35 Shots of Rum (2009)

Lionel, a Parisian suburban train conductor, lives in a comfortable place with Josephine, his daughter, a university student of social studies. Their lives are examined in this introspective character study by Claire Denis, a director closely associated with the African continent. In this story, she watches a group of railway people, all of them African immigrants from the former French colonies.The focus of the film is the loving relationship between father and daughter and friends. Lionel was married to a German woman, now dead. He has reared Josephine, doing a splendid job. Even though they might not have a lot to say to one another, their love is evident. Noe, a neighbor, clearly likes Josephine. Lionel, who has been a widower for a long time, is interested in Gabrielle, a taxi driver. Nothing much happens in the story, and yet, it has its spell on viewers. One follows these immigrants who have made a life in a foreign land, living productive, if somewhat quiet lives. The atmosphere is positive as Ms. Denis decided to present them in a light which makes the audience care for them. The screenplay, written by Jan-Pol Fargeau and the director, shows their appreciation, and respect for the people being examined in the film.The cast is excellent led by Alex Descas, who plays Lionel with a quiet dignity. Lovely Mati Diop makes justice of her Josephine. Gregoire Colin plays the enigmatic Noe, and Nicole Dogue does an interesting take on Gabrielle. The production was photographed by the distinguished cinematographer Agnes Godard who bathes the film in dark tones since much of the action takes place at night. Tindersticks provide the melodious musical score.

I liked everything about this movie. I liked spending time with these characters, and the performances were spot on. I liked the moody aesthetic of the film, the music (I haven't heard "Nightshift" in YEARS!) and the cinematography fit beautifully. I liked how the relationships between the personalities gradually unfolded and revealed themselves. But the operative word here is "like." Although I can't find anything to criticize, I can't find anything that deserves exceptional praise either. It's a thoughtful movie, it's a nice movie... it's a good, solid understated drama. It just wasn't anything more than that. I often wondered if there was some subtext I wasn't picking up on, which is highly possible. For whatever reason, although I enjoyed it, it didn't leave much of an impression.

A long, pretentious and boring mess, ending in a mushy inexplicable scene set up only to get the title worked into the film. It goes nowhere... mostly because it hardly has a plot, it is just enigmatic observations.Denis's strives for realism and humanism; but the only rare viewer can possibly identify with the film due to its purposely vague non-plot. Or to its characters who are just living their mundane lives. This film uses a manipulative narrative structure and its characters are mostly connected by lifeless staring or slight movements. The character development is nothing more than an hour and a half of watching them perform the most trivial and mundane of tasks. Nothing much happens. And the scenes in which nothing much happens drag on endlessly. This slice of life film was far less enjoyable than a slice of soggy pizza.

If like me, you're the kind of person who's desk is always tidy with everything in the right place, who appreciates clarity and structure, and is in generally on the wrong-end of the societal norm of 'just go with the flow', then this film could prove to be quite a challenge.The first few minutes encapsulate the movie in miniature. We spend the time zipping around a French metro system going nowhere in particular, via a camera attached to the front of various trains, as the timespan unfolds from daylight to darkness. This is intercut with shots of a good-looking chain-smoking bloke in his fifties, watching the subway trains from his motorbike by the side of the tracks. What is he waiting for? What does he look so worried about? Why does he eventually leave? For every answer meted out, another dozen questions take its' place.The plot, such as it is, concerns the changing relationship between a beautiful father/daughter combo (which, at times, seemed to me almost incestuous in tone), and their extended family of neighbours. Most 'stuff' is left unsaid for the viewer to interpret. Instead we are treated to languid, lingering shots of things like, er, doorways and skin. This is most definitely art-house territory, with bits of French-ness thrown in.I stayed for the Q&A after the Edinburgh Film Festival showing, in the hope that the director (Claire Denis) might shed some light on her work, and indeed she did – long, rambling answers that veered all over the place in an entirely inoffensive but generally incoherent way – just like her film really. Nice enough to look at, but not really my cup of thé au lait, even if there had been some in sulky Noe's fridge. 4/10