Karl Self Wow! This certainly wasn't like anything I expected. I thought I'd get an earlier version of "Chocolat" but ended up with the French answer to "The Deer Hunter".This movie certainly isn't entertaining, light, fun or frothy. It's like expecting a latte macchiato and being served elephant laxative. Paris is like a postnuclear wasteland here. Two young beggars meet when they camp out on Pont Neuf, Paris' eldest and most central bridge. Although the movie is surreal and fantastic over large parts (we will later see them waterskiing on the Seine during a fireworks display), this is maybe the most realistic depiction of psychotic people living on the streets I've ever seen.We go with Alex and Michèle through their love-hate relationship. It's amazing how unattractive Juliette Binoche looks here. Although you have to marvel about the twists and turns of the story and the many creative ideas of the director, in large parts it felt if someone tried too hard to impress me with their story. "There's this girl, she's super pretty but nobody knows because she's super messed up. She's this super talented artist but she's going blind. Then she meets this boy. He's super messed up, but also super talented. They live on this bridge. It looks messed up but it's actually the prettiest bridge of Paris." And so forth.This is the work of a talented megalomaniac. Enjoy the ride.

timmy_501 Leos Carax's film The Lovers on the Bridge isn't remarkable for its characterizations or its plot, although both of these elements are certainly adequate. Rather, it's remarkable for a few otherworldy scenes of unusual cinematic power. One such scene consists of the titular lovers (Alex, a deranged, fire-eating street performer and Michelle, a painter with a rare eye disease, both vagrants) on the otherwise deserted bridge (closed for renovation) during the Paris bicentennial fireworks celebration. As they cavort about the bridge the massive light show seems to have been arranged for the sole benefit of this unlikely pair; Carax absolutely makes the most of this sequence and the result is one of the most amazing scenes in cinema.Another remarkable sequence involves posters that Alex notices, first one in isolation and then all over the city, that he decides he must destroy to protect his burgeoning relationship with Michelle. It's surreal when he sets dozens of them on fire in a deserted subway; it's nightmarish when he finds a truck load of them and accidentally burns the driver along with his cargo.The Lovers on the Bridge shows a side of Paris that most films don't: while it is capable of creating beautiful sights like the fireworks show it's also a place full of dirty vagrants who form obsessive attachments not only to abandoned bridges but to each other as well, people who are capable of astonishing acts of violence and self destruction. Carax captures all this with a flair that enables him to transcend the thin plot he's working with and in so doing create a magical piece of cinema.

bandw I can guarantee this is not for all tastes, since it is not for my taste. The opening ten minutes are intensely depressing and I found that they set the predominant mood. That in itself is no reason to downgrade this film, but trying to resolve the frequent fluctuations between brutal realism and unbelievable fantasy ultimately wore me out.Alex and Michele are homeless and camping out on the Pont-Neuf while it is under repair. Michele is going blind and Alex is an alcoholic with a drug problem on the side - certainly a setup that will challenge all but the persistent to bug out. We see rubble on the bridge, but never any indication of there being active renovation going on. This is in keeping with there being almost nobody on the streets of Paris, or in the subways. Maybe the intent of this population void is to focus our attention on the protagonists, but it lent an unreal air to the proceedings for me. And just when we are willing to cut the film some slack in this area we are brought back to harsh realities.Indeed there are some wonderfully filmed scenes like Michele water-skiing on the Seine at night with Alex manning a speed boat. But what is to be made of that? Prior to this scene we see that Michele is weak and hardly able to walk. Most scenes overstay their welcome. When Michele takes to drugging the drinks of restaurant customers in order to put them to sleep so she can pick their pockets we are saturated with scenes of about a dozen people as they *slowly* succumb to the drug. And is that mode of theft really practical? And so on.What are we to take away from this film? That homeless people desire love and acceptance just like anybody else? That the homeless have their reasons for being as they are? That love can exist among the ruins? That a few dazzling scenes will keep people watching? That Juliette Binoche fans will put up with a lot just to see her in a movie? There were no new insights for me here.

fvchewtoy45 This is the worst movie ever made! countless times unrealistic things happen in an a "realistic" movie. how could a drunk nearly blind malnourished bum slalom ski? YEAH RIGHT. Take the money spent on this film and give it to the actual homeless and they could make a better movie. Feeling sadistic? give this to a friend! And countless miracle recoveries happen in the film after horrible injuries. What the hell? I wouldve never spoken to the person who lent this to me again if he didn't warn me ahead of time, so I am warning you, if your curious to what really rich producers spend their money on, this is it... Or if you just feel like crying that night and appreciating what good American movies you might have watch this film.