Page 1 of 1

Angel-A (Luc Besson, 2005)

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:57 am
by tavernier
Apparently Armond White loves Besson.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 1:07 am
by Antoine Doinel
Here's the trailer.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:02 pm
by lord_clyde
Hell yeah, I'm glad he got that Arthur and the Invisibles nonsense out of his system.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:16 pm
by godardslave
did someone say "wings of desire" ?

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:34 pm
by tavernier
godardslave wrote:did someone say "wings of desire" ?
No, I don't think so. :lol:

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:13 pm
by Cinesimilitude
This looks pretty good, and Rasmussen was sexy as hell in Femme Fatale. I hope Besson doesnt make it too supernatural, the glowing eyes bit is pretty cliche and uninteresting.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:18 pm
by godardslave
tavernier wrote:
godardslave wrote:did someone say "wings of desire" ?
No, I don't think so. :lol:
hehe, its so obvious, i want to say it again. luc besson has copied Wim Wender's Wings of Desire. :|

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:15 pm
by tavernier
godardslave wrote:hehe, its so obvious, i want to say it again. luc besson has copied Wim Wender's Wings of Desire. :|
Well, better Besson than some Hollywood hack.

Oh yeah: I forgot.

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:51 pm
by Dylan
So, has anybody seen this yet? It looks like a lot of fun, but is it as Wings of Desire meets Girl on the Bridge as it looks?

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:26 pm
by Nothing
erm, this was made and released before Arthur. It's a two year old movie.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:47 pm
by miless
Nothing wrote:erm, this was made and released before Arthur. It's a two year old movie.
it may be, but it is just now getting theatrical distribution in the states (I just saw a trailer for it a week ago before The Lives of Others)

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:03 pm
by Antoine Doinel
Yeah, the North American distribution for the film has been slow and somewhat scattershot. It had a brief run here in Montreal last January for about two weeks.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:39 pm
by lord_clyde
Nothing wrote:erm, this was made and released before Arthur. It's a two year old movie.
So. . . he didn't get that Arthur and the Invisibles nonsense out of his system?

Re: Angel-A (Luc Besson, 2005)

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:04 pm
by domino harvey
I can't believe we have a thread for this (though, tellingly, no posts were made in it after it was released), but then again, the forum was a different beast 15 years ago...

I thought this was laughably bad in its bald-faced wish fulfillment, and honestly, that wouldn't have bothered me if the film was capable of showing one single moment of chemistry between the toweringly tall platinum blonde angel and Jamel Debbouze. You'd think, in a Splash/Wings of Desire ripoff wherein one of the two has to invariably give up their entire way of life for the other, that there would be some kind of spark to drive that forward. It does not help matters much that we are told over and over that Debbouze is secretly sensitive, intelligent, a diamond in the rough etc but as far as I can tell and as far as we are shown, this is a well-guarded secret as he is a total moron for the entirety of the film and his so-called "love" for the titular savior looks a lot like clinging onto her because no one who looks remotely like her has ever given him any attention. I can understand the appeal of this to the losers in the audience, wanting this to happen to them-- many movies satisfy a viewer's desires in some way-- but I think the film flatters anyone who sees some aspect of themselves in this unpleasant "lucky" guy (Some variation of "Jeez, I'm bad but this guy completely sucks and she still fell for him," presumably). I did find it amusing how often a two shot of the central couple required Rie Rasmussen to literally crane her neck down into frame like a swan, though, so the movie had that going for it

Re: Angel-A (Luc Besson, 2005)

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:11 pm
by beamish14
I always thought this film was Besson trying to consciously make something in the Cinema du Look aesthetic that he was associated with at the start of his career, but it makes plainly obvious that he doesn’t have the vision or originality of Beineix or Carax