Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Can't really say that I liked it or didn't like it, I guess many will feel that they either do one thing or the other, but for my case there were equally many parts for both sides, so the scales was more or less balanced.I did think it became a bit to artsy in its expression for me, this was basically in many ways a soft-core film, explicit enough to make you fantasy run with it, but not enough to make it porn and thereby not be able to actually show it before after midnight :)Take a look, you might like it, but my guess it by now is not that interesting for anybody, maybe for the artistic parts and the visuals, but for the story and acting, this is like watching most soft-core, not that interesting.

This is a very short movie for all the content it packs. It feels like several movies at the same time, and it execution is flawless. One of the film's dimensions is its spiritual world, barely touched in the film which only gives us hints of this world through bizarre dialogue and the creatures that are the namesake of the film. Another of its dimensions is its discussion on female desire: a subject rarely explored in film and for which alone it deserves praise. It even explores, in yet further dimensions, female psychology, gender roles, and society's view on them. This is also, undoubtedly, an erotic film, and a very good one at that, which is rare for erotic films, which tend toward sleaziness and pseudoporn. As an erotic film it focuses on desire and fantasy, not arousal and gratification. It features interesting characters, good dialogue and plot, intertwining its multitude of dimensions. In 100 minutes or less, with so many layers on it, the film has no time for gratuitous sex shots.

A French filmmaker interviews a bunch of women to get them to do a screen test for a movie he's making about female orgasm. Meanwhile, there are a couple of fallen angels who appear and disappear randomly and apparently can influence the pervert filmmaker's life. Somehow the filmmaker's dead grandmother is also involved, but it's never quite clear what she or the angels have to do with the filmmaker's attempt to make a porno movie. This is an incredibly dull movie - even the sex scenes are boring. There's a lot of pretentious talk, but nobody says anything interesting. Reading the subtitles becomes tiresome. There is hardly any plot and the film moves at a snail's pace

My girlfriend and I saw this at the IFC in NYC on Friday night. I went to film school, she studied French in college, we both loved Short Bus - we thought this would be fun date movie. Man, were we wrong.As a film that's trying to be "art" it humorlessly apes just about every art film convention from the early days of Bergman to Wenders Wings of Desire. It is literally a shopping list of art film cliché's. That in itself would not be a crime if the film's treatment of these cliché's wasn't so boring. As well, the script is mediocre at best. Maybe this is due to a bad translation, but my girl, who speaks French, told me the translation was fairly accurate. And cinematagraphicaly, the film is just shot badly. Many shots are ackwardly framed and staged. It reminded me of Kevin Smith's Clerks, only at least Clerks had a strong story and clever script that over came it's tech limitations. This whole film just feels slightly less than mediocre on every level.As for the story, the director wants us to believe that his doppleganger in the film is observing these woman play out their erotic fantasies because he doesn't understand female pleasure. But it's obvious that he enjoyed watching three girls get naked and screw each other. Just because he didn't touch them doesn't mean he didn't enjoy it egotistically. Yet the film never holds him accountable for this. He is presented as a victim of crazy actresses, an unsympathetic wife, a corrupt judicial system, and ultimately a victim of fate or divinity itself. The film seems to ask us to envy his power at getting these girls to kink it out in front of him at his beck and call and at the same time we are suppose to sympathize at what a good husband, artist, and father figure he is and how nobody understands what a victim he really is. It just doesn't work. Apparently, the events of the film are based on a real situation that happened to the film's director. This story sounds like something a philandering husband would tell his wife about being taken to a strip club. "No, dear, I didn't enjoy it all. I spent the whole time talking with the girls about Hobbes and Locke." Bullsh!t. Also, there is a lot of talk about taboos in the film. Apparently, the director's idea of taboo is having sex in a hotel room. Oh, how daring! Lastly, there are two fairly sexy sequences in the film. However, they are almost completely ruined by the film's score. Every time the girls start to get naked, this bizarre 80's horror film score comes on the soundtrack. This combined with the bad writing and staging just kills any feelings of arousal you may have. Throughout the screening people would just get up and leave. And when the final "tragic" moments of the film were played out the whole theatre was laughing at how bad it was. The only thing anyone was talking about as we filed out into the lobby was how much we wanted our money and time back.