Can't really say that I liked it or didn't like it, I guess many will feel that they either do one thing or the other, but for my case there were equally many parts for both sides, so the scales was more or less balanced.I did think it became a bit to artsy in its expression for me, this was basically in many ways a soft-core film, explicit enough to make you fantasy run with it, but not enough to make it porn and thereby not be able to actually show it before after midnight :)Take a look, you might like it, but my guess it by now is not that interesting for anybody, maybe for the artistic parts and the visuals, but for the story and acting, this is like watching most soft-core, not that interesting.

French film makers are prone to mixing banal philosophy and soft core porn. Their tiresome philosophies of pleasure are ALWAYS mere justification for voyeurism and mental masturbation for the predominantly male viewers, some of whom evidently hope that their wives and girlfriends will be stimulated too. They can thus escape the horrors of monogamy, if only in their minds. This transparently false justification is the essence of kitsch. On an intellectual level this film is no better than Exit To Eden, which also justified voyeurism and diluted forms of perversion with the same pretentious twaddle. But at least we are spared from seeing men in G strings and Rosie O'Donnell in a black corset and fishnet stockings. The borrowings from Orphee are obvious. Death is a sinister beauty, corrupt police do her work, and coded radio messages appear at random. Even the title borrows from Bunuel. However, little is done with these elements. They are tiny bits of brain candy for the critics, like finding Waldo. We do see some pretty girls, but they are mostly insane. BOTTOM LINE: For men who need a jump start.

Following the path of his late feature, "Secret things", "The exterminating angels" probably close an era in Jean Claude Brisseau's career(one of the most interesting of contemporary french cinema). You can film sex and nudity and not ever telling stories of provocation and other things that women could refuse to show but in the attempt maybe you don't realize what the camera-eye is registering: passion,loneliness, madness and ... love. Anyone could say Brisseau hides things but you must check if you are aware enough to see what this movie is really are. One of the best of the year and one of the best exercises of freedom in wide format

I guess you've got a number of French writers at IMDb, and the global rating of "Les Anges" is good (6,6 for 19 votes : it's better than most French films I guess). Nevertheless none dared to write even a brief comment on this "thing". I will try to. If you don't like watching young, very desirable, girls playing with themselves under the table of a fancy restaurant, this film is not for you. If you're not attracted by beautifully filmed saphic loves in a hotel corridor, this film is not for you. That should leave plenty people as potential public but has the film a point in itself, or is it only a gorgeous sex show ? The answer is complex for Brisseau never hide that his main interest is filming female orgasm, true or perfectly played. He was jailed for having "forced" actresses to masturbate in front of his camera on the pretext that they were casted for his next film. Unfortunately, all the girls were not kept for the cast...and some sued him . Les Anges is therefore a pro domo plea where Brisseau explains that his objectives were of clearly artistic nature, and not mere voyeurism . This debate is at the center of the film, more or less drawn into a ludicrous scenario, and deserves all our attention. Anyway, I shall remember "les Anges" as some of the "hottest" films ever, and that's certainly worth the price of a ticket.