dwpollar
1st watched 2/12/2012 – 7 out of 10(Dir-Thomas Vincent): Controversial thriller about the drug industry using humans as guinea pigs to test new drugs before they hit the market. Specifically this movie is about it's effect on a man, and his son – who died from a car crash – while testing a drug. The movie starts showing clinical tests being done in Africa on young kids and then moves to the star – who receives a phone call about the demise of his son. He then gets a call from a woman, who we find out later is checking up on his son – fearing that he may run into issues with the drug company. They then meet up at a conference where the woman is escorted out after making a public scene against the company. The couple then start to work together to determine what happened to the young man who died. At first, there isn't a lot of trust between them, but upon seeing the danger the woman is in – he starts believing her. This movie is paced well, and takes a direct stab at an industry many people talk about, but we see very little in the movies about the issue. It is a unique movie in this sense and is also a good thriller that keeps you thinking up until the very end of the film. The only downfall is that it is very biased and it's obvious very quickly. All in all – if you can get around reading subtitles – this French film is a unique and enjoyable movie. And if you know French turn them off and enjoy!!
dbdumonteil
Thomas Vincent seems here André Cayatte's psychic son: a director who takes the law in his own hands;we do need someone like André Cayatte,this director the Nouvelle Vague was always putting down.The subject is absorbing and the movie is up to scratch in its first half:the scene in the hospital where the dead son's mobile's keeps on ringing (spooky ,huh?);the press conference;and to top it all ,the sequence in the café where a scientist explains to a bewildered Cornillac how we are all potential sick persons and that there's a lot of money to be made ;developing countries ,we could help them ,but they are not interesting commercially speaking: rich countries are the gold mine.Molière was a visionary when he wrote his "Malade Imaginaire" in 1693!Too bad the character disappears after such terrifying lines.The second part is less interesting ,consisting of chases,abduction attempts ,violence ,in short,your average thriller.The human side,present in the first half ,has almost disappeared and I find Cornillac's playing rather wooden -maybe when he is dubbed ,it's less embarrassing- Jean Reno's style.His female partner 's is not very subtle either and is not sparing of gestures and words (she's almost always shouting).What is definitely lacking is details about the young victim;we know almost nothing about this unfortunate young lad and the final "unexpected" revelation does not make much sense out of context.
canadamelody
My friend Jim wrote this and I totally agree in fact I go further I say this is a powerful call to revolt and an American movie would defend the corporate mouthpiece.THE NEW PROTOCOL a review by James Neeley. October 26 2009.Could the New Protocol be made in the United States? Could a movie be made with such an overt political ending stand a chance in a country that needs a hero, sex scenes , lots of guns, one liners, hidden conspiracies and the constant reaffirmation that we are still the "good guys? I think not.Now Thomas Vincent would find an audience for this movie in America, bigger than an art house audience and smaller than latest torture porn of the Saw franchise. (Franchise not my word, but the current word of choice by the industry for describing these products). We are not complete idiots yet, although we are well on our way.The movie begins in sub-Saharan Africa with two Europeans bringing vaccines to the local citizens, as ominous dark music grows in the back ground, and a bar code reader beeps with each reading of a bracelet as the children are vaccinated. The bracelet is much like the ones put on my children in the hospital where they were born, although for very different reasons. It was a sound I knew but couldn't place. One child, one bar code.The question of a hero, in the New Protocol. Raoul Kraft, newly divorced, a hands on foreman with a logging company learns of his sons death in a car accident, questions the official line and is drawn into an action filled movie. So far this movie could be playing on any number of tiny screens at the local mega-plex. He teams up with Diane who recently lost her husband, who had a heart attack, after taking an approved drug. Get a large popcorn and refill the drink. He helps her, and she helps him. Mutually empathy, maybe and mutual selfishness, that too, both have lost someone they love.No sex scene though, no embrace after the chase, no falling in love, no falling into bed. No wasted film time, no nude scene controversy. In American movies that is the cue that personal love will conquer all problems, if the couple is happy the world will follow. When Diane does kiss Raoul, it is from pure human compassion. They both need something, but it is not each other.Now for the villains, are they Louise Verneuil and Pleynel?The audience is conditioned to the evil corporate monster, looking out from the top floor, the conspiracy hidden through murders, threats and payoffs. A naive assistant, a file down loaded as a key is inserted into the door. A bad apple in an all American apple pie. The system itself can not possible be tainted or bad, just the current leadership. They write the fine print we don't read.Are the the multi-nationals the villains? If you can get the right laws passed, you will not need to break them. There are no hidden conspiracies because no laws are being broken. If you want treatment check here on the release, otherwise go elsewhere. Remember its a free-market.Are they a public scared to death of getting old, depressed, anxiety ridden, over weight, stressed out, under sexed, over sexed? We know, deep down we have it better because others have it worse. The market is the velvet glove of the army said Arundhati Roy. But I don't believe that some boomer needs to get an erection until he's 70. I do believe world health takes priority. If you ask the people in churches, grange halls, community groups, non-profits, around dinner tables, you'd get the same response.If The New Protocol was made in the United States, the villain would have been a rogue corporatist. He would be the benefactor, not the share holders. He would have covered up the mistake. And it would be a mistake, not a five year growth plan. The proper authorities would finally believe Kraft at the last minute, the villain led away in handcuffs. Kraft wrapped in a blanket. His ex wife would be waiting for him, the lights of a police car engulfing them.But it was not. There will be no sequel.When Pleynel tried to pacify Raoul with her presentation. And it was a sales presentation, without power point but the same intention. The intention to sell Raoul something he doesn't believe. He believes, because he wants to, needs to. But that handshake he sees on the hotel TV screen. That handshake that says we're all on the same page. We are not.I liked the ending. It was true.The hero, if we can call him that, is handcuffed, his son took a placebo, and so do we everyday when we think we are not part of the problem.
abisio
For reasons that only can be related to protect the crap the Hollywood movie industry produces this smart and not easy to digest movie did not get distribution while awful USA movies (non-independent) are shown in thousands of theatres.This is not a matter of subtitles or commercial issues. European countries like France or Spain translate the dialogs in their own language and few theatres show the original version. This is the real FREEDOM, USA citizens do not have (though are being convinced of the contrary). On the contrary USA distributors; buy movies that are never shown because if they do people could first of all THINK something Hollywood is against and second could realize that out of the technical and production aspects USA movies are far from art; just plain formula repeated and remixed in every major title.Now, about "LE NOUVEAU PROTOCOL"; Raoul Craft (the outstanding Clovic Cornillac) is notified about his son dead on car accident. The first 15 or 20 minutes deals with the tragedy and family sadness without almost using dialogs. During that period; Raoul is contacted by a women (always solid Marie-Josee Croze in a too complex character) that a medical laboratory was involved on the kids dead.After the initial sorrow, a series of unclear events makes Raoul believe the woman and tries to find out what happened. Things get violent but in a completely unexpected way. The line between good and evil is blurred; as it is in real life.It could be fare to compare this movie with the CONSTANT GARDENER (the same subject matter); however while that movie had a more poetic / romantic approach, this one is pretty complex and never gives an easy answer to anything.
