The Blue Note (1991)

Admirable film.

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

I liked pictures (images, colors) and expressive acting but unfortunately for Żuławski I'm a person who has studied the sources concerning Chopin and Sand for years. I know all Chopin's music and letters and the most important Sand's writings and letters. And what can I say? Żuławski's movie is a forgery.Żuławski knew nothing about Sand (who was a very deep and serious personality, described by many people who really knew her as ... a good and generous person) and the evolution of her social and religious ideas. His aim was to denigrate and falsify her as did Chopin unwise hagiographers before him.Chopin in „La note blue" seems to be a quite ridiculous man, however he may please the exalted admirers of his music because fits the myth of a sweet, quiet and lovely genius (in fact the composer was a rather neurotic, jealous and difficult personality which doesn't of course mean he wasn't good and tender also. Chopin music is complex as his personality was... Żuławski didn't show it...The plot itself is a fantasy (based partially on Chopin not credible and dishonest hagiographies). If Żuławski uses the sources (like Sand's Histoire de ma vie or Lucrezia Floriani), he falsifies the original meaning of these texts (not only the meaning but also the words...).I could write a book about lies Żuławski told in his movie. It's a pity because most of people are naif and take the so called „biographic" stories for truth.In fact the movie is about Żuławski's hate, Żuławski's love, Żuławski's obsessions, Żuławski's ridiculousness and vulgarity, Żuławski's vision of the world. Shortly it is about Żuławski's EGO.

As a pianist and lover of Chopin's music, I really wanted to like this. But it's just an annoying artsy-fartsy mess in which multiple talents are wasted due to the poorest direction.Director, you are a moron. Hysteria + hysteria + hysteria = boring. When all your "characters" are flamboyant, no one really is. All the portraits in this mess are failures because they have no individuality, they are all the same manic person -- who is this, you? You give it no rest for 2 hours... Such a pain to watch. You have absolutely no sense of contrast or rhythm. And by the way, Chopin's music does not work as background for constant hysteria. You are unworthy of making a movie about any of these people.Viewers today will be expecting a little slice of Chopin's biography, but instead of doing this respectfully and getting out of the way, the director wants to steal the scene for himself. This is just a bunch of stuff that George Sand wrote, juxtaposed with no sense, care or taste. The direction given to the actors seems to have been, "Imagine a sane person saying this in a normal way, then do the opposite -- imagine you are Nicolas Cage". The result is incomprehensible and fails to portrait any of the famous personalities we could be interested in.On a side note, viewers today also will be ignorant of the significance of these personalities. I am ashamed to confess I didn't know anything about Alexandre Dumas' son. No help is given -- the director is openly hostile to the masses.

After seeing this movie, I just sat breathless in my armchair - I just hadn't seen such a movie before. Truly, a masterpiece on par with Peter Greenaway's finest. Beatufilly filmed, superbly acted (Olejniczak, a pianist by trade - a damn good one at that: he recorded the soundtrack to Polanski's "The Pianist" - is very true to the role of Chopin in his final moments), classy scenography... The action is presented in a way resembling the very atmosphere of the romantic period's art - hectic and rich in expression. The movie's goal is to portray emotions, not a plot - and this goal it achieves perfectly. But, as with romantic art, this movie requires a certain mindset - an openness to emotion - or it will be totally misunderstood.When I finally regained my senses, I've instantly decided to jump on IMDb.com to see how other people could've perceived this one-of-a-kind film - and guess what? A general rating of 3.7. Some people do not understand cinema as an art form at all. Just because the movie isn't something most people are used to nowadays doesn't make it a bad one.I am going to risk the claim that if you won't like this movie, you won't like art of the romantic period at all. Really, "La Note Bleue" embodies the whole spirit of the romantic period.

After having seen this film I feel guilty for having given the grade 1 on other films. This is the worst non-low-budget movie I have ever seen. Ok, the female actresses were pretty, but what else was there? Awfully played music, horrible singing, terrible characters? Was there suspense or even a plot at all? An idea? A message? This pile of pictures seemed like a very bad theatrical play, and I regret that it wasn't. I would've loved to booh at the responsible persons.