Angel-A (2005) Movie Review

Categorized | Romance, Comedy, Foreign

Angel-A (2005)
Reviewer's Rating: N/A

Rate This Movie: $(Don\'t waste my time!)$ $(Don\'t like it!)$ (So... So...)

Loading ...

Posted on 02 September 2010 by MikeHanks

After a 7-year break from directing, Luc Besson returned in 2005 with this relatively unknown effort,"Angel-A". Filming in French for the first time in almost 15 years (which may explain it's obscurity), Besson writes and directs this romantic comedy of an angel helping a down-on-his-luck petty thief get back on his feet. The stars, Jamel Debbouze and Rie Rasmussen, are less well-established actors than we have come to expect from Besson, who we are more used to seeing direct names such as Bruce Willis and Gary Oldman. Set in Paris and filmed in stark black-and-white, the film revels in gloriously framed shots of the city, which is clearly a key element of the movie for the native Parisian. The film starts with Andre (Debbouze) giving the audience a brief and glowing description of himself. When he reveals his narration to be a lie (the first of many and a key theme for the character), he is promptly punched in the face by some goons. It seems that Andre owes various Paris gangsters money and the villain of the piece, Franck, is giving him until midnight to pay up. After attempting and failing to emigrate to America and get locked up by the police, Andre decides that he's had enough and, in the style of James Stewart in "A Wonderful Life", prepares to leap off a bridge into the Seine. He asks God why he has been abandoned just before noticing a tall blonde with similar plans on her mind jump into the river from the same bridge. He rescues her and finds a companion, Angela (Rasmussen), who agrees to help him sort his life out. From here. we will see the composed and confident Angela work to get Andre to confront his self-loathing and dishonesty in an attempt to show him that inside he is beautiful. Of course, it turns out that Angela is an angel (clever name, eh?) sent down to guide him and that romance will blossom between the two. Since the plot of this movie is really very predictable from the start, it rests upon the performances of the two leads to make it engaging. Andre and Angela are practically the only characters given more than a scene, the rest of the cast well in the background. Happily they largely pull this off, Debbouze (probably best known for playing the dim-witted Lucien in "Amelie") in particular providing a funny and energetic performance. His portrayal of a hapless loser carries the film, with some excellent physical comedy and a surprising degree of on-screen presence, considering that he is a full foot shorter than his attractive co-star. Rasmussen is adequate in her role, which is admittedly less interesting than Debbouze's, and sometimes it can feel like her looks and figure were the key elements in winning her the part. That being said, her dominant and seductive character can certainly fill the screen when necessary. Though the performances of the leads are important, I feel that the main character of the film for Besson is Paris itself. He takes every opportunity to fill the screen with wonderful wide shots of the city, with plenty of sweeping overhead shots playing their part as well. As one of the key themes of the film seems to be an appreciation of life, it is clear that the director feels that Paris is where this life is best appreciated, making sure to fit in the Eiffel Tower, Montmatre and the Seine as often as possible. Filming in black and white only accentuates how open and bright he makes the city seem. His direction is fast, the editing cleverly and stylishly connecting scenes together (Andre lifts his coffee to end one scene and immediately lowers another to start the next, for example). Upon watching "Angel-A" you won't feel as if your eyes have been opened to a new way of storytelling or even that a fresh story has been told to you. The plot is very predictable, with some character elements (particularly for Angela) feeling like tacked-on plot drivers. The light tone and fast pace do make up for this somewhat and the climax is moving enough. The core strength of the movie is the energetic performance by Debbouze, who brings a lot of sympathy, as well as humour, to his lead role. Rasmussen is competent and sexy and sometimes manages to deliver with real heart. Besson's romance, though, is clearly with Paris itself, and you'll be hard pressed to find a more beautiful portrayal of Europe's most romantic city.

Written by Michael Hanks
http://www.moviefilmreview.com/author/MikeHanks

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

You May Also Be Interested In These Movie Reviews...
Angel-A (2005)
Angel Heart
Hot Fuzz Blurb

10 Comments For This Post

mhennessy Says:
September 13th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
I saw your list on the “what’s your favorite movie” post and was intrigued, since you have a lot of excellent choices in your top favorites that most seemed to ignore or forget, and this movie is one I have been wanting to see for a long time, as Luc Besson has a pretty good directing track record. I really appreciated your detailed review, which gave me further insight into this film. You’re definitely right in saying it’s a bit under the radar, which also means that I haven’t been able to get much information about its quality. You’re review is definitely about what I expected this movie would be, and I’m glad to hear that although it isn’t the level of quality that he set the bar for with Leon, The Professional, it is still worth a watch. Thanks for reviewing this, and I look forward to hearing more from you about other films!!
MikeHanks Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:03 am
Thanks for your comment, mhennessy. It’s really nice to receive some feedback, as this is my first movie review. I’ll definitely write some more now!

