Paris: A Wild Story (Fred Fougea, 2017): France

Reviewed by Kirsten Anderberg. Viewed at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival 2020.

The often unnoticed world of Paris’ wildlife is put under a spotlight in the comedic nature film, “Paris: A Wild Story.” A Parisian lightness, with beautiful aerial shots, takes us on a journey with the animals who have come to exploit the city’s many amenities offered by the coming of humans. Artful cinematography allows the audience to see the grand architecture, arched bridges, parks, and tunnels of Paris from a bird’s eye view.

Graceful narration (in English) over a bright and emotionally soothing musical soundtrack provides a peak into the mindset of animals prowling Paris’ streets and waterways in this 90 minute film. Whereas most films have a predominantly human cast, with animals living in the cities being hidden or incidental, this film brings the city animals front and center, uncharacteristically putting humans in the background. Humorous humanizations of these city dwelling animals make for audience laughter throughout the film. Satirically juxtaposed positions of humans and animals also made for some hilarious visuals. This reversal of the usual human plot dominance also lends a philosophical bent to the film, allowing humans to see the world from outside their own bubbles, perhaps having some epiphanies about the interactions between humans and wild animals, even within cities.

The film used slow and fast motion shots contrasted with oscillating close ups and long shots, combined with shots that were in focus and blurred. Even with this diversity of angles and techniques, there was still a continuity and fluidity of motion and these cinematic tools kept the photography from being monotonous. Incredibly, the film creates tension during some of the situations these city dwelling animals get into, and the audience finds itself just as full of suspense and tension over a wildlife plot as it would over a human-centered plot, due to the unusual and charming style of this storytelling.

My only criticism of this film is I felt it was about 30 minutes too long. After a while, the humorous angle, or premise, of the film began to wear thin. I felt like it was using the same format repeatedly, just on different animals, and it lost its uniquity before the film was finished.