User Reviews

Baya, whose name reminds everyone of Bahia, in Brazil, is a rebellious young woman; she does not mix her words, she likes to equate anything resembling right wing as fascist, a term that is a favorite of most people on the left side of politics. She has a strong reason for being that way; she comes from parents that are half Algerian and half French with strong leanings to the left. She is a rebel who was abused by a pedophile, a man posing himself as a piano teacher. Baya has grown up to be an independent soul believing in having sex on the first date.

Arthur Martin, whose mother was Jewish at birth, is an avian expert who is not heavily into controversy. He gets rattled when a furious Baya irrupts in the studio where he is being interviewed about avian flu and other viruses. In Baya's mind, Arthur Martin, whose name is the same as a brand of popular stoves in France, he nothing but a fascist with his theories about the dangers of being exposed to all the dangers carried by birds.

It is almost inevitable these two would meet as they both are attracted to each other. Baya is vocal in her ways, while Arthur is more reserved. Baya suffers from being absent minded. She also wears inappropriate clothes that reveal her breast if she does the wrong kind of movement. She is easily distracted to the point of going into the Paris metro completely naked and not realizing it, until a Muslim man, sitting opposite her, is clearly shocked by her nakedness.

"Les nom des gens", directed and co-written by Michel Leclerc and Baya Kasmi, is a different film from France, with strong political, as well as romantic ideas. We saw it when it first opened commercially at the Sunshine, and on second viewing, we found it even better than the first time. M. Leclerc's film takes us through the backgrounds of all the players and what made them the way they turned out to be. It is a film that fires theories and ideas in rapid fashion, something that works well within the context of what the director was looking for.

The best thing in the film is Sarah Forestier whose take on Baya is disarmingly frank. One can only think about how difficult it must have been for this actress to do some of the things the screenplay demanded of her. It might have been embarrassing as well for her to follow what was expected of her. No wonder she was given the precious Cesar for best actress. It is a bold approach to acting, something quite unique. Ms. Forestier gives one of the most courageous renditions for an actress in recent memory.

Jacques Gamblin, on the other hand, plays the more quieter Arthur with good sense of what was wanted of him. His Arthur is a quiet individual whose dull life is shattered with the appearance of the intense presence of Baya. M. Gamblin keeps getting better and better with each new film. The wonderful supporting cast includes Carole Franck, Michele Moretti, Jacques Boudet and Zinedine Soualem.

There is something double-edged about Le nom des gens. The film glorifies a cosmopolitan attitude, but its narrative is also typically French. In fact, the universality of the republican lifestyle is more or less the heritage of the French Revolution. Whereas Anglosaxon republicans accept a pluralist society, the French are suspicious that pluralism will weaken their state. In Le nom des gens the cultural diversity of the main characters is enormous. There are Muslims and Jews, bourgeois and parochial persons. However, they all try desperately to ignore their own cultural origins. Muslims marry bourgeois and Jews. They eat, drink and do everything that God forbade. Etcetera. As the events unfold, it becomes clear that the suppression of their past eventually affects their mental wellbeing. Time is adamant (the very first insect). This leads to several moving scenes, in particular for the Jewish woman who as a child witnessed the holocaust. And there is the tragedy of the Algerian Muslim, who witnessed the colonial war. The main characters stem from the militant left-wing community, which in France after the Revolution has always been quite sizable. Right-wing persons and nationalists only enter as targets for a Muslim woman, who tries to convert them by having sexual intercourse. She searches for love, companionship and sympathy, preferably at three different addresses. Her father feels ashamed: "Are there not enough Muslims in town?" (joke). Although the mental problems of the characters are overwhelming, in general the film manages to keep a light tone. Many of the events are ironic. And the love story is dynamite (take a flea out to diner). In addition, you have to be open-minded, and for instance accept that a "normal" woman leaves her house without noticing that she forgot to get dressed. Put women's libbers behind bras. For some reason Lionel Jospin, say the French Al Gore, who managed to come third in the presidential elections, even behind the nationalist candidate, also plays a minor role. Overall, Le nom des gens can be recommended. However, it is wise to buy a version with at least French subtitles. Don't hesitate to leave a comment. I love it.

This film is totally original in its approach. The characters are interesting (Baya as a caricature of a leftist), the various other characters where no one is as he or she seems. There is a lot more commonality than difference in the characters. There past traumas and origins come out through the course of the film.

The film is interspersed with characters and snippets from the past, including a young Arthur Martin and a Pere Martin who looks old even when he was young. The destinies/ambitions/mindsets of the main characters all meld in a very interesting way.

It is an unusual love story and you truly find the ways the two principle characters reach out to each other quite touching. But unlike many French romantic comedies, where people just think and feel, there are many surprising and titillating developments in the film. We can go from a naked Baya in the subway to memories of the Holocaust.

