Micmacs Reviews

Since I have enjoyed all the movies directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, I was really eager to check this flick. Eventuallly, even though I enjoyed it, it must be, unfortunately, his weakest directing so far (yeah, even the critically panned 'Alien: Resurrection' was better than this in my opinion). The first disappointment was that Jamel Debbouze was cast as the lead but dropped out and was replaced by another famous French comedian, Dany Boon who had just reached some major success with 'Bienvenue chez les Ch'ti'. Indeed, Debbouze was an appealing choice but Boon was a let-down since he is usually pretty annoying. Well, eventually, I have to admit that Danny Boon was actually decent here. Futhermore, as usual, Jeunet created a very appealing world, visually some impressive combination between 'Delicatessen' and 'Le Fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain'. Unfortunately, the story was rather weak. Indeed, with a short running time (just 90 minutes) , there was barely enough time to develop the characters which were not really interesting. The plot was not much better, going rather randomly from one scene to another. So, the whole thing was rather disappointing but, like everything done by Jeunet, the directing and production design was really good and only therefore, I still enjoyed this flick. Anyway, to conclude, after 5 long years, Jeunet didn't really deliver the goods but I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like his work like I do.

Micmacs is a film that drunkenly sways towards the edge. It never falls off, but it comes awfully close several times. As a biting satire of the arms race, it is just that. As a quirky film about quirky characters doing quirky things, it does its job. As an enjoyable film filled with whimsy and visual invention it’s quite good. It’s just too much of too many things. Almost too whimsical, almost too many ideas bouncing around all at once, too many quirky characters doing quirky things just because it’s French, and that’s what they do. But I was never bored, and I walked out enjoying it way more than the problems that I had with it.

The story, which seems secondary to the whimsy, is about a sad, lonely man who gets shot in the head and discovers two rival arms dealer’s right across the street from each other. The bullet is from one, and the bomb that killed his father in the opening sequence is from the other. He moves in with a group of carnival-ready oddballs in a cave hollowed out from a junkyard and plots his revenge. I’d like to pretend that this film centers the story first and has the weirdness as a logical outgrowth from it, but it doesn’t. I’m all for bonkers filmmakers and films that feature gorgeous visuals, but while, say, The Fall or Pan’s Labyrinth accomplish these goals, they’re also story-centered affairs. Micmacs could have done away with one or two eccentricities and been all the better for it, I nominate the love story which is never fully realized nor believable since it just happens.

Each of the actors must have been told to keep all of their emotions at an eleven on a scale of one to ten. Except for Dany Boon, our main character, who is trying for something resembling Buster Keaton’s great stone face and Charlie Chaplin’s beloved little tramp, think of his character as their progeny. He comes to closest to making us really care about these characters, but I never really invested in them the way I invested in Amelie. Again, they’re often struck down by weirdness for weirdnesses sake. It’s entertaining all right, but a bit too much.

It tackles a big message, the have-nots can topple the haves very easily, but it strains for charm. Amelie burst forth with charm and quirks, but it anchored itself on a solid story and a great performance. Micmacs is a film that I am glad that I have seen, but frustrated that it didn’t impress me as much. I am grateful that someone dared to be different and have this much visual invention, but knowing when and how to edit is key.