Part of me wanted to hate this film. On its hands and knees 'fiening for an Oscar, it seemed the standard bearer for those that "like independent cinemas". But make no bones about it, this is a crowd pleaser on an epic, mainstream cinema scale. Wonderful, wonderful filmmaking.

Having watched Paul Merton's excellent Birth of Hollywood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Merton%27s_Birth_of_Hollywood), I was compelled enough by The Artist's premise to plonk my butt down with an enormous popcorn and coke.

This film is successful in telling the rise and fall of its lead - and superbly named - silent movie star, George Valentin. What they do so well, is to seamlessly weave in the birth of talkies with George's trajectory, together with the love story (and the face of George's downfall) Peppy Miller. Berenice Bejo does a truly fantastic job. She effortlessly made me fall in love with her. Not only is she more than aesthetically pleasing, she's also truly in love with this man and we feel her heartache as she sees him tear himself apart.

What this film articulates is how important imagery and performance is in conveying emotion.

Got to say as well that the tap dancing at the end is incredible. Would never have guessed myself being so enthralled by it.

You've really got to see The Artist if you haven't.

I saw this last week. Really not my bag, but I gotta admit, it dug its claws into me. Both leads were extremely likeable characters. Berenice was fantastic. Been a long time since I simply adored a female lead like her.

Was also impressed with the sets, scenery, and costume design. They really captured the look and feel of late 20s, early 30s Hollywood.

The scene when George actually begins to hear sound in the movie was gripping.

One thing maybe you can answer, Andrew.

MAJOR SPOILER

Are we to believe that nobody wanted to see Valentin in talkies because of his thick accent? When he finally speaks at the end? If so, I felt I was a bit mislead during the film.

All in all, was glad I went to see it.

James

I hadn't thought about it like that but that's a very interesting question.

I'll need to watch it again, but my impression at the time (and that was a couple of weeks ago) was that his inability to become 'a talkie' was down to a combination of things:

- His belief that it would pollute the artistry of silent movies hence his financially suicidal directorial debut.
- His arrogance and dismissive attitude towards the showing of a talkie, thus fracturing his relationship with the studio.
- His hogging the limelight that ostracised him from co-stars that may have been willing to salvage his career by intervening.
- He was viewed as silent movie star, and the audience wanted fresh stars for their fresh platform.

But now you've mentioned that, it does add an extra dimension and also addresses the question of why they bothered with him actually speaking at all. Be very interested to see what others think about that.

The film's charm is undeniable and it worked its magic on me.
The leads. The dog. The silent era humor. I bought it all.

What I didn't buy into was the long second act descent of our protag.
The story wallowed in the mid section a bit too much for my taste.

John Goodman, James Cromwell and Penelope Ann Miller add some zest to the tale.
I was hoping for a little less melodrama and a little more ingenuity.
But the movie is affable, sentimental and utterly charming when it wants to be.

I'm going to watch Hugo this long holiday weekend.
Unless that movie completely sweeps me off my feet, I say this one gets Oscar gold.

E.D.

It was probably the best film of another disappointing year, but I agree with Brett that the second act left a lot to be desired.

I simply didn't believe he was that proud...throughout the film he just came across as a genial fellow who people liked....as an example his chauffeur who was willing to work for him for free.

As such, I also didn't buy any of the love story...which is kind of a problem considering that's literally all there is.

Ending was underwhelming as well.

It's a medicore film wrapped in fantastic clothes. All style over substance....but it's about the best you can hope for at the present.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films It was probably the best film of another disappointing year, but I agree with Brett that the second act left a lot to be desired. I simply didn't believe he was that proud...throughout the film he just came across as a genial fellow who people liked....as an example his chauffeur who was willing to work for him for free.

I"m with Rick here about the second half trajectory.
Due to its construction, I thought George was going to reinvent himself.
Keep his chin up and try a lot of different things to get back into the biz.
But he keeps picking the wrong trends, cuz he doesn't have confidence in himself.

I thought it was going to be more about shunning gimmicks.
And letting himself be real, no more mugging for silent films.
But it went a melodramatic way that didn't resonate with me.
Came around in the end, but the mid section sagged for me.

E.D.