Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Simply Perfect

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Inspector Bellamy is on vacation. Why shouldn't he be? He's earned it, being on the force for so many years. He spends his time resting and doing odd things around the house - that is, trying to distract himself from an odd presence in a thin man who stalks his house and steps on his flowers. For shame! Paul Bellamy calls up this man who stopped by to speak to him and leaves a stern message. This man calls up Bellamy at midnight- such an odd hour - to meet with him. This man, a guy with big, nervous and possibly frightened eyes, names himself Emile Leullet, and he thinks he may have killed someone. Thinks being the operative word as he's not quite sure. Bellamy, not having a lot better to do, takes on the case informally, interviewing his girlfriend, and other people like a dance instructor who might know what's going on.As it turns out Leullet is not just one guy, he's two, or three. Claude Chabrol does a playful Hitchcock trick (Hitchcock and Chabrol, no way!) where Leulett is played by the same actor, Jacques Gamblin, and also appears as Noel Gentil, a businessman, and a homeless guy, who may be the one that Leulett killed. Whether he did or didn't is a guessing game Chabrol toys with and curiously keeps his main character equally engaged and annoyed by. Would he rather focus on this case while on holiday when his (to him and maybe to us) sexy wife is at home? But then again, what about his brother, Francoise?The brother part of the story, or who might be a step-brother, is what adds the interesting dimension to Inspector Bellamy. With just the crime-plot in the story it might just be a fun but diverting and inconsequential little thriller that is so much a slow-burner that Andy Warhol might have filmed the candle. But it's the introduction, relatively early on in the story, of this brother that suddenly makes the film matter more than it did before. Or, rather, it becomes a more interesting film the more one thinks about the duality of the situation. Bellamy is caught in the middle of two men who are just there: his brother Francoise, a louse and a drunk and usually a pretty miserable guy who is 'in-between' jobs and is amusing 20% of the time and the other 80 percent Paul can't help but want to smash his face in. And then there's Leulett, or Noel or Denis Leprince or whoever he is. Did he kill this person? Does it matter? Maybe Paul, as he even notes, has a liking for murderers, or just their style.Chabrol is in no rush with his story, which takes some detours here and there with dinner talk and trips to the hardware store and conversations with a female employee who is young enough to be Paul's daughter. This is just fine if you can get into the rhythm he's telling. For some (like a gentleman sitting next to me in the theater and insane to me due to the $13 ticket price) it might be sleep-inducing. But Chabrol does have more on his mind here than the usual police procedural or provincial murder mystery with twists in the story and the 'show-don't-tell' aspects where we see Leulett in "action". Those scenes, and seeing Depardieu in this role, is fun. It's when we get this personal dimension, of this brother who for all rights should be like a bad case of fleas and yet has some kind of sympathy to him, that the film takes on another light.Chabrol is neither over the top nor too subtle. Many scenes are presented in a straightforward dramatic style- probably just one shot in the bedroom for the confrontation- and in the resolution it's kind of peaceful. Again, this duality for Paul, of a man in his life who is very frank and dangerous in his honesty, and the other who is a total fake and possibly proud of it (though he does snap back to reality when he hears of his girlfriend sleeping with another Inspector!), is what counts. I liked seeing how Depardieu made his character smarter than others around him, but humble and with some humility to him. He's not a Sherlock Holmes, he's just a guy trying to put together a book-shelf and have some sex with his wife, what's wrong with that. That the actor playing his brother as well (I forget his name at the moment) is as good, if two-dimensional, in his role brings out the best out of the film's star.This was the director's 50th film, and it feels every bit like a Chabrol film, all the way down to its sad climax (and what a wonderful quote to end a movie, and unintentionally a career: "... there is always another story, there is more than meets the eye."), and his very reasonable and/or crazy cast of characters. It's a story without frills, as one would hope an old man would make, though perhaps a bit too long in some spots (there was a moment I thought the story would naturally end, and it didn't, though it ended up in a special place), and the camera and editing are loose and relaxed. This doesn't mean Inspector Bellamy is meant to be too slow, or not- involve its viewers. It's the quiet work of a master confident completely in what he's doing, be it a flash to a dance scene drowning in darkness and slivers of light, or having fun with little surprises. One such one, as a final note, is when the Leullet character is on trial, and his attorney breaks out into song (he's the only one, no music, just his voice) to explain his defense. I've never seen that in a movie. Glad there's one more curve-ball to throw, and a hilarious one at that.

