Rendezvous with an angel

Rendez-vous avec un ange is a French film, directed by Yves Thomas and Sophie de Daruvar , released in 2011 . His work title was “Where are you Judih?”

Synopsis

Judith, a nurse, is married to Roland when she loses her job.

Distribution

Critical Reception

• Sophie Benamon of Studio Ciné Live hails the “ambition” of the project and the “subtlety” with which the directors look at “the infinite details that make the death of a couple”. But “the film is divided between the two, without ever choosing, before being carried away by the force of the character of Isabelle Carré. The false leads on the nurse’s sides are too many ” ¹ . “What’s on is that we’re expecting their second film”

• For Olivier de Bruyn du Point , the film, described as “a first essay often exciting but uneven”, has the undoubted merit of fretting with delicacy in disturbing areas rarely approached by French cinema. But “the counterpoint in the privacy of the couple much less subtle, the contrast between the two characters appearing mostly artificial, Manichean time” ² .

• For Charlotte Renaud d ‘ Etudes , “This beautiful first film conceals several stories in one” ³ .

• For Jean Rimbaud of Sud Radio , the film has “some thriller tunes, but it is appreciated like a drama in its own right without interfering in the debate of society” ⁴ .

• For Fabienne Bradfer du Soir , the film “deals audaciously with a taboo subject” and “one gets caught up in the narrative thanks to a certain unusual singularity for a first long but also thanks to the accuracy of the actors”, but the Journalist regrets that “the directors have not dared to dare the purity optics” and that they “multiply false leads and go astray between adultery, the submergence of suffering, the death of a couple and the Quest for the ideal. To this are added a lot of blunders, some errors ” ⁵ .

• Le Monde notes that the “lack of inspiration” is added to the “lack of means”. The daily notes the many problems of the project: “Second roles and secondary intrigues cruelly sacrificed. Soundtrack cut from the sounds of the world, which one would think made in a hermetic box. Reduced action in therepetitive door of the couple in his apartment, interspersed with scenes of spinning equally as heartbroken.

• Télérama evokes a film that runs several hare at a time, and in which the most interesting tracks are treated “superficially and without real point of view” ⁶ .

• The Parisian regrets the weakness of the scenario, which suffers from “an increase of blunders, delays and floats that the correctness of the actors’ game is difficult to save.”

• West-France speaks of a “lack of credibility, and therefore of adhesion”.

• The Cross describes a film “with hesitant realization”, which reveals itself “of deep boredom and approaches without any finesse the thorny question of euthanasia “.

• In the Mask and the Plume , Éric Neuhoff evokes a dispensable film, in which everything is “missed”, “flat”, “evanescent”, “ridiculous”, and suffers from a great casting error ( Sergi López in film criticism ) And unsuccessful costumes. For the critic, the result resembles ” Marc Dorcel who would try to make Brian De Palma .” It is therefore a “film about euthanasia in front of which the spectator has the impression of being in palliative care for an hour and a half” ⁷ .

• Jérôme Garcin regrets that the film is based on a light misunderstanding and wonders how this type of films can find a producer ⁷ .

• Michel Ciment de Positif finds that the film does not know how to “face the themes” and “goes in all directions”. The narrative begins as Othello and finishes like Vera Drake . This “cruel absence of scenario” denotes, for the critic, “a total amateurism”. He continued by mentioning the fate of those films that “clog screens” and “disgust” spectators film ⁷ .

• Xavier Leherpeur of Studio Ciné Live judges the result uninteresting, “catastrophic” and “dismaying,” and compares the scenario to an exquisite corpse , that is, a form without unity, “where nothing has anything to do with nothing “. The misunderstandings resemble Jeanne Labrune and do not take the road. The critique builds character “laborious” of all by noting that the film needs four or five scenes to lift a little dramatic challenge ⁷ .

Notes and references