Wonderful character development!

Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Dreadfully Boring

A Disappointing Continuation

Overall I think the film justifies the mixed reaction it has had here. I agree with one of the posters that if you are going to set a film in Paris and SELL it on the basis that it IS set in Paris then the least you can do is to CONVINCE us that we ARE in Paris; I think the poster in question was perfectly correct to state that we might be anywhere given that roughly 90 per cent of the action occurs in the dismal, grey eponymous boarding house. That same poster speculated on what an attractive and wealthy young American would see in Shaun Dingwall's Grunewald, I would go even farther and ask what ANY woman would see in such a colorless character let alone Julie Delpy who, against all the Laws of Reason, falls madly in love with him. Life at the Villa is hardly a million laffs so that my allusion to The Lower Depths is not that far out. On the positive side the acting is uniformly excellent but the overriding impression is of Julie Delpy's fragile Dresden Sheperdess presiding over a gallery of grotesques. Maybe you should see it once for the experience.

It just shows to go you. Reading the reviews, they go from boring to wonderful. If this film is not for you, then its just not for you. But if you like it, you will love it. I've no intention of trying to tell you WHY i think its good and WHY you should like it. It's my favourite film of all time so far, and i've watched it about 25 times. You owe yourself the privilege of watching this wonder at least once in your life. Apparently i need to write some more words so what can i say? Yes, i can take the film apart bit by bit and see what the elements are and their sources and why they are there. The themes, which seem to be war and children( although there are no child characters, and only one war scene- another contradiction). The references to Dickens and Shakespeare and other classics and 'genres', the earth moving at key moments like god intervening. The piano playing itself, when it seemed that it was being played, a comment about fate somehow i think. The superb performances by superb actors, of their quirky, imperfect, characters. I see the unanswered questions too. I see certain things that don't quite work for me even. Its beautiful, its funny, it still makes me cry. But i know if i was going to make a movie i would like it to be a sister movie to this one; except i couldn't do it.

Even though I haven't read the book this movie was based on, I'm sure that it must be a lot better than the movie itself. Willem Elschot, the writer who wrote the book is seen as one of our finest and his books are considered as masterpieces, but I'm afraid I can't say the same about this movie. I'm not saying that it is bad, but it just isn't good enough and I'm sure that Willem Elschot wouldn't have been too happy with this rather sterile adaptation of his book either.It's sterile because there are too many questions that are left unanswered. Not that I always want everything to be clear even before the movie ends. I like intellectually challenging movies, but this time you never really get to know the characters, you'll not find out what drives them, what exactly happens to them, why they all live in that lousy hotel in Paris that once must have been a marvelous villa... It all looks very gray and dull, even though the "relationship" between the maid and the German tries to bring some light to it. But it isn't enough to stay focused on the entire story.Maybe you think now that this movie must be the worst ever, well that's not true either. Frank Van Passel is still a very talented director and he had an excellent cast to work with. Some moments in the movie were absolutely great (for instance the abortion scene was very chilling), but it was never enough to cover all the holes in the plot. I give this movie a 6.5/10.

Boring. Boring. Boring. Sure, some of the shots looked sort of pretty, but not unlike all the other films you've seen dealing with this period. Nothing new or interesting happens, so you can't even call the film daring or interesting. Some people will call the film well made (even the ones that don't like it), but what does that mean? If nothing interesting is shown and you care about none of the characters, is a film well made because it looks like it costs a lot? No, this film was badly written and directed, let's face it.