MartinHafer
Hmm,....I've seen a lot of French films in the last year and have found that quite a few of them concern adultery. So, I found myself a bit tired of the plot line already before I even began watching this film.Carole Bouquet is a middle-aged woman married to Gerard Depardieu. She's an awfully pretty lady who's a housewife and he's a very traditional working man. Unknown to him, she wants more out of life. She never tells him anything so he assumes the marriage is fine. Well, he's out of work and needs a job so he has to work several hours away and only come home on the weekends. Since she is bored, she doesn't try very hard not to become involved with another married man. During all this, she does a lousy job of concealing it from her teenage son--eventually this selfish and carefree approach towards her son will result in consequences (the best part of the film I think because it actually shows the damage this behavior can have on the kids). Depardieu finds out but doesn't respond like a clod--in fact, he's very quick to forgive her and take her back. His character is just too decent about it. He also vows that if she's bored, he'll do anything to change things. But, she's extremely self-centered and runs off with her lover.I actually liked the film better than most of the French "adultery movies" because you can see negative consequences. I think for those who think adultery is an evil, there's enough there to prevent the movie from glorifying it. And, interestingly enough, I could also see the movie being taken as a "do it if it makes you feel good" film by those who think adultery is a legitimate alternative. It's interesting, though, how often in films the message appears to be that it is your partner's job to make you happy--and isn't YOUR responsibility to make yourself happy. That's just my "two cents worth". I would have liked it if the film had focused more on this, but this is only a minor quibble.Well-acted and interesting, but not a great film.
rosscinema
Gerard Depardieu can sometimes come off on screen as an oaf and other times he can be smooth and charming. I think his direction in this film can be described as the latter. This film starts out in 1962 in a small French city where Georges (Depardieu) is looking for work and decides to apply with a construction company that is going to be building a bridge. Georges wife Mina (Carole Bouquet) is bored with her life and goes to the cinema as often as she can with her son Tommy (Stanislas Crevillen). One day at the cinema Mina notices a man near her crying during the film. After the film they talk and he introduces himself as Mathias (Charles Berling) and it turns out he is her husbands foreman at work. Soon Mina and Mathias are having an affair while Georges is away with the work crew. I liked the pedestrian pace that Depardieu sets for the film and the cinematography is very well handled. Its a very good looking film and it surprised me that Depardieu could be so impressive directing. They're is a lot of symbolism in this film and of course its apparent that the bridge that Georges is lending his hand to build represents an exit out of their relationship. Another thing that I found interesting was the tomato plants that Georges seems preoccupied with, they seem to also symbolize George and Mina's marriage and when George knows his marriage is in trouble he spends his time tending to the tomato plants.*****SPOILER ALERT***** The last scene pretty much sums up where both characters are headed in life. They both meet by accident at a gas station and both of their cars are pointed in different directions. Film is written with a very mature focus to it and when Georges finds out about his wife he's not violent and doesn't make a big scene. He seems to understand it. No, he doesn't like what has happened. But he's such a level headed lug that it would be wrong to argue. Some viewers complained about the slow pace, but I found it refreshing. The characters stand out even more when a film is paced this way. Hollywood, are you listening?
cestmoi
Despite the wonderfully wrenching performance of the boy (Stanislas Crevillen) this Bridge lacks foundation to support the relationship that turns on a tear. Motive matters. And a thoughtless and irresponsible and unsympathetic role Bouquet is saddled with, besides a 16th arrondissement visage in a maid's role, does not allow the viewer to ultimately care, though the sympathies do lie with the boy and the dad. This tranche de la vie is a bit stale, n'est-ce pas?
salsbury
I had the misfortune of being on a 7 and a half hour flight with this movie as one of my only forms of entertainment. I have seen and liked Gerard Depardieu in the past, so this is not an anti-French or anti-foreign film bias, just to get that out of the way. The plots was horribly weak, and gave no explanations for the events that took place or why the characters did what they did. The characters themselves were as shallow as a puddle in the Sahara. The main character has an affair for no other apparent reason than the fact that the man in the movie theater next to her cried. She fights with her son over the affair, they are in the heat of the argument, and she says "I just want you to be happy", and just like that the argument is over and everything's fine between them again. Perhaps things get lost in translation, as it was dubbed, but it would have to be just about the entire script that was lost in translation. The ending is a giant non-sequiter, and if possible, even more of a disappointment than the rest of the film. I was better entertained by the airline's "external temperature update" screen than by this film.
AD
