ShangLuda Admirable film.

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

falconara I chose this film only to see Justin Theroux,whom I ADORE; Ms.Tatou is really unbearable in her,again,happy naive Cinderella-style skinny character.The script is a not-credible fairytale,with some touches of bad taste now and then,probably meant to be modern/transgressive signs,but utterly out of place(i.e.:1-Val peeing in the micro-garden,at night,and Jack taking a photo of her;2-the lesbian kiss) There isn't the slightest trace of chemistry between Jack and Val,not a REAL kiss,not a contact,a scene between the two conveying some emotion. Tatou's acting is irritating.Theroux is a little bit rigid sometimes-I think it's up to the script-and really good and exhilarating in some scenes. If this film was meant to be a sentimental comedy the result is a total disappointment.

Andro It's quite unfortunate that some artists who are perfectly cast in the movie that brings them fame end up being victims of that particular memorable performance. That is, they are identified with one single character which casts a shadow over their remaining career. Great artists manage to overcome this barrier, whereas artists who are limited in characters they could effectively portray move the wrong way. Downwards. Self-destructing themselves. Audrey Tautou belongs to the latter category. She gave it all to Amelie Poulain. And even though the movies that followed "Amelie" were not bad, excitement that surrounded her eventually declined. Before being re-cast by Jean-Pierre Jeunet in "A Very Long Engagement", where Tautou portrays a dry variation of our beloved Amelie Poulain, Tautou chose to take part in a disaster called "Nowhere to Go But Up". Basically, the movie behind this review. "Nowhere to Go But Up", I dare say, is prosaic characterized by a banal script and disastrous acting. Nevertheless, it's somewhat hard to say which is worse, the tasteless movie itself or Audrey Tautou who explicitly demonstrates her numerous shortcomings as an actress.

writers_reign This movie is currently playing in Paris as 'Happy End', hence my summary. Tautou has great presence and luminosity, no question, and equally obvious is that she has the makings of another Audrey Hepburn. But this isn't it. Someone has obviously seen the grosses on Breakfast At Tiffany's and figured, okay, let's do another adorable kook in Manhattan, let's have another writer manque become enamored of her and write about her successfully. Okay, it may be dated by now but Breakfast at Tiffs had STYLE. How else could they get away with making Hepburn WORSE than a hooker, a hooker who took money from guys on the tacit understanding that she would come across later and then powder via the powder room. True, they were more up front with the George Peppard character, he WAS a gigolo any way you sliced it, but they could get away with contriving a WHOLESOME romance between two slightly sleazy people because of the Style with which it was done. It was a pity there was no believably chemistry between Hepburn and Peppard but given that Peppard was a graduate of the Forestry Commission School of Acting that was always going to be a problem and given that Hepburn actually married a pygmy Redwood in the shape of Mel Ferrer, she couldn't complain. In this one, Tautou is cast as the adorable kook, French style, come to Manhattan to make it as an actress. She is reduced, however, not only to cleaning toilets but also sleeping and peeing outside the house of Justin Therouze (who he?), a would-be leading man clearly destined to go the same way as Nathalie Nattier. There would be more sexual chemistry between Golda Meir and Yasser Arafat than these two mismatched lovers. See it if you like Tautou, the camera loves her, but that's the best you can say for it. 3/10