The film represents a lovely pastiche, medley and tapestry of the elements which make up modern France. It does so with very original characters and scenarios and is a real pleasure to watch. It makes some strong points about stereotypes, origins, perceptions yet presents it all in a quirky, sexy and intriguing way. Totally worth seeing!

Interesting slant.

He's half Jewish, half French, has a terribly common name that belies his heritage.

She's half Arabic, half French, has a very unique name that belies her heritage.

Neither recognizes their foreign culture or religion; both identify heavily with French politics and culture. He is not seen as Jewish, she is not seen as Arabic, so they fit easily into French society, yet both had grandparents who were treated very badly by French authorities.

He is twice her age and refuses her initial advances. She's excited by the prospect of becoming a Jewish/Arab couple, noting that this could only happen in France (thus making them very French).

Their parents are deeply entrenched on opposite sides of the political spectrum. His French father spent his career in nuclear power while his mother was taught to deny her Jewish heritage. Her French mother is a staunch left-wing activist and her father is an Algerian-born people-pleaser. Their first dinner party together with at first two, then all three couples is true dark comedy.

There are countless ways love manifests itself and this movie brings one such variation to the audience in a most charming manner. The two main characters, Arthur Martin and Baya Benmahmoud, played oh so well by Jacques Gamblin and Sara Forestier, could not be more opposites, yet they will be attracted to each other because it simply was meant to be, as nature follows a path for the best. Indeed, Arthur is a conservative, clinical, repressed individual whose life was shaped by his upbringing; Sara is a volatile emotional, leftist whose life was equally shaped by her upbringing. Their parents lives are culturally polar (Jewish and Muslim) but share similar struggle and so Arthur and Sara find that to be their common bond, in addition to their most satisfying sexual relationship. I just wanted to take a bite out of Sara, but in a very good way; I found Arthur very sympathetic.

There was a passage in the film that sort of explained the scientific expression 'hybrid vigor'; I found this to be particularly fascinating and of course, I subscribe to it wholeheartedly. Sara liberates Arthur from his repression and he provides her with the real affection she was always deserving of; a romantic comedy movie could hardly do better.

Too often, comedy is mistaken for hilarious premise or funny storytelling; comedy is roughly defined though, as a drama with light and amusing characters, typically with a happy ending and we tend to forget this. It's one reason so many movies are categorized as romantic comedies. I rather like the genre and believe it lends itself to a more fulfilling experience than action movies or thrillers which tend to be judge more rigorously. Don't get me wrong I need my fix of those as well. If you like foreign (non Hollywood) films, you should love this one; if on the other hand you haven't yet realized such a variety enriches you movie-going experience, try. I recommend this movie in either case.

(Minor spoilers.) The premise of this movie is a romance between a self-proclaimed left-wing "political whore" and a (left-leaning, but not overtly political) veterinarian. Both are the children of a native French citizen and a member of a historically maligned group (Baya is half-Algerian, Arthur half-Jewish). But instead of engaging in some awful, weepy remembrance tearjerker, this movie gives its audience some credit and handles the expected poignance with humor and aplomb. Yes, the characters have secrets and conflicts which they've circumvented throughout their lives, but the specifics are irrelevant and--appropriately--elided. Rather, this is an attempt to examine how people deal with their heritage and personal lives while trying to reconcile their reactions with their beliefs--and what they feel their beliefs _ought_ to be.

Moreover, while the full complexity of the characters' struggles is shown, it is always with a subtlety that keeps the movie grounded. The conversion of ancestral suffering into a cachet, to be readily exploited for the social needs of youth; the feelings of inadequacy in the presence of our parents, whose enormous ordeals seem to render our own difficulties trivial; the mental prisons we build for ourselves in order to establish emotional security; all of these intricate webs of social determinants and individual aspirations are depicted with just the right balance of sympathy and objectivity.

So there is actual substance here. But what is truly remarkable is that Leclerc's use of po-mo tropes (like protagonists directly addressing the camera or characters interacting with their former selves) never feels stilted or laborious, and in fact entails a seamless fusion of form and content.

I decided to give this film a try based on the reviews that considered it to be an excellent film, and I'm really glad I did. I wasn't expecting much from this film, as I'm not really fond of romantic comedies; most of them nowadays are terrible and full of cheesy, clichéd and nonsensical stuff. This film, however, was a blow of fresh air to me, it completely blew my mind with its originality.

The photography and the camera-work are really amazing; they help to contemplate things much better, and the plot is not the clichéd romantic plot you would expect (maybe in some parts it is, but for the most part is really innovative, at least in my opinion). I for one liked the short scene and sequence where the main characters of the story are sitting on a bench and then the camera moves onto a nearer bench where they appear again, but this time as kids. Then the camera goes back to the other bench where they are grown up again, and then one more time moves onto the bench that represents them as kids. That was really an amazing sequence, showing their actual selves on one side and their past selves on the other.

