The Pleasure of Being Robbed

I stumbled upon this used DVD in a thrift store and knew nothing about it. It just caught my eye and something told me to buy it. I'm so very glad I did. Sometimes the stars align and miracles happen, and that's what it took for me to find out about this excellent little movie.

I was expecting it to be a micro-budget indie film with bad acting, and hoping for a few redeeming moments and a whole lot of charm, which is about the best you can ask for from that type of film (I thought). But I was blown away. Five minutes into the movie I realized I was watching something else entirely. I've never seen anything like it. I didn't know indie films could be made this well.

Everything about it is just perfect and far better than any attempt I have seen before. The cinematography is beautiful and the editing is very good, as it the acting, which surprised me the most. The actors here are all ones I'd never seen before, so no big stars, but they all did an excellent job (aside from a few moments of mediocre acting in some of the smaller roles).

Now let's get to the story. It's about a young woman in her twenties who lives in New York. We've seen it a hundred times, right? Nah, this woman happens to be a pickpocket. And for the first time ever, we get to watch a pickpocket going about her day. Some have argued that there's no plot, but wouldn't a plot just make it so boring? That's been done before! It's better just to watch the characters sometimes. This one is fascinating!

Everything was very well done for such a low-budget film, although I later found out that multimillionaires Andy and Kate Spade had something to do with this production. I believe that most of that money went to acquiring film stock, however, as this film was shot on good old film rather than digital, the latter being the preferred medium for films like this. But the film look really makes this all that much better, and really adds to the style and makes it look more legitimate while still maintaining wonderful raw and gritty feel.

The worst film I've seen in years. From the first minute to the last, nothing happens! Our (hugely unlikable) hero, Eleonore, who we follow through the film steals from people for unknown reasons. She is the same person from beginning to end thereby leaving the audience with absolutely no satisfaction. There is no character development, no arc, nothing. This film is as bland as puddy.

It's quite obvious the filmmakers were going for a John Cassavetes story-telling, rawness" but didn't even come close to reaching that bar. Instead they succeeded in showing off their immature, New York, self-indulgent "I'm too deep as an artist" arrogant ability producing this 70 minute film that felt like 3 hours. Everything comes down to idea, idea, idea. Concept, concept, concept. Character, character, character.

My favorite of the worst scenes in the film was the "driver's education film" stuck in the middle of this non-existent plot. I understand people in large cities don't drive & maybe have never driven, but come on: Eleonore, are you 3 years old? Are you mentally-impaired? I mean, you've seen cars, right? You live in NY city, they're all around you. You do get the basic idea of what a car does? How it works?? Ever taken a cab anywhere??? Watching the driver's-ed course which seemed like 45 minutes was pure torture! Seriously, is this really story-telling? C'mon, do you look at your own film & say, "WOW, it's so wonderful & deep."

Having screened at the L.A. Film Festival, when asked about certain character/story questions from the audience, the filmmakers had no clue how to answer these basic questions like, "why does Eleonore steal?", or "what's the meaning behind the title?". They just confirmed to the majority of the audience that they are just a bunch of white-kids with a lot of money, making films in which they have no business doing. I wouldn't have such a problem but knowing they think the world of themselves just because they went to NYU & live in some trendy area, living off mommy & daddy's allowance but play it down like "I'm a struggling artist just like you" is completely insulting.

I felt robbed after having seen this film. Can you give me back my time? How 'bout my money. There is NO pleasure in being robbed.

You people just cant see the inner beauty of this film. Humanity can sometimes be a lonely thing. Eleanor (however you spell her name) appreciated everything she "stole". You could see the appreciation and connection she felt from the objects that she stole from other peoples lives. Hence the title of the film. Which is beautiful. And the cinematography was wonderful. The grain, the tightness of the shots, the cuts. I loved it. There really was no plot. It was mainly the character analysis that kept me watching. Just the spontaneity of her was so inspiring and I truly admire that. She was living and not just breathing. She was innocent as a child. Yes the things she did were not so innocent, but she had an innocence about her. There wasn't even any sex in the film just to further prove her innocence.

I saw this film at Cannes twice and I can't seem to either get away from it or get it out of my mind. I keep thinking about the surface nature of the main character Eleonore in the beginning and throughout. But what is crazy is she knows it.

It is not that she is annoying. I Think it is sad to see someone hide their true emotions. She smiles and you wonder why is she smiling, It is uncomfortable to be in the room. These are negative qualities and that is why they are on film (and yes beautiful 16 mm, finally!). They are just an exaggerated type of personality that forces us to see what we all sometimes fall victim too, too big a self-conscience.

She is a great thief, but she is not really stealing. She just wants to learn more about people because she is afraid, or unwilling, to say hello in a genuine way.

At times I didn't like her but so what? Film is not about feeling comfortable, it is about thinking about how you can change parts of yourself. When I didn't like her or what she is doing, I asked myself why? And that is what I liked. I liked also seeing the other people in New york who don't have her problem. Heck, there is a guy walking around saying how beautiful everything is. And wait, here we see her wonder what that life might be like. Also, when she listens to the trumpet playing, I Thought how sad, she realizes her faults. Sometimes you can't change them (Having been in therapy I should know, haha).

Thanks for showing me the pains of holding back, and the beauty of letting it out.

Not much happens in this movie. It's merely a glimpse into the life of a young woman living in New York, walking around somewhat aimlessly and stealing people's purses and car keys, out of boredom if for no other reason.

I like the idea of a film giving us a close-up view of an unfamiliar character's life in that kind of manner. It's different from the same old high-concept stories we're used to seeing. And here it is done in such a great way and wonderfully edited to the point that I thoroughly enjoyed it and never found it boring. However, it's not for everyone. I know a lot of people will hate this film for the exact reasons that I loved it, because not much happens.

The acting, in particular, is very good. It feels like these are professional actors with years of experience, despite the film's obviously tiny budget. I would say that it is the most well-acted film of such a low budget. It doesn't even feel like they're acting. It feels like they're real people, perhaps in a documentary but unaware that they're being filmed or followed.

At one point in the movie, the lead character visits a zoo and gets close to a polar bear. When she's near the bear, it is clearly fake, as safety concerns would not allow her to be unprotected within feet of a dangerous animal. The fake bear is not at all well-done. I got the idea that they were trying to make it look real, but eventually gave up and accepted the fact that it was clearly a puppet and didn't even try to fix it. They just went with it. It felt like they should have cut that scene but perhaps decided that it was more charming. In any case, it certainly doesn't ruin the movie, especially considering that it is kind of a dreamlike scene that wasn't supposed to be real life.

Another thing I liked about the film was its length at just over an hour. I felt like that was perfect for the story it was telling and I feel like a lot more films would be better if they had similar running times, as opposed to trying to squeeze an extra twenty minutes into a movie for the mere sake of making it longer because someone decided a long time ago that all feature films, regardless of their story, should be between one-and-a-half and two-and-a-half hours long.

I liked this movie quite a bit, but I know many will disagree with my assessment. But if you want to risk it and find out if it's the film for you, it's a pretty safe wager, because even if you hate it, you will have wasted just a little more than an hour of your time.