NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Cissy Évelyne It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

paul2001sw-1 'Anna M.' is a stylish, chilling portrait of a woman's collapse into mental illness; yet it's only partially successful as a film, in spite of a great performance from Isabelle Carre in the lead role, excellent cinematography and an understated, effective score. This is partially because at times it threatens to descend into a straightforward psychopathic stalker movie, and however nicely this is worked out, it's a plot line made dull through over-use and the fact that the victim, by definition, cannot be held responsible by the viewer for their actions. In my opinion, most interesting films leave the audience to judge the character, which can't be done with this plot line. Cleverly, the film cleverly brings this sub-plot to a premature climax, which turns out to be just a local peak on the overall narrative arc; but that wider story, although more innately interesting, never quite lets us into its secret. The tale begins, after all, with a kind of suicide attempt; what led up to this is never explained, even though it's clearly the root cause of what happens after, as well. For me, 'Anna M.' falls in between a thriller and a character study, with some of the merits of both, but also not without the faults of each genre; a miss rather than a hit, though not without interest.

fedor8 I'll have to admit that French movies have come a long way since the 60s and 70s, a period during which vastly overrated - but occasionally barely competent - filmmakers such as Godard, Bunuel, and Rohmer bombarded the viewers with plot-less, overly political, and usually pretentious easy-to-make, pointless, free-for-subjective-interpretation, fill-in-the-meaning-yourself baloney. France is still the source of many dumb films (but, hey, so is Hollywood), yet the direction has become far more skillful, and French editors have finally left the unemployment lines and started being hired to do their (underrated) jobs. Many of the older French flicks look as if ALL the scenes that were shot were stuck into the end-product...ANNA M isn't exactly the first movie to deal either with insanity or stalkers, but it's one of the better ones. This is due in large part to Isabelle Carre's charisma and her ability to pull off an ideal, gradual schizophrenic jump from the likable, naive young spinster to the malicious, tunnel-vision-obsessed loon.The only significant drawbacks can be found around the middle, when the movie drifts slightly into far-fetched territory: the whole nonsense about no-one in the police believing the doctor went into overkill drive for a short while there...The ending is somewhat problematic. The birth of her child "cures" her, calms her down: I don't buy that.

johno-21 I recently saw this at the 2008 Palm springs International Film Festival. This is the story of Anna M (Isabelle Carré), a young and lovely manuscript restorer at the national library in Paris, who develops a fatal attraction to the handsome married Dr. Andre Zanevsky (Gilbert Melki). Anna one day decides to commit suicide by walking into oncoming traffic and is severely injured as a result of being struck by car. While hospitalized she develops a crush on her doctor which upon her release develops into a dangerous delusional disorder called erotomania where she believes the doctor is deeply in love with her which leads to her pursuit and harassment and stalking of him. The film divided into four chapters which represent the four stage of erotomania, Illumination, Hope, Disappointment and Hatred. The four chapters may also represent the film goers four stages of experiencing this film. The premise of the film's story is good and full of possibilities but it ultimately becomes so far-fetched and implausible that it never delivers as either a psychological thriller or a study into mental illness. The doctor can never convince the police that this woman represents a dangerous threat to he and his wife. He is after all a respected surgeon and Anna M. is a woman with a history of mental illness. She just tried to kill herself and at one point in the film her mother recognizes that Anna is losing her grip on reality and comments that "it's happening again" so she must have a history of mental instability even before the attempted suicide. She simply resumes her life after the suicide attempt and as she escalates her harassment of Zanevsky and his wife the police take Anna's side. Anna gets a job as a nanny for tow young girls in the apartment above the Zanevsky's without any references or background checks or employment resumé and immediately begins her final stage of stalking the doctor from her on site vantage point. Carré plays the role in such a one-dimensional way that you are left not really caring about the character and would just like to see her locked up somewhere for along time getting the help she needs. The ending is so ambiguous that you don't know if she's dreaming it up or not and is certainly an unsatisfactory conclusion to the story. Michel Spinosa writes and directs this film that looks good and has a lot of possibilities but falls short. I would give this a 6.0 out of 10.

moimoichan6 Anna M (Isabelle Carré) is a poor and sick girl : she's lonely, depressive, she has no friends or sentimental life, she's got a boring job at the Fench National Library and she lives alone with her mother, who seems unable to fill the void of her life. So, she naturally tries to kill herself an evening, while taking the dog out. And when she wakes up at the hospital, she had to find a new meaning to her life, and it will take the shape of the doctor who cured her (Gilbert Melki), for whom she'll develop a crazy love fixation : even if it seems obvious that he only fells indifference for his patient for whom he only have professional concerns, she'll convince herself that he shares with her an absolute love. The movie develops wit realism and intelligence this fixation, that slowly become a dangerous mental sickness, and fallows its progression steps by steps, with the seriousness of a psychological study.To the crudity of this study, that sometimes really penetrates the intimacy of this troubled conscience, Michel Spinosa adds some horror/thriller's touch that wears a double face. Spinosa uses a fantastic tone and even some horror movies figures of style in order to describe the subjectivity of his character (nighmare sequences, deformed frame to underline the sickness of Anna, etc.), but he's also stage some horrific triller scenes, that lead to the most impressive and tense sequence of the movie, where the monstrous character is now in charge of children. The use of horror figures in a traditional dramatic movie is always interesting in the world of french "Cinema d'Auteur", even if it's more and more common (see the recent "Le dernier des fous", in which Laurent Achard imposed a fantastic tone to a classical family study, or "ILS", a french horror movie, supposedly based on real events). And it's nice to see that the mix is quite efficient and that, thanks to the the reflection of the psychological and the horror sides, you're able to clearly understand the madness of the main character.This description of madness, full of tension, is certainly the great achievement of the movie, but if you're deep in it when you're watching it, it's strange to see how its effects quickly disappear after the screening. Even if I was completely emerged in the movie while watching it, I didn't kept a strong memory of the movie, and it didn't get much impact on me. I think it's partly due to the clinical and cold impression that crosses the all movie, and to the fact that you never really fell anything for the characters. Anna is more like a figure of study, an experimental subject for whom you don't really get any emotion nor compassion, but only understanding, than a really human being. And the Dr. Zanevsky doesn't really exist, except in Anna's mind. Melki's character is just plain and mediocre, and you're never really able to see it through the crazy eyes of his mad lover. That's also why, at the end, despite the original efforts of the movie, I still got the feeling to have watched another classical french little drama.