User Reviews

The new Woody film is neither a masterpiece nor is it bad - as some reviews here seem to claim. It is actually better than some of his recent films (i.e "Autumn in NY"). Parts of it reminded me of "Scoop" or even of the masterpiece that is "Manhattan Murder Mystery". Unfortunately without the humour and star actors of his older films. Although acting is decent and photography, script and directing are even better- it misses the quality and sparks that great stars have brought to Allen's films in the past turning a small-talk scene into something brilliant and funny or a personal impasse into tragedy.

For Allen fans it is very pleasant entertainment with some Hitchcockian touches and a nice Paris-in-the-autumn atmosphere.

The underlying "philosophical" motif of beleiving or not in the power of chance in life is rather superficially dealt with, rehashing the ideas of "Matchpoint". The ending could be more developed while the whole film seems at places to work on auto-pilot following similar plots of his previous films. However, as the "captain" here happens to be one of the greatest living directors who - despite his old age and the witch hunt against him- continues to offer us one film per year I can only say, thanks again Woody!

We were very lucky to attend an advance screening of Woody Allen's latest movie, "Coup de Chance" (Stroke of Luck) almost a whole month ahead of its Australian release. While it may not stand as his greatest work, the film is undeniably well-made and thoroughly entertaining. Set against the backdrop of Paris in the autumn, the cinematography captures the city's beauty, adding an extra layer of charm to the narrative.

The film boasts decent acting performances, with the cast delivering their roles competently. However, it's hard to ignore the sense of déjà vu, especially if you've seen "Matchpoint." It's like Allen's taken a stroll down memory lane, rehashing some of his earlier ideas. While the familiarity may give a sense of nostalgia for longtime fans, it also left me yearning for something new from the seasoned filmmaker. Despite these echoes, "Coup de Chance" manages to create a compelling story, keeping the audience engaged with its well-paced plot and witty dialogue. In the end, Allen once again demonstrates his ability to craft an enjoyable cinematic experience, even if the shadows of his past successes loom in the background.

This movie is absolutely humourless and quite boring. I feel a deep disappointment about it. No sense of humour, no sense of crime no infidelity nothing to tell. Which should be the plot? Nothing to be remembered. Good actors, quite good music, fantastic Parisian scenes but nothing makes any sense. What happened to that Woody Allen director of magical and dreamful movies we all were in love with ? He seems having lost his gift to make us laugh for a long while. The movie is already too long cause nothing on the stage catches the viewers eyes . No emotions, nothing to laugh or cry for, nothing to do with usual Woody's filmography.

I really miss the typical humor of Woody Allen because of the language barrier. When I watch his movies, it's not just about comedy; it's like you can almost picture Woody Allen standing there, finding the humor in human mistakes and laughing along with us. "Coup de Chance" isn't a huge departure from his usual style, but it's more lively and enjoyable than his recent films. The cast is sharp and energetic, showing that he can direct well in French. Everyone looks like they're having a great time in this light-hearted comedy that unexpectedly takes a darker turn. Woody Allen tells a funny story in a simple way, mixing detective-style drama with city romance. The outcome is a clever and amusing spoof created in a laid-back manner.

After being delayed by the COVID pandemic, Woody Allen takes us on a jaunt through autumnal Paris in Coup de Chance, a tale of forbidden love, sudden windfalls, and the fickle hand of fate. Lou de Laâge shines as Fanny, a woman trapped in a gilded cage, married to a wealthy, domineering tycoon (Melvil Poupaud). Enter Alain (Niels Schneider), a charming, penniless writer who ignites a passionate spark in Fanny's seemingly dormant heart. A chance lottery ticket, bought on a whim, sets the stage for a whirlwind of intrigue and moral quandaries.

Allen's signature wit is sprinkled throughout the film, most effective in the early scenes where Fanny's suffocating marriage is punctured by hilarious exchanges with her neurotic mother (played with scene-stealing verve by Valérie Lemercier). But as the plot tightens and the stakes rise, the laughs simmer down, replaced by a Hitchcockian suspense that's undeniably gripping.

