BOUF It's possible to believe in Stephane, the con man who operates in a smart hotel on the Riviera, but he's not particularly interesting or likable; and why he falls in love with the schoolteacher who is spending her small inheritance is a mystery. And we are supposed to believe that the schoolteacher instantly transforms into a tough business-person, and falls in love with Stephane. I didn't. I neither believed her character, nor liked her dishonest and greedy manner. Stephane's friend the tongue-tied, love-struck racing car champ (Cluzet) was another idea without any basis in character. And everyone talks all the time, while I was longing for them to get out and see a bit of the Riviera and do something. By the halfway mark I was wondering if this might have made a decent film with a better script some charismatic actors, and a director with some visual flair, but it was merely an idea to revive a sort of "To Catch a Thief" with very little understanding of the dramatic infrastructure or charm, or pace of that film, I realised I was dreaming. The Hitchcock picture isn't that good, but next to this one, it's a masterpiece. "Quatre Etoiles" has a couple of good ideas, but they do not a feature film make.

jrwp This may be indeed the worst film billed as a serious feature to have ever been made. Besides the ridiculous "love story" between two disgusting characters, the plot proceeds without giving any regard to the several propositions (some of them admittedly intriguing) which are made at the film's start. As the standards of production are up to the commercial circuit, one does not feel immediately tempted to click out the DVD and go on to some more rewarding chore. Thus proceeds the expectation that, somehow, the apparently random sequences of scenes - some of them slightly funny, mainly due to the performance of the Formula 1 retired driver - will wrap up in some slightly logical way. No way. The ending is so absurd, that I felt inclined to shoot at my TV set. Of course, this would only add injury to the insult.

maichan-1 When I first watched this movie, I had absolutely no clue as to what it was about - perhaps one of the reasons I enjoyed it so much, since I (apparently unlike the other people who commented) didn't expect it to be a romantic comedy.The movie itself is very surprising and funny - the story is that of Franssou, a young woman who inherits a large sum of money and decides to live it out in Cannes. There she meets Stéphane, a conman who desperately needs money... and from then on, the plot evolves into a delightful love story where Franssou tries to con Stéphane into admitting he's in love with her. The dialogues were amazing and served by the acting: José Garcia was wonderful in his role - sure of himself and macho when conning people while sometimes completely baffled when faced with Carré's cheeky Franssou; Cluzet's René... I can't even begin to define how much the character made me laugh. The use of a few running jokes (René's obsession with cars, the Asiatic tourists at the hotel) didn't hamper the movie but indeed made it even more enjoyable and I can't help but find the writing truly wonderful. Another plus is Luis Rego's role in the movie - the man is always funny.To address some of the other commenter's criticism, I'd like to say that: 1) While the movie does work with the same theme great American comedies of the 50's do, it uses their basic premise and works on it to achieve something different and new which, IMHO, is worth seeing. 2) Re: Mr Bowen's idea that because Stéphane is French-Arab, the movie is a parable for... well, he doesn't actually say, but apparently it's bad. I'm amused by that reaction because Stéphane's ancestry is not a plot-point in the movie - indeed it is not mentioned at all, which makes me wonder how he got "French-Arab" from an actor of Spanish decent. The film is a romantic comedy, stop trying to see metaphors on society in it.This movie is basically good, light-hearted fun. Watch it and you'll have a smile on your face for the rest of the day - it's the best thing that can be said about a romantic comedy.

writers_reign Even though the chances of her equalling let alone eclipsing her fantastic performance in Se Souvenirs des belles choses are remote to non-existent I will always seen anything Isabelle Carre appears in because she is not only a fine actress but also gorgeous in a quiet, under-stated manner. Mostly she's chosen or been lucky enough to appear in quality product but there's always a first time and this, I guess, is it. We have not one but two dodgy premises here; first that someone as gorgeous as Carre would choose to shack up with Michel Vuilleroz; Vuilleroz is, read my lips, a great actor, he is, after all, a member of Le Comedy Francaise and they don't do chopped liver but even his mother would not presume to cast him as love interest and Carre DOES find him boring but the point is she would NEVER have found him partner material in a million years. Second dodgy premise; having inherited 50,000 euros out of the blue Fransouss (Carre) decides to spend it all in one fell swoop, accordingly she buys a classy car and checks into the Carlton at Cannes where she encounters a guy, Stephane Garcia (Garcia) who makes Vuilleroz look like Tom Cruise and is mean with it so naturally she falls for him like Richmond fell for Grant. Not only is Stephane a small time con man - he is 'promoting' Elton John who, he claims, will check into the Carlton any day now and until he does Stephane is living on the cuff - but also beats up Fransouss and leaves her stranded in the country. Despite this .... well, some girls NEVER learn. It wouldn't be so bad if Garcia had any personality or charisma - I STILL don't know what Sandrine Kiberlain was doing with him in Apres Vous when she could have had Daniel Auteuil - let alone looks and when the leading man is a no-no it only makes everything else that much worse. On the credit side we have Isabelle to look at and though it should be it's not quite enough.