A Scientist at the Movies Reviews by Greg Paris

The Evaluation System Reviews by Title Reviews by Date

Reviews from Video Reviews of the Classics Personal Background

Title: The Triplets of Belleville (Les Triplettes de Belleville)

Date of original theatrical release: 2003

Details:

Voice & singing talent: Beatrice Bonifassi

Lina Boudreault

Mari-Lou Gauthier

Michele Caucheteux

Jean-Claude Donda

Written and directed by: Sylvain Chomet

Score: 0

The Review: Exceedingly odd French animated feature.

Coming into this film with absolutely no advance knowledge, you will not have a clue what the title means, nor why the characters exist, and you will be really puzzled by what looks like old-time B&W cartoons. Watching Triplets is a voyage of discovery -- something rare these days in watching a movie -- and while occasionally slow, variously curious and opaque, it has a quiet humor and charm about it. I choose not to spoil this by trying to summarize the plot, except to say there is one, and it soon announces itself.

Although done in classic cel-based animation methods, the style and format is very different from the mainstream animation now seen in the US and Japan. There is almost no dialog, so it almost wouldn't matter what the native language was -- it turns out that what sporadic dialog exists has been dubbed into English (or Spanish), but it is essentially superfluous. The few words that come through are mostly song lyrics, since, as it will become clear, the triplets of Belleville happen to be vaudeville entertainers from yesteryear, and their lyrics are amusing enough to be worth translating. But the characters as actors are essentially mute, almost mime -- except for the dog, of course, whose bark needs no translation, and the poor frogs.

There is significant humor in most scenes, but you have to be open to it. It is not primarily a comedy, but every aspect of the story has some amusing quirk buried in the scene, somewhere. As with most good animation, exaggeration is frequently used for effect. The archetypic Gaulic nasal architecture becomes emblematic. The bicyclist's musculature is a caricature of physiology, but it makes sense. The shape of the ominous men in black conveys something dark and sinister, while it also is a bit funny. Cartoon feats are needed to move between the two major metropolitan scenes -- one is clearly Paris, the other just as clearly New York City, although neither is so labeled -- and the trans-oceanic voyage offers a break in the action, as well as a transition (and a reason to watch the trailing credits).

This movie grows on you. I'm not sure I agree with all the hype offered it during its initial release, but it has its subtle attractions. As I was watching, for awhile I found it hard to pay attention and was occasionally nodding off, missing a few seconds of action (such as it was), then trying to pick up the thread -- which (alas) was difficult, because things tend to progress just rapidly enough (the editing is rather tight). For a long time, it was difficult to fathom the raison d'etre of the characters, but it eventually hits you in face. The passage of time is portrayed in several odd ways, but it works. The mystery embedded in the plot is well-drafted, if obscure, but like all good mysteries, as it approaches the end it all becomes clear and (almost) obvious. My first impressions were neutral to negative, but as I continued thinking about this scene, or that feature, I found it slowly insinuating itself into my consciousness. I don't think I'll actually buy a copy to own, but I could see watching it again. You may not want an odd film like this to infiltrate your essence with mycorhizal cognitive threads, but there's a good chance it will anyway.

(24-Jan-05)

Back to the chronological list of reviews