The Thorn in the Heart
![]() |
3.0 |
| Director | Michel Gondry |
| Cast | Jean-Yves Gondry • Michel Gondry • Suzette Gondry |
| Genre | Documentary |
| Year | 2009 |
Michel Gondry chronicles the life of Gondry family matriarch, his aunt Suzette Gondry, and her relationship with her son, Jean-Yves.
Editor reviews
Michel Gondry is a video artist. He does things with video that I often don’t fully understand how they could be possible. There is no question of his talent as a film maker. He has had a lot of success in the last decade. No matter which form he attempts he always manages to make something interesting. Now he has decided to make a notably more personal documentary entitled “The Thorn in the Heart.”
The film opens with a scene that most families can relate to, sitting around a table eating dinner listening to old stories. The film is foremost about Gondry’s aunt, Suzette. It seems at first to be a chronicling of her life as a school teacher, in France in the 50s and 60s. The first half of the film is quite slow, which makes it hard to get into. But soon the film finds another focus and we come to understand that the film is about a woman who was able to influence the lives of many generations, but was unable to properly understand or influence her own son. This is also a film about the making of itself. Gondry breaks the fourth wall by presumably happy accidents, which adds realism to the film. The film is also peppered with archival footage from his family’s old home movies.
It is clear that there is a lot of technique in this film. He uses many different cameras and formats to make you feel like you are watching home movies from any decade. It is also not without his usual unique brand of special effects, although much more subdued here. The main thing about the film is you really get a sense of who this woman truly is, you can relate his family to your family, and by the end you feel like you know his family members personally. It is one of the more charming and moving films I have seen since the new year. But in the end it still feels like you are watching a film produced for consumption purely by the Gondry family, which may have been his intent. And there is nothing wrong with that, but there is a missing broader connection that could have been reached. If you are a Gondry fan, you will either love this film for its beauty or hate it for its subtlety. I would say that it is interesting enough despite all of these things, if not purely for Gondry’s unique style.








Twitter
Myspace
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Spurl
Googlize this
Facebook



