I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

A Masterpiece!

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

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.

I caught the Polar Bear sequence of this movie while flipping through channels when it ran recently on Sundance and was intrigued enough to catch the entire film on a repeat screening the next day. From the opening sequence, I hunkered down for what was going to be a wild ride. I loved how this movie develops, not knowing where it's going with Eleonore randomly (yet expertly) picking off her victims. Each score opens up a new story. It's how life is in NYC, a random encounter on the street can completely change your life. You may find love, you may find heartache, you may find the most disgusting horror or the most sublime bliss. It was a perfect, slice-of-life movie about Manhattan. Others in this section have complained about Eleonore being unsympathetic or the lack of explanation for her motivation. She's not meant to be likable or admirable. If you've ever been the victim of robbery or theft (There is a circle in hell for whoever who stole my wallet from my car almost 30 years ago) there is nothing that will compel you to like her. Yet -- You are intrigued by her, even when she's being annoying (table tennis anyone?). To know what motivates the thievery would be to reduce it to a Lifetime movie. To observe her in action is to witness her process --how is she going to pull each score off? The "why" does not matter. I can understand why the filmmakers did not give the audience clues in the Q&A. Just sit back and enjoy the ride.I was very impressed with many aspects of the movie. Casting and performances were spot on, every character made you curious for more details and more info. There is a movie waiting to be made for every person in this film. Those two cops! Hilarious. The doorman, the father and the daughter! Loved them. The man with the kid at the playground! More! The couple throwing around money at the bar! MORE! The man telling everyone "You're beautiful/handsome!" Yes, more please! With each score, the details of the booty became intriguing in backstory. I would love to know the connection between the book about Sarkozy and the woman in the bar. Where did her money come from? Why does the dad have four kittens in a puppy in the same bag? The use of locations in Manhattan felt very real, without being the touristy version that you get in most movies about NYC. This is the everyday Manhattan that feels lived-in and loved in. The glossy fake universe of SATC and other big-budget movies is absent (although I would love to live in Carrie/Big's apartment in SATC1).My only critique is in the ending. While I'm glad that Eleonore is eventually caught, the sequence in Virgin Megastore threw me off 1) Because that store is out of business (yes, I know the movie was shot in 2007/8) and 2) as someone else pointed out, she steals a DVD to place in the CD player. Perhaps that was a comment about how disorienting being busted was to Eleonore. But for me, it just felt like a "meh." The Polar Bear sequence at the zoo opened up an intriguing possibility about her reality (or lack of) that could have taken the film further. I am thrilled to learn that this movie is on DVD and will get it to experience the commentary track and short film extras. This film has made me very curious about the work of Joshua Safdie and the Red Bucket Brigade. I will seek out more of their work.

As the picture begins, our heroine steals a bag containing a small dog from an out-of-towner. When she gets the parcel home and discovers the little critter, for which she has no use, she just casts it out into the hallway of her tenement to fend for itself. She has no feeling for the welfare of the animal, not to mention the grief of its owner. That was enough for me. I couldn't care less what happens to this cruel, selfish young woman, except to the extent that I hope it hurts. Had the plot been billed as animal rights vigilantes giving her what she has coming, I might have continued watching. One understands that not every protagonist can be exemplary, and that even those who are bear human imperfections. In "Gardens of the Night," Tom Arnold gives an Oscar-worthy performance as an even worse human being, who abducts children and "turns them out" as prostitutes salable to pimps. But there are complexities in the portrayal, limits to his excesses, and he displays a horrifying, yet fascinating ability to relate to his victims. In contrast, the unfeeling Eleonore just makes me angry, without being interesting.

I just saw this at a university screening. After reading the reviews here, I wanted to add my response, too.I thought this film was really moving. I think it goes a little way toward helping a viewer recognize the wild grip he or she places on things or expectations, and what's more amazing is that the logic of the film allows it to do this almost solely through humor and with a light touch. Many moments in the film are not that far from Gogol's Dead Souls or Tati's Hulot in their liveliness and scope.At the very least, I'd recommend it to a friend--a thoughtful and surprising film.

The worst film I've seen in years. From the first minute to the last, nothing happens! Our (hugely unlikable) hero, Eleonore, who we follow through the film steals from people for unknown reasons. She is the same person from beginning to end thereby leaving the audience with absolutely no satisfaction. There is no character development, no arc, nothing. This film is as bland as puddy.It's quite obvious the filmmakers were going for a John Cassavetes story-telling, rawness" but didn't even come close to reaching that bar. Instead they succeeded in showing off their immature, New York, self-indulgent "I'm too deep as an artist" arrogant ability producing this 70 minute film that felt like 3 hours. Everything comes down to idea, idea, idea. Concept, concept, concept. Character, character, character.My favorite of the worst scenes in the film was the "driver's education film" stuck in the middle of this non-existent plot. I understand people in large cities don't drive & maybe have never driven, but come on: Eleonore, are you 3 years old? Are you mentally-impaired? I mean, you've seen cars, right? You live in NY city, they're all around you. You do get the basic idea of what a car does? How it works?? Ever taken a cab anywhere??? Watching the driver's-ed course which seemed like 45 minutes was pure torture! Seriously, is this really story-telling? C'mon, do you look at your own film & say, "WOW, it's so wonderful & deep."Having screened at the L.A. Film Festival, when asked about certain character/story questions from the audience, the filmmakers had no clue how to answer these basic questions like, "why does Eleonore steal?", or "what's the meaning behind the title?". They just confirmed to the majority of the audience that they are just a bunch of white-kids with a lot of money, making films in which they have no business doing. I wouldn't have such a problem but knowing they think the world of themselves just because they went to NYU & live in some trendy area, living off mommy & daddy's allowance but play it down like "I'm a struggling artist just like you" is completely insulting.I felt robbed after having seen this film. Can you give me back my time? How 'bout my money. There is NO pleasure in being robbed.