is still an understatement. The filmmaking here is incredibly detached of emotion, cold, and very, very clinical. That's part of the genius of it. A film like this needs to be executed this way, or else wavering too far into one side would be controversial, either being labeled as a film too forgiving of its protagonists and wanting us to sympathize with them, or portraying them as completely evil and not adding enough layers. In that respect the film works. It is mostly without a musical score, and scenes play out in long stretches in ways sure to infuriate many, but also impressive in their commitment. I think it's a fascinating, powerful film, but not an easy one to like.

We actually liked this.But the ending let the movie down big time. Why would the police shoot unarmed people during a terrorist incident? The police didn't know who these people were! They were likely employees, hostages, innocent bystanders. Why would they be murdered by police? Even if they were terrorists what advantage would there be in shooting an unarmed terrorist who was surrendering? This was the biggest flaw in the movie. It was a real turd in the punchbowl. But also... why did they decide to hide out in the shopping mall anyway? There didn't seem to be any good reason for doing that. Also how did the police figure out where they were? Did the director believe the film was improved by leaving out important parts of the narrative? Despite these and other glaring terrible appalling problems it was still above par. The cinematography was great.

"Nocturama" is a French film written and directed by Bertrand Bonello. Bertrand Bonello is an acclaimed French director most notably known for being a part of the "New French Extremism" film movement. Unlike his earlier films, "The Pornographer" and "Tiresia", "Nocturama" deviates from conventions of the French Extremism movement and delivers a fresh and authentic vision. "Nocturama" is set in Paris and is about a diverse group of 10 young people ranging from 16 to 30 years, all of whom are from different social and racial backgrounds, yet they are all united under the same goal: to commit bomb attacks on 4 different locations in Paris. Once they've executed the plan they hide in an closed shopping mall for the night. This is where the second half of the film takes place. Upon hearing the plot this film may seen like an ordinary thriller. But, although it has elements of the thriller genre, its focus is not on the plot but rather on the atmosphere and the state of mind of the characters. The film bends the norms of film language, and tells this type of story in a different manner then it usually would've been told. The film opens up with different young characters roaming the streets of Paris and riding the subway. Their paths cross but they only exchange glances. For the first seven minutes of film there is no dialog, which is a great example of show don't tell style. Even though they don't say anything we know they are up to something, and we feel that something big is about to happen. The story is told non linearly, not only does the film jump form the past to present but we also see the same moments from different points of view. This style is especially reminiscent of the film "Elephant" by Gus Van Sant, a film about a high school shooting based on Columbine High School Massacre. Like "Elephant", "Nocturama" is also filled with shots of characters walking with the camera following them from behind their back. This style of shooting a character evokes a feeling of participation in the viewer which heightens the tension. Another interesting aspect of the film is that there is no main character, but all members of the group are treated equally. We observe them as a collective. Unlike an average thriller this film is not burdened by the need to tie all loose ends. It does not explain how the group came together nor how they came to the idea to commit a terrorist act. We are only given glimpses and hints about these elements of the narrative. The manner of withholding information in telling a story usually leaves the viewer unsatisfied, because he is not given the whole picture. But I personally like that style, for it is expected of the viewer to put all the pieces together and understand how and why it all happened. Once they executed the plan, and the bombs go off, they hide in a closed shopping mall. Here they anxiously wait for the danger to blow off, even though they believe their plan was flawless. Hiding in the hallmark of capitalist consumer society our rebels slowly relax and spend the night trying out new clothes, eating, drinking, playing music, goofing around and following the aftermath of their act on many television sets. Yet even though there seems to be nothing to worry about, we are constantly given the feeling that they are not going to get away with it. In the end the police find out where they are, and even though our characters are unarmed, the police kills them off one by one. How the police tracked them down is left unknown. The idea of "Nocturama" is obscure. The film asks many questions yet doesn't bother to give any answers. It shows the general discontentment that young people have with the government and social conditions. It portrays them as unified even though there are racial and class differences between them. Their attack was not aimed to kill any civilians, rather to damaged certain government buildings and certain corporation headquarters. Therefore, was their act morally unjust? Or is the question of moral in todays society relevant? At the end when the police arrive they are portrayed as merciless, yet clean and very professional, almost non human. The ending gives out a nihilistic vibe, and leaves the viewer wondering whether any form of rebellion against the government is possible.

"It's amazing how much time you can spend with a person and still know nothing about them." A quote from the Fifth Estate, where you actually DO get know the characters. In this film which is over two hours long, is long and tension-filled, but incredibly vague. A group of young Parisian terrorists, from all different backgrounds, plant bombs in different parts of the city, and take refuge inside a luxurious department store. We never find out why the kids did what they did, why and what locations were targeted, what led them to all come together to do this and what their feelings are about it. They all act indifferent, and are willing to kill anyone who finds them out. Some are more emotional than others, but the feelings are shown to a minimal extent. In the end, a squat team enter the building and literally gun down every single one of them in cold blood, including ones who are surrendering, and even a homeless couple mistaken for their part in the kid's crimes. It's a horrible disturbing picture coming out too soon after the 2015 Paris attacks.I never really like things that are too vague, and offer very little sympathy for characters. And this is no exception.