Bellamy (or Inspector Bellamy) is the final film in the career that spreads over half a century of director Claude Chabrol, a career started within the cinematic revolution of the French Nouvelle Vague at the end of the 50s in which Chabrol was one of the most influential names. Many of Chabrol's first films were set in the society of the young students or lower class people in the France of the end of the 50s and of the 60s, in time he had broadened his breadth and dealt with a wider social range. This last film of his is set in the bourgeois society of the French province and while from a thematic point of view we find the combination of detective story combined with the psychological analysis which eventually discovers the real being of the characters under their apparent skins, from a stylistic point of view it's a very settled, almost static work.Much of the film relies on the presence of Gerard Depardieu for whom the role of the police inspector who cannot escape undertaking an investigation in private cop mode while on vacation seems to have been written for. Strange as it may seem Chabrol and Depardieu work together in Bellamy for the first time. I can however imagine that the director let the actor all the freedom to build his character, a combination of Poirot and Maigret at huge physical proportions, with a tenderness for the loving wife acted by Marie Bunel in a manner that makes us fall in love with her and become jealous on Bellamy/Depardieu by the end of the film, and a complicated relationship with his step brother (solid acting by Clovis Cornillac). I mentioned Maigret, and maybe I should also remind here another famous detective, Columbo, as their wives represent a mythical but background, in many cases unseen, presence in the respective films and books. In Bellamy, the inspector's wife is a real presence, and the family story will play an important role and give to the action and story a dimension that competes and even exceeds the detective story itself.I have watched many times the French critics becoming more enthusiastic about American movies than their American counterparts (and audiences in many cases mirroring these feelings). Something similar seems to have happened with this film as well, as the critical reception in the US by critics as important as the late Roger Ebert, or the New York Time critic were very welcoming, while the French critics I read reproached the lack of suspense of the story and the theatrical approach. I would say that both - appreciative reviews and critics were right. Bellamy does look at many moments as TV theater with stiffness in dialogs and static camera work especially in the scenes filmed in the interior. There is however enough fine acting to support the gradual discovery of the characters and the situations to keep the interest awake, even beyond the fascination of watching another work on screen of Depardieu. Claude Chabrol's last film is a low tone Adieu, by a master who never stopped being fascinated by the endless games of disclosure and hiding of his characters.

How do you face the loss of a loved one bent on self-destruction? That's the real theme of this movie, mistakenly packaged as a crime thriller.In the midst of his idyllic summer vacation, Inspector Bellamy and his adoring wife are joined by his dissipated, no-good, yet charismatic brother (a haunting performance from my favorite French actor, Clovis Cornillac). Meanwhile, the inspector is drawn into a case that ultimately holds up a mirror to his own dilemma: how do you deal with the self-destruction of someone you love?If you've ever faced this in your own life--the descent of a relative or lover drawn into drugs, crime, or madness--you know the feelings of helplessness, guilt and grief that can linger for a lifetime. In the midst and aftermath of the crisis, how do you cope? Do you fall into the fallacy of imagining that you change another human being? Do you turn your back on them? Or...do you construct a comforting fantasy that will give you peace of mind?The latter is the choice of just about everyone in the "murder mystery" part of this movie. Never mind the wanted man put on trial; the story is really about the homeless vagabond who died in his place, and the woman who loved him, the clerk named Claire Bonheur who works at the home improvement store. She and the homeless man were lovers for five years. Bonheur is still so torn up about his descent that she can't even bear to let Bellamy look at her photo album. Now the man is dead, perhaps murdered by a con man who took advantage of him. But when Bellamy (conned by the con) puts the idea in her head that her homeless ex-lover may have died by choice, Bonheur seizes on it, and even finds a lawyer to put forth the argument. This is her way of bearing the unbearable: she chooses to believe that her ex-lover died because he wanted to. It's a fantasy; he was murdered. But this is how she copes. (Bonheur = happiness, and she will believe whatever is necessary to escape her sadness.) Only when the trial is over, and Bellamy sees all the parties on TV--the smiling Bonheur and the ambitious young lawyer, the con and his accomplice who've gotten away with murder--does Bellamy realize the awful, awful truth.All this is only a mirror held up to Bellamy's own personal dilemma, the situation with his wastrel brother. Bellamy loves him, but cannot abide his self-destructive behavior. This has been going on a long time; we learn that Bellamy tried to throttle his brother when they were children, and for that act he has ever after felt guilty. He wants to save his brother; as Bellamy says of himself, "a good cop is a good Samaritan." (Good Samaritan = good friend = bel ami = Bellamy.) But ultimately, you cannot save those bent on destroying themselves, no matter how much you love them. How to bear this painful truth? At the end of the movie, Bellamy's dilemma is just beginning.Another work that deals with this theme (going along with a con because believing a lie is more bearable than the truth) is a great story by Ruth Rendell, "The Strawberry Tree," which was also filmed for TV as part of the series "Ruth Rendell Mysteries." Chabrol adapted at least one Rendell novel, and I wonder if he was not influenced by her in this movie.This is a very subtle film that wormed its way into my dreams. Farewell, Chabrol!

Claude Chabrol, one of the best French directors of the last century, had a glorious career. Sadly, the man that gave movie fans so much pleasure passed away recently. "Bellamy" was his last full length feature which we caught in its commercial release recently at IFC. The last part of this master's career, alas, pales in comparison to the first period when he started directing after a distinguished career as a film critic and historian.In a way, this film cannot be considered one of his best efforts. Mr. Chabrol had never worked with Gerard Depardieu at all, so this film was supposed to be a sort of tribute to the actor, as the main character in the film is modeled in some aspect of the performer, as conceived in the mind of the director. The end result is a film that, while being considered a crime movie, has other elements, not the typical product of a man that made a career out of mystery and suspense.Gerard Depardieu does excellent work for Mr. Chabrol, although with his new acquired girth, he is far from the ideal man to play this inspector on vacation in Southern France. There are interesting appearances by Clovis Cornillac, Jacques Gamblin, and Marie Bunel, who plays Mrs. Bellamy.Edoardo Serra, who had worked with Mr. Chabrol extensively, is the director of photography. Mr. Serra, in a way, makes the film much better than what it is. Matthieu Chabrol's musical score adds character to the production. Claude Chabrol's disappearance from the French cinema will certainly be missed because it is an irreplaceable loss.