MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Bergorks If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

andynagy I have not yet seen this movie, but would like to add that, regarding how a previous review comments on this being 'an old story'... Indeed this is an old story! It was one of H G Wells earliest fantasy novels,in fact his second. First published in 1895, the same year as his first novel, "The Time Machine." Quite a few years before Spielberg or Truffaut! Compared to the rest of his canon, it is a slight, but enjoyable novel, containing some delicious observations on the follies and problems of society, a theme he would continue to write about, with varying degrees of hope and despair, up until his very last published works in 1945. Perhaps this offers some more perspective on the film. I will seek it out and find out for myself!

fwmurnau The great director of LES ENFANTS DU PARADIS, QUAI DES BRUMES, etc. made this odd low-budget trifle in 1975 at the end of his career.It's an old story: a stranger appears, mysteriously innocent, knowing nothing of the ways of human society. Spielberg's version of this story is E.T., where the stranger is an alien from outer space. Truffaut covered similar ground with his L'Infant SAUVAGE.In Marcel Carne's version the stranger claims to be an angel. Appearing naked and dazed on a beach near a small town, the angel is rescued and cared for by the local priest and sexton. They call him "Jean". Jean's lack of understanding of money, clothing, and appropriate social behavior leads to some mildly amusing, if predictable, vignettes.Carné, director and screenwriter, seems a lot like "Jean" himself: innocently trusting that this mild, familiar fable is enough to satisfy a 1970s audience. He seems to believe, as many older folks did back then, that there was something holy and superior about the hippie lifestyle. Jean seems at times to be a sort of sacred hippie -- an idealized hippie, minus the sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll.The angel is played by a very attractive young actor. Carné's camera rapturously celebrates his beautiful face, shining blond hair, and slim, tanned body without any self-consciousness. One wonders if Carné was truly as innocent as Jean and didn't realize how homo-erotic his film was -- although in 1975, critics must have pointed this out.It's not a very good film, not vivid or original enough to enliven such an old story, but Carne fans should definitely check it out. Its overall tone conveys humility, good taste, quiet honesty, and a love for humanity -- qualities that are increasingly rare among the filmmakers of today.

jonr-3 I hoped this movie wouldn't live up to my negative expectations, but am sorry to report it did.There's not much point listing all my objections, but I will mention the jarring effect, in virtually every scene, of inconsistencies such as the angel's being able to speak fluent French but not knowing what money is.This defect plagues every fantasy of this sort that I've read or seen dramatized, and is enough to ruin the experience for me--I guess I'm just of too logical a turn of mind to accept something so silly.Maybe I should stick to documentaries.

mcguirej The angel paints the very grey village after a very grey funeral.My favorite line is when he talks to the priest about the villages belief in afterlife and why people do not celebrate when people die.