movie reviews This was a fun movie... This is the 3rd of Lartigau's (director) works I have enjoyed. (others I Do and The Big Picture--) If I like a movie will typically look for other films by the same director...this is usually the most rewarding way to find new things I like. The movie cost $29 million--in the 60s "million dollar movies" were supposed to inspire awe. Typical Bond movies today are half a billion.This is a situational comedy with lots of uninhibited moderated tasteful sexual visuals if the last word is possible? shock value for American audiences... Woody Allen did a movie Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex...it was very funny for the time very "velveeta cheese" (bland and mainline) compared to this film. Lartigau does something similar with Infidelity.The movie is a collection of vignettes involving some aspect of Infidelity...most feature DuJardin and Lellouche (both actors are 40). There are related skits with other actors...and also a funny one with a therapist session for cheating husbands. I enjoyed them all especially DuJardins company trip. The flaw with the movie is the vignettes seem to be one continuous story...and your brain churns about trying to piece things together. Either separate them better (if they were not meant to be related vignettes) or unify them better is my criticism. I am sure it was one continuous story (the ones with DuJardin and Lellouche) however a comment by another reviewer made me wonder if they were not. Again you experience some cognitive dissonance trying to tie them together neatly. Well I did.The ending did not surprise me....hints were given...it was wacky.So that said...the filming is talented the acting great. Afore mentioned problem is tie the vignettes together better-- The uninhibited sexual (tasteful for this type thing?) aspects are good for uptight audiences... although it is not one I would want to watch with my Mother.RECOMMEND

rightwingisevil this film is actually very hollow to portray two sexual driven french guys whose only desire was to fornicate any average pretty woman they encountered any time and any place. they both were married but simply couldn't keep their zippers up. they were night prowlers in all the nightclubs or even in the daytime attending seminars. there were so many unnecessary ugly sexual intercourse scenes that only the wild monkeys would do. the whole movie was trying to categorize itself in the comedy genre but not even one moment you'd have a feeling to smile or laugh. if you think it's drama, then it was too shallow. two guys were prescribed by the screenplay as two attractive males to women, but with these two casting, only the movie by itself could make them attractive to women. they were just average males with average looks, yet the script endowed one of them so popular with women and most of time he could score, while the other usually by passed by most women. this is a very pathetic movie that was so tasteless and boring to the extreme. and i really don't know what made this screenplay to be approved into production. there's no purpose at all to have another pointless movies churned out from the french movie industries. the investors who invested on this shallow movie simply lost more than the movie goers who just wasted a few bucks. a movie you shouldn't go to theater to watch, not even worth renting the DVD.

Guy Lanoue This is not an exceptional movie. It is not thought provoking. It offers little social commentary. Its funniest bits are unfortunately its briefest. It doesn't even have a lot of gratuitous nudity, except for a few shots of male butt. So what does it have going for it? For one thing, it's fairly well written. No character comes across as stupid or even unsympathetic, which is already a plus, given the subject. The acting is great. The French really can churn these sexy comedies out and keep a high standard of acting. In part, this is because French films are in a bit of a doldrums, so I suppose good actors are working B films and glad to get the work. But there really is a European sensibility present that might not translate too well for American audiences. For example, the therapy group in which habitual cheaters own up to their sins is a scream. For one thing, everyone talks honestly and in a straightforward manner about their situation, which makes their lack of understanding that they have a "problem" even funnier. They just don't get it, and of course, being European, no question of a butch man-hating therapist, though she recites the usual litany on marriage and faithfulness. This may be the best longer sequence of the bunch, since their naïve inability to see their problem, much less admit it, tells volumes about European attitudes that, like I said, may not translate too well for Americans. Don't get me wrong: their blindness is exaggerated to the point of parody, but it is a possible blindness, something that allows the actors and director (in this segment, it is star Dujardin, who plays about 6 roles) to adopt a lighter tone. Imagine a Woody Allen treatment of infidelity about 20 years ago. Take away the narcissism, the self-indulgent and pseudo philosophical rhetoric, and you get an idea of the scene. Another minor plus: one segment has a 50 year old dentist carrying on with a 19 year student, an affair that we are told started when she was 15. Although Americans don't portray 15 year old sex, a self-indulgent age difference is normal. Here, the cheater gets his comeuppance not from a criticizing wife but from his paramour's teen age friends, who take advantage of his wallet and mock his willingness to play a young man's game. This is what I like about the movie: an economical and not so politicised treatment of faithfulness (or not), and especially a treatment that probably could not be made in America.

olicaliente This is not an exceptional film. Its main quality, besides the good acting, is to explore the theme of infidelity in a manner not "socially correct". This is a movie with several skits(7 or 8) some very short, others more substantial. The characters are excessive, lovable, sympathetic or repelling, comic or depressing ...It is sometimes quite realistic, sometimes more fantastic or surrealistic, but we can find a little bit of ourself in those situations or characters.The acting is OK, and Dujardin Lellouche are excellent.A good time to spend, not necessarily with a square, except if you want to help him loosen up.