Here's the problem: while the premise is enticing, the execution stumbles in spots. The pacing occasionally meanders, leaving us wanting a bit more oomph from the central love affair. And while Allen masterfully builds tension, the resolution feels somewhat tepid, like a souffle that didn't quite rise.

Despite its shortcomings, Coup de Chance boasts undeniable charm. The camerawork is a love letter to Paris, capturing the city's golden hues and melancholic beauty. The performances are uniformly excellent, with de Laâge and Poupaud delivering nuanced portrayals of characters caught in a moral maze.

So, should you gamble on Coup de Chance? Well, it's not a jackpot, but it's not a dud either. Think of it as a crisp autumn walk-pleasant, thought-provoking, but maybe lacking the fireworks of a summer blockbuster. If you're a Woody Allen aficionado or enjoy stylish dramas with a touch of suspense, it's worth a peek. Just don't expect to win the cinematic lottery.

Fanny Fournier, a young woman married to a shady financier, is surprised to encounter an old schoolfriend, Alain, on the street one day. He casually references a crush he had on her back then, and suggests they catch up sometime. She starts to reflect on how her life could have been different if Alain had spoken up. Fanny characterises herself as a rebel, husband Jean comes across as more of a social climber.

After the initial long takes there are brittle little scenes in the country when Fanny's husband goes shooting in the woods. Then we're rushed back to the city, so that you can almost hear the neurotically urbane director gasping, "Phew!"

Fanny and Alain go, not for a working lunch together, rather a walking lunch, during which Alain talks about how ironical existence is. Does the fact that he does so in French instead of English make it less of a cliché? [Discuss.] Is it ironic that we have to watch husband Jean show off his model train set twice? Over successive lunches Alain talks about his youthful yearning for Fanny, and husband Jean isn't exactly indifferent to her either. She complains, "Sometimes I feel like a trophy wife." She's clearly restless. We see Fanny alone on a sofa, staring into space as the camera smoothly zooms in to the sound of smooth jazz. [Cut.] Alain's gift of a poetry book reminds me of Elliot and Lee in Hannah & Her Sisters. Are we are on the verge of a reluctant affair? What will happen if Jean finds out? With his head buried in his train set, will he even notice?

Alain does rather harp on about his emotional dreaming after Fanny. It's a wonder she doesn't get bored. And why no kids? There are so rarely children in the stories where Woody wants to explore one of his old stand-bys: chronic dissatisfaction. We keep seeing Alain buying things for Fanny with his coins: chestnuts, an old poetry volume, a single flower instead of a bouquet. A lotto ticket, for given the chance of being born is so small, in effect you've already lucked out, so how can you lose?! I've not got my fingers crossed for this couple.

Allen wisely energises Coup de Chance with more modern, extrovert jazz than, for example, the soporific song used to open Midnight in Paris. Still fairly mellow though (Cantaloupe Island multiple times in the first half an hour). The mise-en-scene is also a happy blend of rich, contrasted colour and soft, sensuous lighting. When Fanny confesses to a friend her burgeoning affair the other woman remarks upon the irony (we all thought you and Jean were the perfect couple). The image, when it arrives, of Jean doing his angry cuckold face is decidedly comic. Intentionally so? Everything about this movie has an aura of unreality about it, even the aforementioned lighting. The model train set reminds me of the idiots in Le Diner de Cons, their boring hobbies, but many commentators related it to the notorious allegation that still follows Allen around. Trains that go round and round like a journey/story/delusion that goes nowhere?

By my reckoning, Coup de Chance falls short of the more focussed storytelling achieved in its British predecessor, Match Point (2005). The subject of luck has been preoccupying Allen a long time, and this movie, if it is his last, is a satisfactory summation of his late period. It even nods to the Moose skit from his old standup comedy album, from way back in the 1960s. Lou de Laâge and Melvil Poupaud offer compelling performances as Fanny and Jean. Ace cinematographer Vittorio Storaro puts a cosy glow on proceedings and all credit to whomsoever is responsible for set dressing and costumes. And everything sounds sexier in French, n'est-ce pas?

