Before I saw the movie, its title inspired me to cook the dish "chicken which plums", which is surprisingly delicious. I saw the movie last night, and being a fan of Satrapi's comics and her movies, I had high expectations. Unfortunately I found the movie to be well made but so boring that I fell asleep after about one hour. The movie is set in Iran in the 1950ies, which apparently was identical to France of the same period in nostalgic movies, so they might have just placed it there. A famous violin player has an argument with his wife, who then smashes his instrument; without it, he feels that he is unable to continue to live. The movie then documents the last eight days in his life. Eight chapters ensue which inevitably lead to the death of our protagonist. I felt like having to watch eight magazines of a slide show of someone else's highly predictable holiday. Magazine one: the journey. Magazine two: setting up the tent. Magazine three: we go to the beach. Magazine four: diarrhea and sunburns. Magazine five: I have lost my will to live.
Overall the movie felt like the visual style of Amélie Poulain but without the great story or the humour (or the great lead actress). It's set in postwar Iran but doesn't tell me anything about that place or period. The retrospectives to the protagonists younger days only add confusion but don't make the story more interesting. The movie trades in a slight surrealism and nostalgia for the great and engaging storytelling that is usually Marjane Satrapi's hallmark.
Overall the movie felt like the visual style of Amélie Poulain but without the great story or the humour (or the great lead actress). It's set in postwar Iran but doesn't tell me anything about that place or period. The retrospectives to the protagonists younger days only add confusion but don't make the story more interesting. The movie trades in a slight surrealism and nostalgia for the great and engaging storytelling that is usually Marjane Satrapi's hallmark.