Watch The Perfume of Yvonne For Free

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

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.

I have never seen such a nicely made piece of rubbish in my life. I am still working out what the film was about and what was its cause. There was none and I felt I wasted an hour and a half, as well as £1.50 hiring this from the library. Nonetheless, it was beautifully made, the camera work was nice, there were interesting statements about love and Sandra Majani has a very nice bottom.So what does happen exactly; well, it's about a man called Victor Chmara (Hippolyte Girardot) who doesn't do much with his life apart from living off his fathers inheritance. He falls in love with the beautiful actress Yvonne (Sandra Majani) and becomes best-buddies with her mysterious old friend Dr Meinthe (Jean-Pierre Marielle). They all have a great time together and then things go wrong after a strange motor/fashion show. Victor wants to go to the USA, Yvonne doesn't, and the Doctor just continues being camp. If I tell you anymore, I end up telling you the ending, so that's enough of the synopsis. There are ingredients in this film that I liked. The camera work was sometimes interesting and there were some nice landscape shots. The dialogue, the heart to hearts, the warble about their lives, the philosophical statements about 'never letting her (Yvonne) go' were very romantic and very poetic. The acting by Jean-Pierre Marielle as the camp doctor was also amusing. Otherwise, his character is totally wasted in the story and has a far bigger role than that is necessary. For me, Patrice Leconte's reason for adapting Patrick Modiano's book Villa Triste to the big screen was all about Sandra Majani and seeing her nude. She was a poor actress. Her movement and the way she carried herself was half-hearted. That goes for Hippolyte Girardot as well. He plays someone a little too stiff to be in love. Either the actors are poor or the director is, because there are bad performances all around, and it's the director's job to make sure that these types of performances do not happen. Another of his problems was conveying the messages in the story. They were mixed up and statements of romance were just thrown together without thought of the plot. To me it just seemed pretentious and the director was trying to be too clever with little resources. The story had little meaning other than not to let love go when you have it. That and to see a beautiful French lady naked, which was admittedly quite nice. The statements of love were unsubtle and the acting didn't really convey any proper emotion. Totally unconvincing and I hope Yvonne's bad smelling perfume goes away. I give this film two.

Patrice Leconte is one of my favorite director. Although this film is not one of his best, it's still worth watching. It's burning with sensuality. Great characters: from the eccentric doctor René to the Marmaduke look-a-like dog. Good performances by Marielle, Girardot and Majani. Too bad it's her only film. This movie tells the story about two persons in love. But love, as every true movie fan will know, is not always the easiest thing. Verdict: not the best Leconte, but a very enjoyable way to spend 89 minutes.Seen at home, in Toronto, on September 20th, 2005.76/100 (**½)

What can you say about a film by a leading director that flopped at the box office and whose leading lady was never heard from again (shades of Les Portes de la nuit and Nathalie Nattier) yet has drawn a half dozen sympathetic comments on this very board. For me the twin selling points were Patrice Leconte and Jean-Pierre Marielle and neither let me down. A friend in France whose judgment I value warned me against it and although I could see where she was coming from I'm still glad I saw it. In some respects Leconte has produced the ultimate valentine to lost love and shot it in a hazy, wistful, slightly unreal style the way we tend to remember lost time. The handful of linking scenes featuring the narrator looking back to 1958 are shot in stark, sombre tones contrasting wildly with the pastel palette of the flashbacks set in and around Lake Geneva. The dreamlike quality is present from the start; in a dream there are no formal introductions or elaborate establishing of relationships, they are just there, you meet someone and instantly know them or know all you want or need to know to fall in love. As others have said on this board Leconte withholds information about all the three principals but even with a story as leisurely paced as this one we don't really care. The eroticism whilst more blatant than in say, The Hairdresser's Husband, is still light years short of being even soft porn but is in keeping with the dreamlike quality throughout. On balance a fine film which did not deserve its neglect.

As the audience of this movie you will drown into the atmosphere of boredom from three non-characters who are heading straight for the ending you all expect from the beginning. I still liked it though.