No masterpiece but a better film than its predecessor, Rifkin's Festival. Allen enthusiasts will find little that is new but sights and sounds to enjoy.

Fanny (Lou de Laâge) and Jean (Melvil Poupaud) have everything of the ideal couple: fulfilled in their professional life, they live in a magnificent apartment in the beautiful districts of Paris and seem to be in love as on the first day. But when Fanny crosses, by chance, Alain (Niels Schneider) , a former high school friend, she is immediately capsized. Fanny falls for her charms and soon her encounters stop being so casual. They see each other again very quickly and get closer and closer. As two young people's bond leads to marital infidelity and ultimately crime. Meanwhile, Fanny's mother Camille (Valérie Lemercier) discovers some clues and surprising events that show that things are not as they seem to be.

¨Exciting, dramatic, and also sinister", is how the great New York director Woody Allen defines his 50th film. He directs this ironic black comedy full of criminal intrigue and numerous plot twists , which he himself compared to his successful film "Match Point". The film is shot entirely in French, here Allen recovers common themes from his writing such as infidelity, death, romantic intrigue, murder or luck, as well as his usual characters full of contradictions, which he frames within the carefree and idle Parisian upper class.

Lou de Laage (¨Les innocentes¨¨Mad Women's Ball) plays competently Fanny, a rich, happily married Parisian, whose life takes a turn when she accidentally crosses paths with Alain, an old high school classmate well played by Niels Schneider, while the third in contention is Melvil Poupaud. Lou de Laage stars in an acceptable but somewhat unknown cast, compared to other Allen films in which big stars, either American or from other countries, usually appear, however they all give decent performances. This is one of his last films in which Allen usually shoots abroad such as France or Spain and which are usually financed by companies from the countries where it is shot in order to internationally promote the cities in which it takes place.

In ¨Coup de chance¨(2023) excels the colorful and luminous cinematography by the great Vittorio Storaro, the prestigious cameraman working from the 60s and providing luxurious color to all the films he has made. This comedy-thriller is full of attractive and pleasant and also somewhat ridiculous situations, being adequately written and directed by Woody Allen. Hauled by some as Allen's triumphant return to his old stylings .In his beginnings Woody made generally hilarious films in which he often acted, such as: "What's Up, Tiger Lily?", "Take the money and run", "Pussycat, Pussycat I Love You", "Sleeper", "Everything You always wanted to know about sex but were afraid to ask¨, among others. Later he created several masterpieces. Including a series of films in which he provided good direction, putting enough care, wit and warmth, such as : ¨Crimes and misdemeanors¨, ¨New York stories¨, ¨September¨, ¨Radio Days¨, ¨Hanna and her sisters¨, ¨Broadway Danny Rose¨, ¨Zelig¨, ¨Stardust memories¨, ¨A midsummer Night's Sex Comedy¨, ¨Interiors¨, ¨Purple rose of Cairo¨, ¨Manhattan¨, ¨Annie Hall¨, ¨Melinda Melinda¨ and many others . Rating: 6.5/10. Better than average. The film will appeal to fans of Woody Allen's films. Well worth seeing.

Coup de chance is another masterpiece by Woody, the master of cinema. The cast (Lou de Laâge, Melvin Poupaud, Niels Schneider, and Valérie Lemercier) is absolutely great, the script (Woody) is brilliant, the cinematography (Vittorio Storaro) is gorgeous, and the direction (Woody) is, as always, impecable. This is a movie about love, betrayal, control, and luck. Amazingly written and beautifully shot. A masterpiece (in French) with a flavour of the great French cinema from last century (Truffaut, Lelouch, Godard), with a bit of Hitchcock (you can actually spot a Hitchcock book lying on a shelf in one scene), and with a wonderful soundtrack (jazz from the 60s: Herbie Hancock's "Cantaloupe Island" and Nat Adderley). No explosions, plastic people or a 200MM budget; just absolutely pure excellent cinema. Bravo, Woody. You are the best! 10/10.

