Cathy Sargent Politics cannot be put aside in this film! The birth of all consciousness whether it is a barbarian invasion or not begins in the round or world egg.It is the mythology of the Uroborus or circular snake that weds, slays and impregnates itself... and the serpent that bites its own tail n the Garden of Eden.This labyrinth of a story is centered around a serial seducer college professor no longer seductive and dying.What blows my mind is that his first wife and children are so loving and forgiving given this creepy snake like man. They are altruistic in helping the mistresses children!In this case the uroborus snake has slayed himself in his self defeating serial seducing of women. In biting his own tail..there is a surprising amount of character development for all.Quebec have much to teach Americans about the rippling effects of being our brothers keeper in spite of all odds.

Boba_Fett1138 And once more here we have a movie that shows you in order to make a good and effective movie, all you need is a good script and some talented persons involved, both in front and behind the camera's. Good movies don't always need to cost a lot of money to become successful ones, both critically and financially.This Oscar winning Canadian movie is actually a sequel to the 1986 movie "Le déclin de l'empire américain", by the same director and also mostly the same cast. But is it also necessarily to see that movie first? Not really. It doesn't matter all that much for its story, I would imaging, though it probably will give the story and some of its characters some extra depth and emotions behind them.Thing with this movie is that you can take it as both a political movie/social commentary or simply as a drama. It all depends on how much you're reading between the lines. I for one simply took this as a drama and perhaps you have to be Canadian yourself to fully appreciate and understand everything this movie is trying to do and tell.The one and foremost thing I got out of this movie was that its story was telling you that you can live life all the way you want but in the end it will always be your family that will comfort- and bring you true joy and pleasure in life. And in that regard, this drama also truly works out very well.It's also because the very realistic characters. None of them are without his or hers flaws really and just like its story, nothing is ever black or white. Nothing and no one is truly good or evil and people all make their mistakes in life, no mater how good the indentation are. Yes, you could say that this is one of those movies that is basically being like a random slice of life, with realistic people and emotions in it.The movie of course also truly thrives on its great directing approach by Denys Arcand. He handles, the drama, the comedy and basically everything else in between very well and make it a very well balanced movie with all of its many ingredients and heavy subjects. Besides that, it's a very good looking movie, with a very distinctive style as well.Simply a good and effective movie, you can hardly say anything bad about.8/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

pegasus3 Denys Arcand is a wonderful director and this film is also a testimony to his subtle and trenchant style. But ultimately the movie suffers by a seeming obsession with the upper crust and dilettante world of his story where medical care and ease of dying can be bought by a financial trader and where "self revelations" and cosmopolitan discussions are achieved amidst fine wines, fresh truffles, and of course the perennial pate. Throughout the film, I kept feeling it was "My Dinner with Andre" meets "As I Lay Dying"(with veins occasionally laced with heroin). Perhaps Arcand is really saying that the "barbarians" are in fact not the "invaders" but, in fact, quite comfortably at home in Montreal living as insufferable, self-indulgent natives where the seriousness of one's state of mind and physical health appears to be measured by passing up scrambled eggs and fresh truffles.

craigp81 There seems to be a lot of passion over the claim that the film is anti-American, anti-capitalist, etc. Many criticisms seem to dismiss the humanistic elements in this film - pain, death, reconciliation - because it has a vague intellectual, leftist, socialist face. My experiences in Canada tend to suggest that the Canadians have plenty of targets down south that deserve criticism. But does it matter? Whether the film included all these elements, the key theme was the preparation for death and reconciliation between those who will not see each other again.Doesn't anybody cry over loss? Are we scared of those things after death? or do we fear the process of dying - the loss of the person, their presence? A person died in this film - right before us - 100 minutes of decline -and what a sigh of relief that there was reconciliation in the end! That there was time to speak, time to be present. Consider the contrast between the daughter on the yacht - stranded, distant - and the son near his father. The great pain that welled up in me to see that there was no opportunity for her left.I don't cry in films, but I did here. I feared dying more than ever - other people's deaths, and mine - and I resolved to prepare for it.