User Reviews

This is a film that could be asking a question but which one? Can we change our destiny or does destiny change us? The film starts with a mysterious man on a train who comes to a small French town to meet some others for a planned bank heist and in a small shop meets an older man who is instantly drawn to him. Johnny Hallyday plays Milan who doesn't say much and the great Jean Rochefort is the retired teacher of poetry Monsieur Manesquier. Milan cannot find a place to stay and Manesquier is more than happy to have him stay with him. Both men are the opposite of each other. Milan is a tough ex-con type that has been down a tough road in his life and seems very tired of his life and appreciates his hosts simple life. Manesquier is a dreamer that does jigsaw puzzles and eats the same meal in the same diner every day. But he dreams of being a cowboy or a gangster type. He asks Milan if he has any tattoos and ultimately asks if he can be in on the heist. Milan is street wise and says no. During the course of the film we watch each character try and become each other. Milan borrows some old comfortable slippers to wear and wears his mustache like Manesquire. At one point he helps a young boy who is being tutored in poetry. Manesquire on the other hand gets his hair cut short like some of the younger men and has Milan show him how to shoot pistols.

*****SPOILER ALERT***** Towards the end of the film Manesquire is having a heart operation at the same time Milan and his cohorts rob a bank. During the robbery Milan discovers someone has tipped off the police and they are surrounded by a swat team. Manesquire dies on the operation table at the exact same time as Milan is gunned down. The film has lots of symbolism like the ending when both trade spots and become each other even though its to late. There is on scene in the film where the bank robbers are in a stolen car at a red light and on the other side of the intersection in another car is the surgeon who is going to perform the operation the next day. When the light turns green both cars pass each other and this scene reflects what the film really is about. Two men with destinies that can't be changed passing each other in different directions. Hallyday is quite effective as the burnt out thief and he gives a performance that reminds me of a younger Charles Bronson. His quietness is the key to his character. He's seen a lot and is burnt out, what more is their to say? And Rochefort is a marvel to watch. He seems perfectly cast as a retired teacher who craves excitement in his dwindling life. Listening to him ramble on with his stories adds so much to the film that you can understand why he wants to change his life. The film is shot in a hazy gray tone and there is no sunshine at all in this film. It made me think that maybe these two doomed characters were in all essence dead already and they were just to lost souls walking around in limbo until their fate catches up to them. Patrice Leconte has shown to be a good story teller and this is arguably Leconte's best film beside "The Hairdressers Husband". Well made with two excellent performances make this a memorable film.

Well, "The Man on the Train" takes a long time getting where it wants to go and is very French in its sense of humor and dialogue, but as they say, all's well that ends well. In this case, it's a great ending. I had turned off this movie around an hour in, bored by the dialogue and lack of plot advancement, right around when Luigi arrives in town.

DO NOT DO THIS! I decided to give it a last chance. From there, the film gets more interesting, and the ending sequence, virtually wordless as we go between each man's "operation," is suspenseful. The interesting thing about "Man" is that it's not about trading places: it's about two people who wade in the waters of each others' lives but never quite dive in. That could have been unfulfilling, but it turns into an engaging narrative on the "what ifs" we all ask ourselves instead of becoming an overly contrived caper.

Rochefort powerfully conveys his frustration and anger, while Hallyday becomes more sympathetic as the film goes on. The ending shots of him sitting in the house by the piano are totally understandable: Milan sees Manesquier's life as leisure, while Rochefort sees in Milan's a life of adventure. Both of them have that "grass is always greener" problem, and both of their lives unfortunately, as unchanged, lead to dead ends. I suppose you have to be the risktaker for a while in order to enjoy the leisure, and maybe you have to have been stuck in a dull life to enjoy the risks. It seems as if neither has ever known the other side and so ends life with regret about what could have been. Let it be a lesson to us all!

What is it about endings that makes it seemingly almost impossible for filmmakers to get a strong, satisfying one?

I loved this film up till the last three or four minutes.

(SPOILER now follows) Having the deaths of the two main characters coincide almost instant-for-instant seemed a bit hokey, but I was willing to accept that, as such things are far from unheard of in real life. But what followed ruined the film for me--ruined its overall quality that is; I will gladly watch the movie again, and probably more than once, for the excellence that permeates the other 85 minutes.

This was a realistic, or even naturalistic, story treatment. To turn it into some metaphysical puzzle at the end was, if not cheating, at least a kind of dereliction of duty. A glance at the message board will reveal the confusion that resides in spectators as to the outcome of the story. Did the men "come back to life?" Come on. Did they enter some kind of alternate world where their lives would be essentially swapped? (The tagline for the film suggests this interpretation.)

The viewer should not have to wonder. I thought this kind of weak-kneed wrap-up was a Hollywood speciality. Apparently it's spread at least to France, and more's the pity.

For looks, acting, superb script, and even better-than-average subtitling, I was hoping to give this one a "ten." Even with one of the worst endings I've ever seen, I still vote "eight."

I wish the film would come out in a "director's cut" version where, for once, instead of tacking on extra material that was wisely left out of the distributed version (typically what "director's cut" turns out to mean), the film actually WOULD be cut--by about four minutes, at the very end.

Then I could give it a ten, and watch it all the way through several more times with greatest pleasure.

This is the story of Manesquier a retired professor who still does a little teaching of poetry. Nothing in his house has been changed since his mother died 30 years ago. He lives quietly with his books, his piano and his dreams of what could have been.

We are all made up of two parts....we are what we are and we are what we would like to be. Manesquier is like that. He leaves his doors unlocked so that his alter ego can enter unannounced. This is Milan whom he finds so fascinating, so exciting, living a life so unlike his own lonely existence. Milan is a thief, a bank robber, a man of action, quick on the draw...but talks little.

In my opinion Milan does not exist as a person but only in the mind of Manesquier. All of the scenes in which Milan appears are in Manesquier's imagination. Viviane too is a part of his memories.

The final scenes of the hospital operating theatre cutting to and from the bank robbers in action are a dramatic but bewildering conclusion. Once again my explanation is that the only real happening is what is taking place in the hospital. Manesquier always wanted to be a part of the excitement of a robbery and so he imagines under anaesthesia what it would be like with all the noisy shooting and Milan (the other part of him) dying on the steps. Anaesthesia and his failing heart are playing tricks on his mind. The nurse responds to his murmurs and he pulls through the operation.

The throwing of the keys to Milan across the street is purely a symbolic action indicating perhaps that after all these years he is turning his back on the house with all its sad memories and is looking forward to a new and different future. In the closing scene we see him in the train pensively moving on.

The script and acting are brilliant. I also like the sound effects of the speeding train and the music. I'm not sure why the streets are so empty. They emphasize that life is pretty boring in that part of the world where nothing ever really happens...