One of the worst movie I watched in French and I am a French native! I have no idea how can people appreciate this awful movie with one of the worst scenario I've seen lol. The characters are poorly built and extremely badly acted, nobody is going to win an award! Poor direction, poor lighting, the only 'good' thing in it is the sets, the 'rich architecture, the rich places'. Oh, and let's not forget that jazz music that does NOT fit with the scenes whatsoever! The only real luck is if you didn't watch it haha, urgh painful watch.

I have nothing more to say about this... let me say it in French; "ce navet!" (a turnip)

Being a fan of Woody Allen's films, I couldn't expect a mediocre film shot in Paris. Paris is the European muse for Allen and some of his most enjoyable films are shot there.

Many have found resemblance to "Match Point" but I disagree: "Coup de Chance" is a wonderful hommage to Claude Chabrol's oeuvre. Here's why; There's a corrupt rich husband with a murky past, a depressed wife longing for romance, and an old friend who storms into her life to spark 'illegal' passion with all that follows.... Need I say more?

But what Allen knows better is to provoke the sympathy for the people who try to follow their heart and change their life to the better and at the end of the day we can all realize that no one knows what the future might bring in life.

Coup de Chance is also a great comment to those arrogant wealthy people who think they control everything and everyone around them until they meet their own Nemesis!

A trite mishmash of clichés, poorly acted too. The plot is next to irrelevant, characters are irksome at best. Like a small, sad rehash of "Match Point" if you bleed out all the sap. I always admired mr. Allen's movies for the maniacal care in the photography, but this one seems to lack in both inspiration and quality. The movie ends with a twist that anybody with a basic movie culture can see coming quite from afar, and it's endtitle folks! I am still a huge fan of his movies, but after "The goddes of love" it's been really down a slippery slope. Pls save the money, it is too sad to see one's myth fading.

Lou de Laage encounters Niels Schneider on the way to work in Paris. When they were students at a French-language school in New York, he had a crush on her. Despite her marriage to Melville Poupad, an immensely successful financial advisor who rescued her from a terrible first marriage and continues to adore her -- and she him -- she begins an affair with Schneider.

For the last fifteen or 20 years, Woody Allen has been going over themes from his earlier movies and seeing how he can improve on them. Here, he seems to be revisiting MATCH POINT, but without much, if anything new to say. Instead he shows it at great length, observing all the romantic spots in Paris he can and sneering at the idle and the super-rich. And Allen has populated the this story with physical types fans of his movies will find familiar.

Besides not having anything new to say, Allen takes his time. 93 minutes is not an excessive length of time for a movie, but this one seemed to be very slow, ill-natured, and ultimately very simple and direct in where it was going. The only mystery that eludes me is long-time cinematographer Vittorio Storato's lighting. He fills the first half of the movie with yellow lighting; then when Poupad and Mlle de Laage renew their vows, the light turns bluish-white. Clearly there is a very simple code here, but what it is eludes me.

Of course, I'm not going to write a word about the end of the movie, but when I looked at my watch and saw that there were only 9 minutes left until the credits, I realized that even a genius like Woody Allen wouldn't be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat in this time less subtitles, and no surprising miracle would happen on the screen. In fact, when the situation in the film reaches the boiling point, after a long and tiring wait, it fades like the soap bubbles in the children's game. In this case the director cannot complain to anyone, because he also writes the script. I have no idea what Mr. Woody Allen's French language skills are, but things may have been lost in translation.

"Luckily, I ran into you..." or was it a matter of chance? In Woody Allen's latest film his obsession for the thematic of crime and punishment gets fixed with his peculiar sense of humor while exploring the possibilities and happenings of life as he questions if there are things such as luck or chance and how they can affect everything for better or worse. Nothing new under the sun, specially when it comes to Allen as he dealt in exemplary ways with those themes in the dramatic efforts "Crimes and Misdemeanors" and "Match Point", complex and thrilling works where love triangles are destroyed by the acts of murder and one has to live with the burden of guilt, without the one they love but reaping some benefits. "Coup de Chance" falls into that exact setting, closing a loose trilogy, but this time the humor element becomes the dominant element rather than the tragedy. Or at least, that's what Allen is trying to make us see, a potential dramatic story with a humored perspective. It works but not fully.

