This film about a super doctor who seems to do everything fine while being quite stressed makes everything for us to "identify" with him. Nevertheless, I felt nothing. In that respect, it felt more like a documentary or a cliché about "life of a clinician that 'could be you'". The bothersome mum, middle age questions, town gossip, people who talk too much and drift from topic to topic instead of talking about the problem, everybody very concerned about money, how much he charges and if the social security would cover them, the "philosophical questions" (life, death, abortions, giving birth, sickness, addictions, family tensions, adultery, unusual sexual practices, people who need shrinks rather than doctors, relatives who want a certificate to get rid of a cumbersome family member or two, selfishness, the old doctor who hides sorrows, married men who give illusions to other women, "men are like that", the devoted secretary, everybody judging private lives, and mixing it with professional qualifications, the "sensitive doctor who writes and is concerned, probably too much, about his/her patients (specially women seem to be "his type"), the distant admirer, the nice woman who works at the local café, the inevitable patient who turns into a perfect lover, the old doctor's phrase at his birthday: "I forgot you could be so involved with your patients"... And yes, classical music, a small piece played by Reinhard Goebel which, in the end, gives you more distress than "cure".
There's one phrase that lingered after the film was over: (Lonely woman that goes on a Sunday and starts sobbing): "I'm sorry, I'm not sick". Doctor: "But you're in pain".
The film is OK, quite funny at times, but, honestly speaking, I never understood one bit of Docteur Bruno Sachs, let alone of his alleged sickness. The ending didn't help. His love interest was cold as must be winter in rural France. I can't say I liked the film, but will pass it to my doctor and cousins who study medicine, I suppose it'll make them laugh, at least the accumulation of different, seemingly endless ailments that the human species can produce, bodily and otherwise.
I agree with wombat_1 from Sydney that the movie is stereotyped, but in the particular example he quotes, at least I understood it was a one hour interview. In fact, the grouchy mum even complains: "he charged me 2 sessions, but ...". To Gabriel Rocha from Barcelona, the musical score is Jean-Fery Rebel's "Élements" by Musiqua Antiqua Koln by R. Goebel on DG. There' a tiny sound bit on You Tube, it's the 1st movement, but IMDb doesn't let me quote a long link... (The CD is on Amazon, can't give it x the same motif.
I agree with daniel-charles2 that there's no action, no "anything", and too that it nevertheless it succeeds. But disagree on his "you need perfect French and local knowledge to get this film". I don't understand French well at all, and I don't know any of the local habits. Nevertheless I think I understood the gist of this film thou.
Alice Liddel's "numbing sameness" is very accurate, and her postmodern interpretation is brilliant. Nevertheless her insight that the housekeeper is named Borges doesn't lead her to the text where he speaks about the value of both kinds of literature, the "character" (for instance, H. James) and "action". I agree that it's a very literary film, but didn't like neither the flashbacks and even less the two "family traumas" he indulges in all the film (his dad's reassuring wristwatch, and why he doesn't want to have children) the only moments in which we see "the man behind the mask of the profession". I agree with her again they tend to "make a saint of him", and he's like a priest who confesses more than "only" practicing a trade.
Enjoy while not pretending to get "full blown cinema".
