I’ve gotta be honest, I was not a fan of this film and don’t understand why it’s been hailed as a classic. There are a lot of classics that I may not be able to connect to, but grasp the reasons why they are thought of in the grandeur that they are, however I haven’t quite come to full comprehension on how or why an examination of detail calls for such cinematic study. This film, and “Playtime” both feel like an exploration of tedium rather than a significant observation of cinema.

With the exception of “M. Hulot’s Holiday”, Tati’s analysis of modern society’s rituals and ridiculousness are some of the most taxing films I’ve sat through. The same commentary could be made in a fraction of the time, but his films drag on and become a victim of the mechanicalness he’s pointing out. But perhaps my tastes just lie with Chaplin. I often feel Tati would’ve been more suited as a painter.

My personal opinion. Take it for what it’s worth.