This time, we move from his beloved New York to Paris where we meet the perfect couple Fanny and Jean (Lou de Laâge and Melvil Poupaud), happily settled into their bourgeois lifestyle and culture and they don't have anything to worry about. But fate intervenes when Alain (Niels Schneider), a young schoolmate of Fanny appears in her life after many years without seeing each other and he reveals that he always had a crush on her. In between talks about luck and chance, as the young writer truly believes in one of those things, a love affair blossoms between them, though she detests the idea of cheating on Jean. Obvious that Jean will know about them, and there's no need to go further with what comes next.

What do we get in this conjunction of ideas? An ellegant fine drama with some weightless comedy that takes a little too long to actually get some laughter from us (even nervous ones). For the most part it was a very anxiety inducing film that I could not see much humor from it and Allen's films usually make me laugh - even the heavy dramas. It's only after Fanny's mother (Valerie Lemercier) becomes a more recurring character that the story takes off with some brilliancy and fun, as she become nosy about everything that happens in the couple's life and a background mystery revolving a friend of Jean who disappeared.

I liked that Allen finally took a clear stance on the "crime and punishment" device, as opposed to the other two forementioned films, or at least you can see that the punishment is more evident outside of being something only the criminal suffers deep down inside - plus it was funny. Don't think the whole conflict between luck or chance was so gripping or fascinating as shown in here, as there's many ambiguous things or others that don't develop at all (who won the lottery ticket?). Yet, there's so good room for audiences to analyze and observe the events that happens with those characters and have their own theories if luck or chance affects them in a positive way or not.

Besides the high anxiety feels, the other obstacles in the way which affects the film a little are that Allen didn't capture/portray French culture in an interesting manner - it's like he transports the oddities and complexities of his New Yorkers into France, so they all become very talkative but the conversation isn't funny nor so eloquent; and having Melvil Poupaud playing the antagonist right after the frightening abusive husband in "Just the Two of Us" wasn't much of a good choice. He's very good in the role, the best performance in the film, but it kills any chance of unpredictability because you know what to expect. Had Louis Garrel been chosen for that role (and he worked with Allen in "Rifikin's Festival"), we'd have something different and very unexpected. I wish Alain/Schneider had more sequences as he's such a high-spirited/loving man as opposed to the possessive and neurotic Jean and his obsession for train models.

Rumor has it that Woody Allen might not direct again - many obvious reasons. If confirmed and become a fact, it's a bittersweet swan song that stays far back on his resume and far apart from his masterpieces. It's a quite enjoyable film, it has plenty of his known qualities (for better or worse).

But, as for his recent films it annoyed me that it seemed that he always kept drinking from the very same sources of inspiration (Dostoevsky, Tennessee Williams, Freud, F. Scott Fitzgerald, himself) as if there wasn't more novelists/playwrights to be inspired from, or human issues that he could have dealt with. That he still mantained a career despite some 30 years of personal life turbulence is pure luck and we're the fortunate ones to have the chance to see all of his works. 7/10.

With "Cantaloupe Island", by Herbie Hancock, as background music, and the wonderful photography by Vittorio Storaro, Woody Allen pays homage to French filmmakers of the 1950s and 1960s, such as Claude Chabrol, Jean-Claude Luc Godard and François Truffaut, in his latest film COUP DE CHANCE (2023). As the title indicates, 15 films after MATCH POINT (2005), Woody Allen returns to exploring the theme of luck and chance, now giving us the reverse of the coin.

COUP DE CHANCE (2023) is based on the premise that even the most fortuitous events can have profound and lasting consequences, showing how the characters' lives are shaped by a series of coincidences and unforeseen events.

Ironically, the only character who thinks he is making his own luck ends up succumbing to the whims of fate, becoming a victim of luck, or the lack of it, and his own Machiavellian design, which leads us to ponder the illusory nature of total control of our lives.