As to the acting, they are very well executed. The revelation here would be actress Sara Forestier; what a great actress and beautiful woman she is, she delivers a really convincing acting. Maybe that was a little bit biased on account of her nudity in this film, but she still is a great actress nevertheless.

I would actually compare this kind of filmmaking with that of Amelie's. They are very different movies, though, but it is the closest style of filmmaking I can compare it with.

Finally, It is appropriate to say that this film is not for everyone; it is a really different kind of filmmaking. Although if you're looking for something fresh, you should give this a try, you won't be disappointed.

My Score: 9.1/10

I saw this movie literally to get out of the intense heat a couple of nights ago not expecting or even knowing that much about it and that's prob the best way to approach it. Its a very nice and deceptively light french film about the ridiculousness of people's beliefs and the ridiculousness that other people will go to to change these beliefs. Film wants to and very much succeeds in wanting to merge people's personal beliefs with their political ones but in a way that is both light and sweet and funny without being either too maudlin and sad or too lightweight.

Film features a radical liberal who knowing that talk will never get anyone to change their minds prefers to let her body do the talking for her. (she engages in intercourse to get other people to change their minds--just how she does it is explained in the film although its a fair question as to whether or not it would actually work in real life or not.)One day she hears this uptight doctor on the phone and decides to seduce him--not knowing that he brings his own rather heavy baggage with him in the form of family history, parental beliefs informing his own beliefs and just about everything you can imagine really. She in turn brings her own baggage (fam history, parental beliefs, and also current relationship with parents)but she never doubts her own abilities to change anyone's minds for a second.

Needless to say they fall for one another and an attachment gets made and now the 2 of them have to overcome a lot to make it work if they're gonna make it work at all. This is not a spoiler to say that this is what happens--because the bulk of the movie is the 2 leads trying to get their stuff in tune with one another so that they can continue to more or less lead the lives they were living just with each other instead of without.

Its not an easy tone to pull off given the balance that is needed to offset real world beliefs with the warmth and heart needed to make a successful romantic comedy but this one managed to do it more so then any recent film i can recall seeing which is damn impressive. Its actually quite Woody Allenish in some way which is even more impressive as most who try to copy Allen can't quite get the heart part right. Much like some of Woody Allen's films this film even brings in some really heavy duty topics with an amazingly light touch. Things like the holocaust, the war of Algerian independence, and modern day conservatism vs modern day liberalism all manage to get touched upon and discussed but never in a way that's heavy handed or brings the movie to a halt. Film always amazingly manages to maintain a lightness of touch and this is in no small part because of the very zesty and very lively performance of Sara Forstier in the lead role. She is like Sophia Loren in some of her more lively performances one who clearly loves life and one who doesn't really care or need other people to tell her how she should live it and its one that should her career take off--it'll be this role that people look back on 10, 20 years from now and say Viva La France!

This is an attractive French mix of a romantic comedy and a mild, warm satire of French politics. She is Baya (the very beautiful Sara Forestier), a free spirited, very attractive girl in her early twenties. Her mother is a leftist hippie, her father is an Algerian immigrant. She has followed the politics of her mother, and she tries to get into bed with right wingers, in order to convert them to a progressive outlook. He is Arthur (Jacques Gamblin) a shy, mild mannered, middle aged minor public bureaucrat. He denies being a right winger (since he voted for the moderate socialist candidate Lionel Jospin, who by the way has a cameo appearance in the movie) but he comes from a very staid family. His father is a respected engineer in the politically incorrect field of nuclear energy, his mother is the daughter of a survivor in Auschwitz (when Baya learns of his family background, she is excited at the possibility of becoming an Arab-Jewish couple, but he plays down his Jewish connections). Very entertaining, and at its best when it mocks the more emotional strands of western leftism.

I just saw this film and thoroughly enjoyed it. It's difficult to create a sexy laugh-out-loud comedy with quirky characters who fall in love that also intelligently and subtly considers complicated political differences on volatile subjects such as Jews, Arabs, Muslims, immigration, animal cruelty, bird flu, sexual abuse, fascists, and the Holocaust. I know it sounds like a bizarre combination but once you see the film, you will understand and appreciate the pleasure of it. It's quite an achievement that the filmmakers were able to maintain the hilarity and high level of political discourse all the way through while adding poignant elements to the story as well. Bravo to all involved, I was quite impressed.

The only other film I can think of that can be compared to this is the Billy Wilder film One, Two, Three that's set in Berlin during the Cold War and has a capitalist and a communist falling in love with the help of the girl's reluctant guardian, a Coca Cola executive who pretends the communist is the son of an Old World aristocrat so the girl's parents don't freak out.

But the Wilder film is more of a broad farce and doesn't have any poignancy to it. The Names of Love is much sweeter and more authentic in a real life way, which is more difficult to do well.