I kid you not, this is one of the worst films I have seen and yet I generally like artsy films/experimental films as long as they aren't too pretentious. The biggest issue this movie has is a very simple one:
Investment.
Why am I watching this character and do I care about what happens to them.
Even some of the worst movies ever made have some form investment in the characters and the story, but this film does not. I can't name even one character who I genuinely cared about or was considered about their well being. Marie? Don't care about her. Arnold? Didn't even know his name until he was about to die. Gerard? He is the worst. Balthazar? Not even established as a truly relevant character until around the 50 minute mark and then he fades back into obscurity until he shows up at the end because, you know, the movie has his name in the title so I guess we should end with him. The amount of investment I had in the characters was so low that they all could've been brutally murdered on screen and I wouldn't even blink (and that is a VERY hard thing to do, as I am pretty sensitive to on-screen violence and don't like that kind of stuff very much).
I can understand why the core concept of this movie has the potential to be interesting. Having a series of mini-stories with an animal connecting them together to show the life of that animal is a neat idea, but this movie doesn't do anything really interesting with it. To be completely honest, if Balthazar's name wasn't in the title I would not have known that he is supposed to be an import figure in the movie. The amount of screen-time focused on the donkey as the key character in a scene might be about two-three minutes max, if even that.
Another huge issue with this film (outside of there being no reason to invest any time on the characters) is that none of the characters seem to run on human logic. They will just kind of do things and there never seems to be a reason why. One of the characters starts trashing a party by breaking mirrors, chairs, bottles, and what not yet no one even notices. That's not how humans react to people breaking stuff. Another scene is where a man is attempting to rape a woman yet when a car drives by she doesn't run for help. That's not how humans act. Heck, she then ends up dating a falling in love with him. That's not how humans act. That said man ends up stripping and beating her later on (with the parents finding out) but then the next scene the mother is talking to the man as if there is no bad blood between them. That's not how mothers act. There is a scene where a girl begs to be taken in by a man because she needs shelter, but then she immediately begins to berate him and start talking about pretentious stuff like "you know you will die too." "You are living in a house designed for death." "You are selfish" Granted, this man obviously wants to have sex with her, but she starts insulting him before he really makes any moves on her. Cops are investigating a house and tons of teenagers are running around behind the house, stepping on wood, and making noise when they aren't supposed to be there, yet the cops never notice or seem to care.
To make matters even worse, the dialogue isn't very good. There is nothing exciting or interesting in the way characters talk or communicate with each other. I'm perfectly okay with minimalistic dialogue, but make it effective. Most of the dialogue is incredibly basic or borderline painful to read. Marie has some of the dumbest lines in the film especially when she is talking to her old childhood lover (which she continually screws over).
The final nail in the coffin is the pacing. My goodness does this film have pacing problems and not because it is slow. This movie seems to run on a weird logic where characters will have conversations off-screen that are relevant to the plot yet the audience is never informed as to what it was they talked about or did. In one such scene Marie and her "new lover" are running through a field and she says that she needs to do something. This thing she needs to do results in her being beaten and stripped. As far as I know, there was NO IMPLICATION as to why she was doing what she was doing, where she was going, or why it was even necessary to confront her old friends. Another instance is a donkey leaves a tramp and then is bought by a circus and used for some mathematical acts. The original tramp shows up at the circus sees the donkey, and then we cut to the next scene with him having the donkey. Yes, the audience should be smart enough to infer that he got the donkey back fairly, but it kills the rhythm of the film. In another scene the mother calls the donkey a saint, we then see him dressed up as a saint as part of a ceremony, and then we cut back to Gerard taking it away at night all within the span of 12 seconds or so. What? Care to explain what just happened? This doesn't happen once in the film, but many many times. I could tell what was happening but there was always a hiccup in the way it was presented.
Lastly, everyone in other reviews seems to make this claim that the Donkey is a "saint" or "pure" or something along those lines but there is no backing for that in the film. The donkey DOES NOTHING in the film and makes no choices. To claim that it has a "character" of some sort is a lie as it is never presented with a character. It has no character so stop treating it like it has some deep philosophical and spiritual significance. It pulls carts and gets beaten. Big woop, that doesn't classify it as a saint. In fact, the concept of it being a saint is only brought up by the mother at the very end of the film but there is no build up to this conclusion. This would be like if in Nostalghia someone said a throw-away line like, "That german shepherd is a saint" and then all of the reviews of the movie say "the german shepherd clearly displays transcendence and sainthood by the way it follows its master around without uttering a sound".
In the end, I have no idea why this film is considered a masterpiece. There is not one good thing I have to say about it except for the actress who played Marie seemed to be skilled, but had the dishonor of playing an uninteresting character who would spout cheesy/on-the-nose dialogue every now and then. Again, this movie has the potential to be a great film, but just about every element of it was done in a poor manner.