When comparing COUP DE CHANCE with MATCH POINT, we can observe an interesting dialogue between the two. If in MATCH POINT, we see a character who escapes justice due to a twist of fate, in COUP DE CHANCE this theme is inverted, presenting a character who believes he has everything under control, not counting on external elements that may eventually influence in his plans. This inversion offers an intriguing perspective on how luck and chance can condition the course of events, regardless of each character's beliefs or actions.

Thus, by presenting a subversion in relation to MATCH POINT, COUP DE CHANCE broadens the viewer's understanding of the role of luck and chance in our lives, and invites us to reflect on the complexity and unpredictability of human destiny. This time, the tennis ball lands on the less favorable side of the net.

And I haven't watched some of his more recent work.

Written and directed by Allen, it's very much a movie in the Fench tradition, the tradition of Chabrol and Truffaut: Hitchcock minus the suspense.

That's a real shame because Allen has is a great director of suspense, he proved that with movies like Crimes and Misdemeanor, Manhattan Murder Mystery and Match Point. This does not come near those titles.

Allen is a master filmmakers. I am a big fan of his. Hannah and Her Sisters, Annie Hall, The Purple Rose of Cairo and Crimes & Misdemeanors are all time greats. I just can't understand why he'd want to make something like this. Something this empty and tedious. What's the point?

I am mesmerized by the fact that my favorite director, Woody Allen, made such a film despite his old age. A film that, although it may not be as energetic, creative and exciting as his previous masterpieces, but it was made at the peak of maturity and shines on top of his brilliant career. I'm so glad for his fans. We know he could make a great movies in almost every genres but also we sure his best especially is human relationship and dark/bright comedy romances. Like Annie Hall (who could believe that work made in the year 1977) like Deconstructing Harry (20 damn years after Annie Hall) and so many works. We should stand up and clapping for this amazing artist.

If I could get back my money for the wasted life time I just spent on this, I would. Another reviewer who compared it to a workday German TV movie was absolutely right - subpar, unimaginative plot, witless conversations, only fairly decent actors, corny lines. What did Woody Allen think? It is not enough to shoot some beige-colored takes in chic Parisian streets and manors, at least not in my books. Take away the flair of Paris and you are left with a thinner than thin plot. I have to say, the 1st part of the movie was more like 5 stars but then it went into such a steep decline that I was quite shocked.

I was waiting for the opportunity to see Woody Allen again. I am happy I did. «Coup de chance» is very much in line with what we are used to have from W. Allen, and yet there is something new, namely, the way the film underlines the conflict between self-control and the power of chance, between honesty and the drive for control, between intelligence and the demands of the heart.

Woody Allen is a very skilled filmmaker, and yet you can see signs of repetitiveness. TO me, this was not a disturbance, but rather a confirmation of the Allen cinematographic stile. «Coup de chance» is very well constructed and the end is amazingly surprising. The way the movie ends is a lesson in itself. I enjoyed the movie and highly recommend it to others. I am more interested in the substance of the work than in its entertainment value. Either way, the viewer will not be deluded. Yet, the viewer is requested to further think once the movie is over. Like this, I would like to see more from Woody Allen. I hope I will!

Outdated, old in concept, unlikely. Poor Allen continues to make films in his alternative reality, made up of bohemian writers, snobs who read paper books and live modernist adventures, listen to vintage jazz, etc. This bland and boring film lacks anything that could make it interesting. Absolutely irrelevant in the overall scheme of things. Mere exercise in style without any particular style other than luxury furniture. Awkward as a geriatric dream machine. But the most hateful thing is to see characters who do not act like ordinary mortals, in a perpetual exaltation of the ruling class. I swear this is the last time I'll waste time with an author who should seriously step aside and stop trying to involve us with his nostalgia.

I've been waiting for quite a long while for Woody to say something new. To be completely honest, it's not all that new, Woody himself had said more than once in his writing. But he never made a movie saying it so bluntly. And after a decade of repeating movies he did before, it's a breath of fresh air.

