There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

I have just finished to see the movie and I came to IMDb, which seems to be a very serious movie website, to read what people wrote about "Qui a tué Bambi?". It's strange that everything I read turns to make the film a good quality one. The argument is poor. The music is non-sense (it tries to copy the soundtracks of David Lynch. And I still do not know how can somebody quote him here). It's far from anything we had in history of cinema like Lynch, Kubrick's and so.If Bambi was in Cannes, I'm starting to doubt about the festival as well. And it's impressive how can the media support it. I've seen some French movies and I believe this is the worst one, it's so young as Facebook. The film was made for cocktails, good for globalized children.

I missed the first 15 minutes or so and that might be why the ending left me as confused as it did. I mean, what happened to the doc? Was the forest and the hole part of a dream? Was the whole movie a dream? Did I fall asleep and dream it all myself? In any case, I found this to be pretty good. It's slow, of course, by the standards of, say, "Coma", or "Freddy and Jason Haunt a Hospital," but the visual images, the score, and the acting make up for it and keep a viewer's attention engaged.The visual images are striking in their sterility and simplicity. It's not not like any hospital you've ever been except maybe in a couche-mar. The hospitals I'm familiar with -- the better ones -- have people bustling about night and day, and the floors have coded colored lines on them. This hospital is mostly empty. And oddly lighted. Even the OR is dark except for some dramatic lighting over the patient etherized upon the table. In the corridors, the FLOORS seem to emit their own white light.There is hardly any score to speak of. There is usually an ominous discordant electronic hum. Aside from that there is only a slight groan from an opening door and the squeak of rubber soles on polished linoleum. Well, an occasional scream too.The acting is fine on everyone's part. Dr. Phillip's role doesn't call for much except a haughty look and a stern tone. But Isabella is just about right. Few people have ever looked so winsome and helpless. She has a slight figure and the face of an adolescent girl. (Try to imagine Gerard Depardieu in the part.) The story itself is rather routine. We've seen it in one or another variation before. But this is a well-done example of the genre, worth catching.

This movie was stunning. It's not supposed to be scary, like someone's going to get me scary (i think people that say that are reading it the wrong way), it's more about the creepiness of our own desires. I don't want to give too much away, but this is a wonderful movie.The ending makes sense to me, I don't know why people keep saying it doesn't? No she didn't die physically, I think that's supposed to be meant a different way. Maybe her view of herself died, or she was permanently changed by the experience. Realizing who she is, while obviously not understanding or wanting it. The hole that she dreamed about.

I really enjoyed this movie at the Cannes Film Festival.Walking out the cinema, wearing my smoking tuxedo suit, I was shouting to myself what an awesome movie this is!I love the psychopath, I love the main actress, the cinematography is absolutely cool. The story is cool.This is maybe kind of like a David Lynch experience. Weird scenes, weird dialogs, weird camera-work, weird script. All this weirdness, and concentrated beautiful set-ups makes the film very cool. I rate it 8/10.