GUENOT PHILIPPE You may prefer the Jean-Pierre Melville's film, made thirty one years earlier. I do too. Here the visual grammar is absolutely different from the Melville's feature. Nothing in common, if you consider the way of filming. Nothing at all. But this film is however more faithful to the José Giovanni's novel than the Melville's masterpiece was, in 1966. In this film - the old one - for instance, the Relationship between Gu and Manouche's characters were very complex. Because the audiences never actually knew if the two were only long time friends - as could have been two men - lovers or brother and sister...If you Watch closely the Melville's film, you'll notice that. And it was perfectly in the Melvilles touch to bring such ambiguity.On the contrary, in this 2007 version, the Relationship between Gu and Manouche - Bellucci and Auteuil - are very explicit, clear, plain. It is exactly what Giovanni wrote in his book.The action sequences in the Corneau's movie are very inspired by the Asian - Hong Kong - cinema. Thanks Johnny To. Who was himself inspired by Melville...But on another way of filming. We can also find something from Sam Peckinpah here. Slow move gunfights, extreme violence in the WILD BUNCH way, and the funeral odyssey of the lost hero, unable to face the modern world for which he couldn't deal with anymore. A rather good remake, even if you can prefer the genuine material.

ferdinand1932 The gangster genre under Melville was always a little philosophical, a little Sartrean, as it examined the motives of men in the world of crime. It added an extra chic to an otherwise American style of story telling set amongst alleys and bars and clouds of cigarette smoke.That style can also lead into pretentiousness, as though the thinness of the story and the genre form of the characters can be raised to higher art if it is treated as long drama. But to do that, deeper themes need exploring, the capacity to be a writer, a filmmaker, of real effect is required and that is not possible in the strict genre of gangster movies.Unfortunately what is on offer here is simple but overly long. It's pompous. It seems as if there might be something more to it but there isn't. The story has been seen many times before and this treatment at two and half hours could be cut by 40 minutes without any loss. The extra tracking shots; the shots with the cars all leaving a street in real time could be cut because we know what happens, the cars go to another place. Easy. The windy long dialog, which is not very engaging could be shortened and made tougher just like gangster pictures were once made. These are men talk in stabs and gunshots.But of greater weakness is the entire ensemble cast and especially Auteuil who should never have been chosen, he brings too many other roles to this and he lacks the beady eyed killer instinct. Bellucci is not very involved but for her Brigitte Bardot hairstyle and Dutronc does what Dutronc often does. Consequently the hats take over as every male has one and the lighting is all yellow and green filter throughout perhaps to represent the past so the overall effect is like an adults comic book, or some other pastiche of the genre because the story may be too tired and unable to be delivered straight. The feeling when it's over and done is also faintly philosophical: two and half hours have passed and you are older but perhaps no wiser for losing the time.

ablakeway Good plot with great actors, but they seem to act like beginners! This movie is a bad copy of Michel Audiard style dialogs, no where near as funny. The actors seem board stiff. Did they need cash that bad?! I haven't seen the original movie with Lino Ventura, but I'm keen on watching it to be able to compare. The picture is fuzzy and the sound bad (I didn't understand all the dialogs), but perhaps this was due to the cinema, which is a local one (250 seats, one film at a time, but really cheap entry!). This movie is just not worth it.

cashiersducinemart Based on the novel Un Reglement de Comptes by Jose Giovanni on which legendary auteur Jean-Pierre Melville based his classic 1966 film, one has to admire the balls on Alain Corneau for tackling the same source material. A more colorful adaptation of the Giovanni novel, SECOND BREATH rejects all things black and white. Headlamps are amber and there's even a jaundiced light over black and white crime scene photos. In fact, Corneau's SECOND BREATH isn't just colorful; it's garish. Hues are saturated to stratospheric levels.Apart from the color and some intensified violence, Corneau's version of SECOND BREATH is an exercise in redundancy for fans of the original Melville film. It's not to say that Corneau's film is bad by any stretch of the imagination. It's simply just not necessary.