Investment.
Why am I watching this character and do I care about what happens to them.
Even some of the worst movies ever made have some form investment in the characters and the story, but this film does not. I can't name even one character who I genuinely cared about or was considered about their well being. Marie? Don't care about her. Arnold? Didn't even know his name until he was about to die. Gerard? He is the worst. Balthazar? Not even established as a truly relevant character until around the 50 minute mark and then he fades back into obscurity until he shows up at the end because, you know, the movie has his name in the title so I guess we should end with him. The amount of investment I had in the characters was so low that they all could've been brutally murdered on screen and I wouldn't even blink (and that is a VERY hard thing to do, as I am pretty sensitive to on-screen violence and don't like that kind of stuff very much).
I can understand why the core concept of this movie has the potential to be interesting. Having a series of mini-stories with an animal connecting them together to show the life of that animal is a neat idea, but this movie doesn't do anything really interesting with it. To be completely honest, if Balthazar's name wasn't in the title I would not have known that he is supposed to be an import figure in the movie. The amount of screen-time focused on the donkey as the key character in a scene might be about two-three minutes max, if even that.
Another huge issue with this film (outside of there being no reason to invest any time on the characters) is that none of the characters seem to run on human logic. They will just kind of do things and there never seems to be a reason why. One of the characters starts trashing a party by breaking mirrors, chairs, bottles, and what not yet no one even notices. That's not how humans react to people breaking stuff. Another scene is where a man is attempting to rape a woman yet when a car drives by she doesn't run for help. That's not how humans act. Heck, she then ends up dating a falling in love with him. That's not how humans act. That said man ends up stripping and beating her later on (with the parents finding out) but then the next scene the mother is talking to the man as if there is no bad blood between them. That's not how mothers act. There is a scene where a girl begs to be taken in by a man because she needs shelter, but then she immediately begins to berate him and start talking about pretentious stuff like "you know you will die too." "You are living in a house designed for death." "You are selfish" Granted, this man obviously wants to have sex with her, but she starts insulting him before he really makes any moves on her. Cops are investigating a house and tons of teenagers are running around behind the house, stepping on wood, and making noise when they aren't supposed to be there, yet the cops never notice or seem to care.
To make matters even worse, the dialogue isn't very good. There is nothing exciting or interesting in the way characters talk or communicate with each other. I'm perfectly okay with minimalistic dialogue, but make it effective. Most of the dialogue is incredibly basic or borderline painful to read. Marie has some of the dumbest lines in the film especially when she is talking to her old childhood lover (which she continually screws over).
The final nail in the coffin is the pacing. My goodness does this film have pacing problems and not because it is slow. This movie seems to run on a weird logic where characters will have conversations off-screen that are relevant to the plot yet the audience is never informed as to what it was they talked about or did. In one such scene Marie and her "new lover" are running through a field and she says that she needs to do something. This thing she needs to do results in her being beaten and stripped. As far as I know, there was NO IMPLICATION as to why she was doing what she was doing, where she was going, or why it was even necessary to confront her old friends. Another instance is a donkey leaves a tramp and then is bought by a circus and used for some mathematical acts. The original tramp shows up at the circus sees the donkey, and then we cut to the next scene with him having the donkey. Yes, the audience should be smart enough to infer that he got the donkey back fairly, but it kills the rhythm of the film. In another scene the mother calls the donkey a saint, we then see him dressed up as a saint as part of a ceremony, and then we cut back to Gerard taking it away at night all within the span of 12 seconds or so. What? Care to explain what just happened? This doesn't happen once in the film, but many many times. I could tell what was happening but there was always a hiccup in the way it was presented.
Lastly, everyone in other reviews seems to make this claim that the Donkey is a "saint" or "pure" or something along those lines but there is no backing for that in the film. The donkey DOES NOTHING in the film and makes no choices. To claim that it has a "character" of some sort is a lie as it is never presented with a character. It has no character so stop treating it like it has some deep philosophical and spiritual significance. It pulls carts and gets beaten. Big woop, that doesn't classify it as a saint. In fact, the concept of it being a saint is only brought up by the mother at the very end of the film but there is no build up to this conclusion. This would be like if in Nostalghia someone said a throw-away line like, "That german shepherd is a saint" and then all of the reviews of the movie say "the german shepherd clearly displays transcendence and sainthood by the way it follows its master around without uttering a sound".
In the end, I have no idea why this film is considered a masterpiece. There is not one good thing I have to say about it except for the actress who played Marie seemed to be skilled, but had the dishonor of playing an uninteresting character who would spout cheesy/on-the-nose dialogue every now and then. Again, this movie has the potential to be a great film, but just about every element of it was done in a poor manner.