Belle de Jour (1995)

Waste of time

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Bunuel delivers a beautiful story through symbolism, dream sequences and complex character narrative. Belle de Jour- on the surface -could be viewed as an "easy watch", yet digging deeper it hints at the surrealistic values of the director. Although this is regarded as one of Bunuel''s most popular films, I feel it lacks the depth and value that his earlier films boast. Though it is a classic, I don't think it's a masterpiece. This film is a great watch for both those studying film or seeking entertainment.

nothing different, in essence, by his other films. and nothing common. the speech remains the same. but the magic, the story as support for provocative images, the refined beauty as tool for a clear manifesto are good points in this case about marriage, bourgeoisie values, love, freedom and choices. it is difficult to explain the roots of a Bunuel film and, in same measure , it is not easy to understand, in a time of Hollywood blockbusters, his message. enough could be to admire Catherine Deneuve, the old fashion eroticism and to imagine the significance of scenes. it is portrait of a period and this does it real special. it has admirable forms of poetry, mystery and a form of seduction who remains a great challenge. so, it is not complicated to ignore than this film, like each film of Luis Bunuel, is a talk to you. a personal message. this is the essence in the case of "Belle de Jour".

Catherine Deneuve has a handsome doctor husband who loves her and likes whisking her away to nice spots for romantic getaways. He wants children with her. She responds with frigidness and, usually, turn-downs to his physical overtures.Then she decides the thing to do is start working as a prostitute at a whorehouse. While he's away working to make the money to support her idle luxury, she flops down on a mattress to sell to a series of fat, sweaty strangers the sexual favors she usually won't share with hubby at home.For his sake, it's unfortunate she neglects to mention this. He also could stand to know the name of a good lawyer. With a friend like her, he won't need many enemies.We see she was molested as a child by some elderly pervert. As an adult she fantasizes about being tied up, whipped, raped, and having animal dung flung into her face until half her person is covered in it. And you wondered why they never show this at women's self-esteem conferences.We do tend to guess she has issues, a side of her sexuality she hasn't come to grips with. Her prostituting herself, we speculate, is some exploration of it.Director Luis Bunuel seems mostly interested in manipulating the characters like marionettes to reach his pre-planned political agenda, showing them as empty-headed bourgeoisie marching to certain doom.Doom comes, not to her but to him. He pays a vicious price for her duplicitous back-stabbing. Unable to face what she's wrought, she descends into a world of fantasy, dreaming of him as he was, conveniently forgetting how much it bored her.While I did care about the characters and was drawn in by the tragedy, it also seemed an all-too-easy excuse to make it all about some dark sexual matter. For all her exploring, Denevue doesn't seem to gain much insight. I didn't either, except that movies like this tend to draw attention.Bunuel seems to hold his characters and society in contempt, while also not suggesting any better alternatives. Sexuality is almost always depicted as something either perverse or for sale in half-hour increments. The one character who seems to feel it's healthy - Sorel - winds up an invalid in a wheelchair. This anti-human strain was off-putting.Bunuel's hatred of the middle class seems endless, and is uninterrupted by the fact that he is one himself. He even appears in a cameo, drinking coffee in a cafe. Better he'd been the waiter, so audiences could have sent this all back to the kitchen and ordered up a little less misanthropy, a little more care about the characters.

a special film. like each movie by Bunuel. same scene, same tricks, same spirit. different ingredients. and Catherine Deneuve in one of her memorable roles. a film about passion and desire. about search of happiness and clash between words. ironic, cold and out of reality's circle. and it is enough for discover an universe who has its rhythm, shadows and law. a film like a parable but that is not new fact for Bunuel. a film who seduce in strange manner because it is only a chain of questions. surrealism is basic answer but not the only. because it is an imitation of life in essential aspects. and a challenge. like each of Bunuel films.