It has become a hallmark of so-called "avant-garde filmmaking" to feature ambiguity and vague or incomplete story arcs. This is not art; it is lazy writing. Though the various synopses for this film concentrate on the Maria Enders character, played by Juliette Binoche, returning to the play which began her career after 20 years, but in the role of the older woman who is driven to kill herself (but maybe not?) by the predatory younger woman who became her lover (the role Enders originally played), the film is more about the relationship between Enders and her assistant, Val, played by Kristen Stewart. And then, all of a sudden, it's not. I cannot say more without spoilers, but there are more than one unresolved situations in the film, which felt to me like the screenwriter couldn't figure out how to resolve things, so they just ended it.Not clever, not art - just lazy.

Rehearsing for a revival of the play that made her famous proves unexpectedly challenging for an esteemed actress in this French drama starring Juliette Binoche. While she knows all the dialogue, the difficulty is being asked to the play the older of the two protagonists (a la Michael Caine assuming the Laurence Olivier role in the remake of 'Sleuth'). Further tensions arise as the older protagonist is manipulated by the younger one in the play with Binoche wondering how close she may be to the older character. Fascinating as all this might sound, the film is nevertheless hard to get through at times with the plot not really taking off until 40 minutes in when Binoche views online clips of her bratty co-star to-be and tries to rehearse knowing what her co-star is like. At its best, the film blurs reality as Binoche and her personal assistant practise with it often ambiguous whether the pair are really fighting or simply rehearsing. There are also some memorable bits as the pair discuss whether science fiction dramas can have merit and the notion that "thinking about a text is different to living it", but these sparks unfortunately fizzle out before the film is over. As others have observed, the movie has a curious meta quality with Binoche playing an actress character very similar to herself, but the protracted first forty and final fifteen minutes oddly leads the film succeeding best in its middle section.

The only reason to judge it as "intelligent" is so you, are your cliquey buddies, can feel superior to the riff-raff.If you read between the lines of the other reviews you'll understand what you're letting yourself in for with this bore-fest (translations provided).* It's "European" so has to be judged differently (it's all arty and no plot or action - and I'm European).* It is an "intelligent" film (we don't get it either but we pretend we do so can feel superior - my IQ is in the top 0.05% of the population so I'm not thick,just don't like rubbish)* Each person brings their own interpretation (we don't know what's really happening either but can discuss ad nauseam what it means to "us").* It has juxtapositions of scenes that take a little to adjust to (the editing is deliberately awkward to detract from the nonsense).* A meditation on fame, acting, aging, and acceptance, "Clouds" is a multilayered rapture on the subject of woman, performing (I can only marvel at this bit of utter drivel).* The director's longtime fans will find its pleasures virtually pornographic (more pretentious than the last piece of rubbish will give you more to pseudointellectually analyse).* A haunting film by Olivier Assayas about art, time, and irony (it's just full of art, time and the only irony is it's the blind arty types that can't see that).* Clouds Of Sils Maria. swirls with provocative ideas, but they're talked about more than dramatized (just about sums it up).All I'm trying to do is warn you what you're getting yourself in for, so if you're seeking pretentious nonsense to impress your Guardian reading metropolitan buddies then you've scored.

The great performances of the actors in the film are offset only by the stubbornness of the director to not display anything else. Complex characters played brilliantly by Binoche, Stewart and Moretz express so many different emotions related to the female psyche - after all, the film was written at Binoche's challenge to Olivier Assayas to make a movie about women - yet they refuse to describe any coherent one character. I feel that this is on purpose, as all three women are basically just facets of the same archetypal female.With this material and these talented women, it could have been a great film, however Assayas' work is defiled by his own ego. The stories of the characters interweave with his life and work, with connections to some of his films, including the one that he wrote for Binoche for her first major role and reminding, for no good reason, of Ingmar Bergman's work. In the end, when you are left wondering "what the hell was this film about?", you realize that it is a lot about the guy that both wrote and directed it. Big surprise there!That being said, my conclusion is that it is a very difficult to rate a movie. Great performances, nice direction, good soundtrack and a plot that weaves into itself to tease the viewer into subtleties of emotion and understanding. Yet if you, like me, couldn't give a damn about Olivier Assayas, you will find it difficult to accept the ending that provides no resolution whatsoever. Perhaps it is a brush of genius, though: if it's really about women, then you only get a series of WTF moments including the final one. It's a play on a play about a play.