L'Argent (1983)

Sorry, this movie sucks

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

a young man is accused of passing counterfeit French franc notes and is sent to prison. his wife leaves him and his life spirals out of control in way that is totally believable. I kept thinking this could really happen. it's a very simple story, but a complex tale. there are many gaps in the film and I understand that is how the director Robert bresson does things. you are just expected to catch up with what's going on as best you can. it's a film where basic decency turns into monstrous results. it's a lot like Hitchcock. maybe better. one interesting thing I noticed was atm machines in France in 1981. I don't really remember them in nyc that early.

In the modern jungle of the society presented in Robert Bresson's last film "L'Argent" (The Money) the survival of the fittest gets translated as the survival of the smartest person and the material for that is the money in all of his forms. The one who has the money controls everything, everyone, has the chance to buy and sell everything but men are mortal and they end losing up his/her soul just to have the main thing to survive among the living: money.In his criticism about modern society, Bresson follows several characters involved with counterfeit money made by some bourgeoisie teenagers whose parents don't give all the money they want; and this same money will cause problems to a lot of people including the good guy Yvon Targe (Christian Patey), a simple man, living a regular life with his family until the day he almost gets arrested for trying to spend this money given by him during a business trade. Yvon escaped from being sentenced, but the damage was done. He lost his job, finds another one not so good by helping a friend in a bank robbery but this time he'll go to jail and will lose everything he knew of his previous life. The destiny has some surprises for him and for us while seeing how things will be developed with him and the other characters.The environment and the circumstances of situations changes the man into a different thing; Yvon was a good man before all that happened; after that it's all downhill from him, including more robbery and even some murders. Here's a story about life, the awful pursuit of profit over the weakest, the dumbest (after all, Yvon received the money from the guy at the shop without looking if it was real or not), and how almost innocent pranks turned out to be the deadliest, the most striking events. Interesting also the fact about the wealthy kids who make counterfeit money, ask more money to their parents. One of them has a great taste for suits, steal money from his former boss and then return some part of the money, claiming that he's generous, he'll donate some for the poor. The sense of irony in this moment is incredible.Well directed, well acted and with a good screenplay, "L'Argent" on one hand makes valuable statements about the power of money with a positive simplicity, based on a work from Tolstoy (now, here's a man who really gave away all of his money to preach love among people). On the other hand, the most technical aspect of the film, the narrative makes two films in one that it gets dreary, confusing, and almost without any connection with what we were seeing. I'm talking about the last half-hour that didn't match so great as it could be, but at least Bresson proved his point by the violent reaction of the main character. I believe this conclusion was the reason behind the negative reaction from Cannes audience when Bresson won the award of Best Director, in a tied along with Andrei Tarkovsky with his outstanding "Nostalgia". While Tarkovsky was praised and applauded, Bresson got some boos from the crowd, and Tarkovsky being a great admirer of Bresson complimented, embarrassed the other director (I saw the video with this moment somewhere). It's a very realistic ending but most people simply don't agree with what was showed in this change of moral behavior from such a sweet character. Bresson and his last film tells many great things about the necessary evil money is and its disadvantages. 9/10

So, let me get this straight.I'm supposed to accept this film's technical failings as "art" sheerly because they are intentionally committed in the service of objectivity? Right.That's not art. It's an experiment and a bad one at that.I guess if you like manipulative, facile films, lap this one up. I dislike this genre of film whether the director is Bresson, Haneke, or Schlondorf.This makes Lars Von Trier's worst films seem opaque by comparison. It's films like this that make mass audiences shy away from any film that can be construed as an "art" film. And the fact that critics swoon over it only makes the case more damnable.

I first saw L'Argent in 1983 during its original theatrical release. The ad campaign at the time proudly boasted, "The only film to receive Four Stars from all three of Chicago's major movie critics!" which at the time included Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert, and Dave Kerr. With eager anticipation I trooped down to Chicago's Fine Arts theater, and there I and a full house of other viewers endured this horrible film. As the house lights went up, we slumped out of the theater in misery, our souls left barren and hollow by what is easily the worst 'serious' film ever made.For 25 years I've regaled my friends with tales of this movie's awfulness. However, a person's outlook, insights, and perceptions can change over the course of a quarter of a century, so I was willing to give it a second screening. Sadly, I must report that L'Argent is as ghastly as ever. The arc of the film's story remains as completely pointless, arbitrary, and capricious as it was 25 years ago. To say the acting is wooden, as others have done, is an understatement. By the end of his career, Bresson was using amateur performers exclusively. I've heard that he would go through dozens of takes on each scene to "de-emotionalize" the content. Well, he could have saved everyone a lot of trouble if he had just administered Qaaludes to his little troupe at the beginning of each day's shooting. Better yet, shooting life-size photo cut-outs of the characters with a voice-over dialog track would have provided a more perfect realization of his vision.L'Argent is essentially a blank canvas upon which viewers are required to paint whatever sort of meaning they can. If you are already a Bresson fan, I'm sure you will be thrilled by this film. On the other hand, I think Bresson is a charlatan, the emperor with no clothes, and that this movie is a barren desert.