Littoral (2004) User Reviews

Deceitful to say the least

[sergeaa · 22 October 2004]

The film is based on a play by Wajdi Mouawad. A man is told that his father has died. he puts his clothes on, walks to the morgue, identifies the deceased. His uncles and aunts arrive to mourn with him. They hate the father whom they accuse of killing his wife who was too fragile to give birth. One of the uncles says there is no way he'll be buried next to his sister. The son decides then to take his father and his coffin back to Lebanon his country of origin. But even in Lebanon, no one wants him either in their village, cemetery or backyard. The film is as fake and artificial as can be. First of all, being Lebanese myself, i never was greeted in Lebanon with military people waving their gunshots to my face and insulting me for being Canadian. Secondly, I have never been in a cab in Beirut where passengers speak Moroccan. Third, Lebanese characters are played by quebecors who try to have a Lebanese french accent, and there Arabic is extravagantly latinized. Forth, the movie is shot in Albania, trying to replicate Lebanese scenery. For a second i thought we were at a ClubMed. And the worst of all is that the director himself is Lebanese. Is he pleasing Canadians who have hailed him as a great playwright (rightfully i should add, and i encourage reading his plays)? what about the Lebanese people who will see his movie, or any Arabic speaking individual. I would have fled the theatre 15 minutes within the film, but the director was sitting few rows in front of me, and i wanted to let him know of my discontent. When i told him about my views of the film he said he totally understand my views but that it's only fiction. only fiction? well when you duplicate a place that looks like that, where no one seems like they are supposed to look like, it becomes science fiction, not fiction. Some playwrites should stick to the pen and forget about celluloid.

waste of time

[atmleb · 2/10 · 20 March 2010]

This movie is a waste of time. It is extremely artificial and stereotypical when it comes to the part that supposed to be in Lebanon. for a person who have visited the country recently, and during the times of war the difference between reality and what is portrayed in the movie. The scenes were shot in Albania which is only a few hour plane ride from the real Lebanon. Why did the producer preferred to go to Albania and try to recreate Lebanon, rather than shooting it in Lebanon itself Knowing that the country was stable during the time of the shooting? Many trivial details have been missed. for example, Lebanese soldiers were dressed with Syrian uniforms while Syrian soldiers were dressed with Lebanese uniforms. Another detail is the uniform of the Lebanese paramedic in the movie have a crescent on it while in real life Lebanese paramedics have always had only the red cross. I understand this is a fiction and not a documentary, but fiction movies who are shot in similar artificial environment generally portray a fictional country. When you want to place your story in a real country either go shot the movie in that country or recreate the scenes with extreme care for details.

This movie was made for a Quebecer audience, but Quebec is full of Lebanese residents who will not be happy at all in the way their country is portrayed in such a stereotypical and sometimes offensive way.

Not a great film but has its moments of merit

[ronchow · 7/10 · 18 October 2011]

An a non-Lebanese and one that knows little about the civil war I would think my view is more objective. I look at the war as a backdrop to a story, one in which a son tries to reconcile his relationship with a father whom he hardly knows. So in a sense it is a story of love, love between a husband and a wife, and between a father and his son.

As a film 'Littoral' is well acted, although there are definitely ways to make the story tighter and more coherent. At times it appears abstract, and the direction avant-garde. Visually it is a good-looking film. The fact it was not shot in Lebanon is not, in my opinion, a negative as I do not think that was important.

In a nutshell, I watched the film and, as a supporter of Quebec cinema, did not find it a waste of time.

Wajdi Mouawad's «golden traumas» .

[jussssst · 1/10 · 28 September 2007]

This is my opinion on this movie, one of the very, very few I could not tolerate to the end. Half way through, I ran out of the theater almost like a madman ! I know straight from the horse's mouth -- in this case, straight from a famous female Outremont clown -- that her kid sister went around raving about Mouawad's talents, ever since he had read a draft of his play to her. Now, I had seen an early version of that same story in a «try-out reading». It was his first work for the stage and in it, Mouawad himself played the main character. It could be most politely described as the trials and tribulations of a «search in a very dirty and smelly lavatory» ! It was a grotesque kind of so-called «comedy-drama» (!). While this movie HAD to avoid many of the most «repelling» aspects of the first version of the play, it still transpires with the surprising way violence can disturb an adolescent, but also later inspire him, as an author... with a minimum of talent and a maximum of pretensions and opportunities. And also perhaps as Freud might have said, this is an example of what can happen with an anal fixation transformed, metaphorically and financially speaking -- thanks to the disguises of art -- into an «acceptable» (well, almost !) form and even into a «gold mine» (no kinky pun intended). To be fair, I write all this from what I saw of the film : only about the first 45 minutes. Could a «miracle» have happened with the other half ? I doubt that very much.