The acting is spot on, even if it does feel like his French people are in fact New Yorkers speaking with a weird accent. All the technical aspects were never an issue in Woody's movies. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's a fun movie, and a good pastime. And I do like seeing Luo De Laage, ever since I saw her in Les Innocentes.

It's plain terrible. And I can't explain it but it doesn't look like cinema. Photo is good but somehow everything feels utterly cheap and phony, like an advert in a bad sense. The plot doesn't develop slowly keeping you interested. Things happen without much expectation from the viewer, the atmosphere is poor, not sophisticated at all, TV movie like. Acting is just correct. It is sad but understandable that you are witnessing an author's decline. But it is disappointing too. We were expecting a comeback from reading different reviews, but this is just not much better than Rifkin's Festival. The themes are more interesting but it is painful to watch how bad the result is: underdeveloped, clumsy, uninspired, cliché, obnoxious... also pretends to criticise the rich when it couldn't feel more posh itself and really far from real art. Woody is not back.

Coup de Chance is sort of like Woody Allen's paraphrased retelling (and he's done what I call 'paraphrased' versions several times in his work) of Unfaithful, with less on screen carnage and erotic sex... which itself was a remake of The Unfaithful Wife, and which is to say this is very much a Woody Allen movie. That doesn't mean it's one of his all timers, but it's not in the lesser range either. It's a good, comfortable middle-tier piece of drama with sprinklings, like a dusting of parmesan cheese on pasta, of humor, and while it may seem on the surface like Allen repeating his absolutist stance on luck being paramount to one's existence, I don't find it quite as dark as Crimes or Match Point.

He manages to thread the needle in making a substantial infidelity drama with a couple of satisfying neo-noir overtones (and that I found knowingly ironic Herbie Hancock music like this smooth graceful jazz overlaying sex and lies and body parts being transported here and there) while having a good air of "we know how this goes, let's have some more fun as we go into the second half." I don't know if Fanny should have been a little more suspicious or war of what goes on with her husband Jean so she isn't to make the plot make sense, or... no I do, and it's not the actresses fault (de Laage is more than *fine) but is my one main criticism (and the pacing of the first half hour is a little slack).

What makes Coup de Chance memorable isn't necessarily the story anyway, and if it wasn't from Chabrol or Allen before this has been the outline of countless melodramas and thrillers, rather it's the strength of the performers to bring the verbose Allen text to life and (minority opinion I guess) Storaro as cinematographer does some of his best work in... well, ever, always with a seamless ability with movement and always bringing out the rich textures to every setting (or dark shadows when called for).

De Laage and Schneider have decent chemistry, but Lemercier and Poupaud are especially good actors for Allen for different reasons; Fanny's mother has to be more of the grounded (less of a Great Attractive looking Person like de Laage and Schneider are or are meant to be), and everything about how the mother quickly has her suspicions and goes into what it's all about is my favorite part of the film.

Poupaud meanwhile makes Jean a wonderfully irksome, rich-person creep, totally insecure yet with so much monetary power, and yet not someone we can't recognize as a human being with all his faults (as in he isn't just some rich clod, we get why he has to keep his toy trains running and going, an example of "making his own luck" as it were). In particular his reactions to the private investigator is everything we need to know about how he thinks and will act and those scenes where he has to hold back what we know he wants to say with Fanny in the several scenes after that is just perfect. It's also cool to see how he has grown as a performer from his earlier roles like Rohmer's Summer's Tale (you probably cant recognize him from that unless you looked him up).

I get if this has the "well, nothing new, move on" thing with this filmmaker, but if this happened to be the last thing the 88 year old Allen put his name on, it not only wouldn't be an embarrassment but he could think to himself "yeah, that last one had most of what I want the world to know about my mindset... oh wait, I'd be dead so who cares." In other words, in that closing narration from Alain's novel regarding how luck and life go together, the part about (and here I am paraphrasing) how to be alive is having won the lottery means a lot to hear and in the context of the film and his career of (to me healthy) skepticism.