It vaguely works as high-level intellectual cringe, as there are a good deal of unintentionally humorous moments from Docherty who slouches through each scene, in one even appearing to stare at an anachronistic wristwatch. It comes off as a BBC costume drama aimed at 'today's yoof' trying far too hard to be edgy with unfortunately rather staid source material...
Firstly, but not importantly, I get that Doherty's part is a libertine, but they could have tried to make his messy hair look more effortless. The film doesn't manage to convey any feeling and Doherty looks and acts as if he does not belong there. Even though it's a nice idea to present the historic plot in non-stiff, light way, the wobbly camera becomes annoying at times and further distracts from building emotion.
Not as bad as some people would have you believe but not very good either. I'm actually a fan of Pete Doherty but I wasn't expecting much from this film. I thought he was ok and Charlotte Gainsbourg about as good as Pete was. There just wasn't much to the story, the poetic observations on life and love were dull. I can't imagine the novel it's based on to be any more interesting either.
I enjoyed Doherty's style here - mumbled and unhurried with his curious swagger, though it seems to irk most of you. This film has a lot to say about the thankless, changing state that seems to be 'love' and I was willing to hear it. August Diehl stole some moments to powerfully convey what the film was getting at.
Very, very fine movie that throws plenty of posits to reflect on. His track had no path, her path a country road. Junction is a goat on January snow. P.D. is fabulous as his acting skills underline the role of an epoque's transient anonymous and a libertine in making. Is he really a libertine?