The movie had a good plot : what can we do to save a life without being an outlaw? In the movie, basically it's said that either you are rich and live or you are poor and you have to steal to survive. 2h of pursuit between the group of self-called "yamakasi" (the good ones who act illegally sometimes) and the police (the bad ones who act legally most of the time). The dichotomy is unfortunately not more subtle. The battle between the robbers and the police. Nothing new. I found that the major problem of that movie, or rather the main reason why I feel I've just wasted 2hours of my time, is that it raises more questions (not difficult ones...) than it gives answers - not in a philosophical attempt to make people think. When a hero saves a child, I like the hero to be likable, and the characters in the movie are complete jerks (the yamakasi and the police alike). The thing is although I have nothing against a movie which expose how our whole system is badly made and how stupid the police is, I find irritating when a group behaves violently and think they're cool (the movie is made so that the youth in France think well of the yamakasi characters although they act violently). More importantly maybe, they had the chance to offer a new look on Paris ghettos (the movie takes place in Paris, I'm from Paris myself and the characters are from the well-known little ghettos here) and it was just a lot of "clichés", so there again nothing new.
The movie could have been much more than what it simply is : an okay action movie. Don't expect anything else. Oh, as far as the movie as an art, there are a few enjoyable and well-filmed scenes, especially since the main actors are very good sportsmen and practice "parkour".
The movie could have been much more than what it simply is : an okay action movie. Don't expect anything else. Oh, as far as the movie as an art, there are a few enjoyable and well-filmed scenes, especially since the main actors are very good sportsmen and practice "parkour".