Watch Three Colors: Blue For Free

Memorable, crazy movie

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

A 6/10 only because of the color work, however the rest of it has visually aged - overlong pointless shots, overly insistent blaring "sad" music, blacking out of the screen - supposed to represent the emotional state, however when you have a unemotional dummy of the caliber of Binoche, who could win a contest for the female equivalent of "best show of emotions" since Steven Segal and Keanu Reeves, then not even blacking out of the screen can save you.Overal - an unreal imaginary story - seriously - giving away your house to your husband's mistress just because she has a child, in France - sorry, but french people are accountants and engineers - they would kill themselves before they give so much as a pence to a person who has, especially by the tacit French morality, no claim whatsoever on that money - set in unreal imaginary France ,going as far as to swim out of lanes in a public pool - we get it, Mr. Director, Julie is a "rebel" who arranges her own life, in the face of nonexistent social opposition to her rearranging the said life, who refuses convention, by being conventionally rebelious, but NO swimming pool in Paris will allow you to swim like that - you'll get ejected and banned for life.Also in immediately selling and throwing away all the deceased's possessions she, and thus the director, is following the convention of "healthy grieving"- that is the absence of grieving of the 90ies to the tee. So much for the rebeliousness!Second - I have an issue with Julie being sad because her husband died - that is no mention of her (presumably) child, while hers being a clearly dysfunctional family clearly on the road to divorce. In the end - it's just not believable and there is nobody (except "the whore", and as an aside - thanks social development that we, at least in most of the developed world, moved away from prying into people's private lives to the point of actually causing them harm in their public lives), who has any, ANY appeal in this story.If you like the pretence of style over Substance of Camus' "Stranger" you will like that movie, or if you like an unintentional comedic jumpscare horror with 2 creepface men and 1 resting assface woman as a protagonist - this movie is for you, for the rest - avoid and watch modern American drama.Sadly in this movie I feel I can see the beginning of the fall of the European cinema from making movies close to life, to being just another socialist Soviet Union cinema which exists solely because it's funded by the government and the "cultivated" class through lobbying.

I cannot be sure that Kieslowski cared much for the script of this film; otherwise he would not have made this 2-act film drawn out into the length of a 4-act. The symbols are there, elegantly shot perhaps, but not elegantly placed; the black screens and musical outbursts are overdone and obtrusive, to say the least. And when the widow, (shall we call her Ms. Blue? I don't remember her name) Ms. Blue, is given the cue for reflection (such as when waiting in the dark for an entire minute, deliberating on whether to open her apartment door to check on the remnants of a street fight), the actress "reflects" well -- but to what end? We get the feeling that Kieslowski is making a feature film from the pieces of a short film (what would be a fantastic short film!) and must slather a coat of cinematic, slow "art house" "reflective" paint over the missing pieces to hit a 80+ minute running time. Perhaps to make the film eligible for awards.It is a wonderful film, especially visually; unforgettable are the ultramarine swimming pool and a sugar cube absorbing coffee. But sugar cubes and swimming pools alone don't make for a feature film. The dramatic weight just isn't there, and the freshness of the visuals certainly don't mend the paucity.

This is the first of Krzysztof Kieślowski's colors trilogy. Blue is Liberty. Julie de Courcy (Juliette Binoche) survives a car crash which killed her husband Patrice and her daughter. Patrice is a famous composer who was commissioned to produce a piece for European unity. Julie tries to commit suicide and then escape from the glare of her former life. She befriends exotic dancer Lucille. An old friend Olivier is also a composer and suspects the composition is actually Julie's. Patrice had a mistress. Julie has to break out of her darkness. Kieślowski uses everything including color, silence, music and most importantly Binoche infusing this with meaning. This is very much an art-house film and may not be for everyone. The quietness does lower the intensity. It's slow and meticulous. There isn't much of a plot. It's all about Julie's darkness and the reveal that can break through.

A woman (Juliette Binoche) struggles to find a way to live her life after the death of her husband and child.Nothing against the plot, but this is a visual film. As with the other two films in the trilogy, the color of the title features prominently in the color scheme. Here, unlike "White", the blues (and greens) jump out everywhere without being overwhelming. The elements are intense, but well-used.Does it compare to "Red"? Based on what everyone seems to think, it does not. But everyone should make up their own minds -- watch all three.