La lune dans le caniveau is definitely different in comparison to director Beineix's much more straightforward crime film Diva (1981). It is more like an introverted, dramatic family member. We observe a man who tries to deal with his mistress and his alcoholic brother, and wants revenge for the death of his sister. Is this story very interesting? I wouldn't say so. Most scenes are long and tedious (the film has a two hour runtime). Only real fans of either Beineix or the actors will keep their concentration until the very end.The pleasure for the viewer lies elsewhere: the stylistic, colorful cinematography. The film has playful use of lights EVERYWHERE. It is visually incredibly detailed for a film from begin 80's, which were usually bleak on purpose. Both films from Beineix, Diva and this one, weren't praised for its renewal. On the contrary: they were equally bashed by the critics. Style over substance, they said. Which, as an argument about film, seems always ridiculous to me. Isn't cinema BY DEFINITION about style? It is not a book on screen, after all. How is a film as 8 1/2 not style over substance?While I'll think Beineix was quite adventurous with his colorful style, perhaps even ahead of its time, as films have become more style over substance ever since (take for example V for vendetta, Spring Breakers, Ixjana, City of lost children, The strange color of your body's tears). Also quite modern are these out of the ordinary female characters, played wonderfully by Victoria Abril and Natassja Kinski. Depardieu's acting perhaps seems a bit shallow but he is in fact right in tone with the introverted style of the film. This was a period (begin 80's) in which he excelled in playing lead characters (Danton, Le chevre, Le dernier métro, Buffet froid). I rate this film 7/10. Despite the visual feast, I'm just too impatient to enjoy a film at such a slow pace. An one-hour cut would do magic for this film.

One plausible reason why French critics failed to appreciate the beauty of this film might have something to do with it being a "mood" based film. It must be stated with caution that films with a certain 'mood' take their own time to settle in the minds of viewers. This is one reason why some critics must have failed to interpret "Moon in the gutter" in the right spirit. Jean Jacques Beineix and his screen writing collaborator Olivier Mergault must be congratulated for their realistic depiction of the milieu from which this film's seedy characters come. They give an air of authenticity to an area where one can easily find all types of low lives who do not hesitate a bit to waste their time over petty fights. It is rather a sad feeling to read a lot of negative comments about French director Jean Jacques Beineix's film "Moon in the gutter". The reason for not liking this film could be many as there is no universal agreement about audiences and their tastes. However, it must be remembered that all filmmakers have the right to portray their visions on the big screen in the manner which suits them the best. From this yardstick, nobody has the right to censure Monsieur Beineix for his film which has also been hailed by many critics outside France as a masterpiece.

The second feature from the director of 'Diva' was met with enough ridicule to suggest a settling of old scores, but unfortunately the film deserved every insult it inspired. No one can say Jean-Jacques Beineix wasn't asking for trouble, and the end result of his efforts to create a heavily stylized, romantic mood piece is an unforgivably empty and pretentious melodrama so laughably bad it might almost be a parody of modern European art-schlock cinema. The ubiquitous Gerard Depardieu plays a burly stevedore who wanders the docks of a nameless city, brooding over the unknown assailant who killed his sister; soon he begins brooding over sultry Nastassia Kinski instead, and they elope. Or do they? Every tantalizing hint of a plot disappears (usually within a scene or two) behind a welter of self-indulgent gestures, none of which could possibly make any sense to anyone except the writer-director. At best the film might be dismissed as a failed experiment; more accurately, it's a near masterpiece of unintended awfulness.

I have to say that this was a pretty bad movie. The acting was bad, the editing was bad, the story was bad. I can see, however, how a movie like this can pave the way for something like Delicatessen, La cité des enfants perdus, and even Les amants du Pont-Neuf.Actually, this reminded me of Carax's Mauvais Sang, which was really horrible but paved the way to his masterpiece Les amants du Pont-Neuf. Similarly, this is a precursor to Beineix's masterpiece, 37•2 le matin (version integrale). The focus on tormented relationships and uncertain geographies can be interesting, but really, not in this movie. The music was good, but not always well-adapted to the scenes it accompanied. Then again, by no means does this movie aim to be realistic (which explains the acting). Too bad. Interesting elements but boring results.