Taking a look at your own top movies list, I’m ashamed to say that I’ve only seen 2 out of the 5. I am a big fan of “American Beauty”, which would certainly slip into my top list if it were expanded only slightly. “The Constant Gardner” wasn’t one that impressed me greatly when I saw it upon it’s release. Having since read the book (which I adored), I feel that I should perhaps give it another go, knowing what to expect a little more this time. I’ll certainly add the other 3 to my Lovefilm list and hopefully get to watch them soon!
mhennessy Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Thanks, Mike!! I had to watch The Constant Gardener a couple of times to really appreciate it, and it really grew on me (obviously!). Till Human Voices Wake Us is a very little-known Australian film, though Guy Pearce and Helena Bonham Carter are its stars. It is just a great movie, all around. The Fountain is directed by the renowned Darren Aronofsky, and is, in my opinion, his best work. (Though, based on my top two films, a lot of people mistakingly believe that I pick films because of Rachel Weisz. While I believe her to be a really great actress, she is not even my favorite. She just happens to star in the two movies I consider to be the best I’ve seen…) I’m excited to read your future reviews and look forward to your recommendations as well!! :) (BTW, I saw The Thin Red Line was on your top list… Are you planning on seeing The Tree of Life whenever it finally gets a theatrical release?)
MikeHanks Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 1:09 am
I’ll definitely check them out. I really like Guy Pearce and Helena Bonham Carter, so “Till Human Voices Wake Us” sounds like a must-see. I am a fan of Aronofsky, with “Pi” and “Requiem for a Dream” both taking well-deserved spots in my DVD collection, so I must catch “The Fountain” as well. I watched “The Wrestler” recently and, while impressed, didn’t find it had the impact of the two others I’ve mentioned. Having not seen too many Mickey Rourke films before (”Rumble Fish” and “Sin City” being the only two that spring to mind) I wonder if the reason for it’s underwhelming effect on me was because the film was about Rourke and his own comeback as much as it was about the fictional character he portrayed. Have you seen it, and if so how do you think it compares to his other work?

I can’t wait for “The Tree of Life”, which gets it’s UK release in January. Terence Malick is one of my favourite directors - I’ve seen “Badlands”, “Days of Heaven” (which would also enter my top favourites list if it were expanded just a little), “The Thin Red Line”, and “The New World” and loved them all. Anything else he directs will get instant attention from me. The way he shoots nature and man’s interaction with it never ceases to astound me, and his cinematography make his films some of the most visually stunning around.
mhennessy Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 11:08 am
I have yet to see The Wrestler. The bare-bones dvd and bluray copies have forced me to wait for a really good sale before I pick it up. Rourke is hit or miss for me. He’s done a lot of Michael Cimino films, like “Desperate Hours”, where he’s been really good. But, he’s been just as mediocre in other things, too. But, I still want to see the movie for sure, and even if Rourke isn’t spectacular, I’m sure that Marisa Tomei can redeem whatever he lacks. :) I’ve never seen “Rumble Fish,” though. Is it something you’d recommend?

I’m so jealous that the UK has a release date for “Tree of Life!!” The US dates keep being pushed back more and more, and now it seems like it won’t be released here for another year. I’ll bet that he’ll be close to finishing up his next film by then. (I’ve heard he’s working with Ben Affleck on another movie that he has already started filiming.) Malick is definitely on of my favorite directors as well. I hate to sound like a giddy school girl, but it is so rare to find another person that is a fan of his, even on other film forums!! I completely agree with what you said: “The way he shoots nature and man’s interaction with it never ceases to astound me, and his cinematography make his films some of the most visually stunning around.”
MikeHanks Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
“Rumble Fish” is a Francis Ford Coppola film from the early 80s with Matt Dillon and Mickey Rourke in the lead roles. It is a fantastic watch - a really well-told coming of age story with the usual standard in atmosphere that you expect from Coppola. I highly recommend it!

It is hard to find other Malick fans around, and don’t worry, he makes me sound like a giddy school girl at times! I think the timing of “The Thin Red Line” so close to “Saving Private Ryan” (a film I really didn’t like very much) probably didn’t help it’s chances for finding him an audience. They are very different films in their pace and style - I can easily imagine more casual cinema-goers finding him too slow for their tastes, and comparing him unfavourably with the more conventional “Saving Private Ryan”. The same goes for “The New World”, which defies even the basic structure that most films adhere to, with it’s rapid change in shots and long stretches with no dialogue. “Days of Heaven” was a real treat for me when I saw it a couple of years ago, coming close to knocking “The Thin Red Line” off the top-spot in quality. Have you seen that?
mhennessy Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
I like Coppola a lot, so that is definitely going on my “to-see” list!! :)

I think you’re right about the timing of “The Thin Red Line.” Even though it had a far better cast and was a far better film, Speilberg already had a following at the time. So, unfortunately, Malick’s masterpiece fell a bit by the wayside. I have seen “Days of Heaven” and own the Criterion blu-ray. Though, I originally bought just a regular dvd copy, but as soon as I did, Criterion announced that they were releasing it as well. That was a bummer, but, aftre seeing it, I knew it was a must-purchase Criterion!! :) I think that “Badlands” is my favorite Malick film, though. Apparently Criterion is releasing that as well, after “The Thin Red Line,” which I think is awesome that Malick is getting such props from them. He is truly a cinematic genious and artist!! :)
MikeHanks Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Interesting that you like “Badlands” the most - I enjoyed it less than the others, though I still think it is a great movie. I’d love to see a review of it from you to see why you hold it so high.

Though “The Thinb Red Line” was the first Malick that I saw and still my favourite, I think it was the locusts/burning the fields scenes from “Days of Heaven” that really blew me away and confirmed Malick as one of my favourite directors.
mhennessy Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 6:16 pm
:) Have you done a review of “Days of Heaven?” Because, while I do feel that Malick can do no wrong, I rank that the lowest of all of his films. :) Though, it is still in my list of top 30 films of all time, don’t get me wrong!! :) And those field scenes were amazing.

I will have to do a review of Badlands… it doesn’t look like there is one on this site yet, and with the Criterion release coming, it’d be a good way to stimulate more purchases of a Malick film!! :)
J.C. Simpson Says:
September 15th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Mike, I love Terrance Malick and am praying for Tree of Life to be as good as it seems. Rumble Fish, which is the next film in the line of S.E. Hinton adaptations (after The Outsiders was made). I’d recommend it, and Days of Heaven was great. Badlands was good, too, though I think that The Thin Red Line is still better since it has one of the greatest scenes in film history (the ending scene where it is the small mound of sand that is surrounded by the water mote, which is representative of the small island and how Caviezel died for really no reason.