Is “Grand Tour” Worth the Hype? Cannes 2024 Viewers Rate Best Director Win

First gaining attention with “Tabu,” which showcased his love for black and white, followed by his three-part adaptation of “Arabian Nights,” Miguel Gomes was a familiar face at the Cannes Film Festival… but only at the Directors’ Fortnight, where he presented five feature films (or three, if you count “Arabian Nights” as one work). 2024 marked a turning point for the Portuguese director, who finally made it to the main Competition.

And he made his mark on the awards list, with Greta Gerwig’s jury appreciating the aesthetic qualities of “Grand Tour” which, in stunning black and white, narrates the search by a British Empire official’s (Gonçalo Waddington) fiancée (Crista Alfaiate) across Asia in 1918. It’s a demanding and mesmerizing tale, but above all, very cinematic in its approach, reminiscent of silent films and incorporating the seventh art into its narrative. But what did the audience think of the journey?

With an average rating of 3.1 out of 5 from 52 reviews*, “Grand Tour” is currently Miguel Gomes’ third best film, trailing behind “The Restless” (3.8), the second part of his “Arabian Nights,” and “Tabu” (3.5), and on par with “The Enchanted,” the third installment of his trilogy.

What Do Viewers Think of “Grand Tour”?

“For 40 minutes, I thought I was watching the worst film of 2024, but after 2 hours and 8 minutes, I realized I had seen the best film of 2024”, writes Tumtumtree (5 out of 5), evidently experiencing a whirlwind of emotions. “Miguel Gomes has done it again but more radically (…) ‘Tabu’ and ‘Grand Tour’: two masterpieces in comparison. Two approaches to crafting a narrative. Two reasons to believe that great, inventive, profound, and sometimes challenging cinema is not dead.”

Even though his rating is “only” 4 out of 5, takeshi29 was not immediately impressed: “While Miguel Gomes’ cinema can sometimes be a bit preachy, here he sweeps us into playful and rich adventures, sometimes even quite humorous, with a directing idea per shot, and a cinematography that is sometimes color, sometimes black and white, absolutely gorgeous. A great joy to savor on the big screen.”

And he’s not the only one to acknowledge that his Cannes trophy was well-deserved: “Hypnotic, a Best Director award at Cannes and it’s clear why!”, exclaims anton_voyl (4 out of 5). “On the edge of documentary and experimental film, one of the most fascinating cinematic pieces of the year undoubtedly!” Echoing this sentiment (and the same rating) is Dafunk: “Totally mesmerizing and magical. A sensory trip that totally deserves its Best Director award at Cannes!”

“A Sensory Trip That Totally Deserves Its Best Director Award at Cannes”

“A beautiful discovery: it moves you, the soundtrack is amazing. Best Director at Cannes deserved!”, adds Thomas Ordonneau (4.5 out of 5) while Naughty Doc (3 out of 5) also doesn’t question the jury’s choice (“Best Director award deserved for this new Miguel Gomes!”). However, he criticizes the narrative: “The trip becomes like a waking dream, but offset by characters with very secondary narrative arcs. It’s not until the last part that we begin to see some embodiment in his female character. An imbalance that prevents it from reaching a higher level.”

Describing a “narrative approach that is somewhat disconcerting”, Abus Dangereux (3.5 out of 5) agrees: “All this demands a lot from the viewer, yet the film still manages to captivate us over the course of the screening thanks to the various encounters the characters have, thanks to a very beautiful cinematography, the settings, and indeed thanks to a minimalist direction. It’s hard to recommend this film, and impossible to dissuade if you’re looking to experience a different kind of cinema session, as well as denying its poetic and fascinating side.”

“Who wasn’t hoping to find the magic of ‘Tabu’ in ‘Grand Tour’, Miguel Gomes’ newer, more experimental, always novelistic and very elaborate work?”, asks traversay1 (2.5 out of 5), who clearly wanted to like it. But no: “It’s very beautiful overall, with the nostalgia of black and white, but is it normal to be so unengaged by a double-layered plot, a somewhat fantasized journey through Asia in colonial times? The emotion is never really there, the fascination with such a work depends on one’s ability to forget that behind the illusionist Miguel Gomes, hides a conceptual artist and a film theorist who favors mind over heart.”

“The languid pace and lack of stakes ultimately wear thin, making this adventure tedious on screen”

Which, under the pen of MADELEINE ELSTER (2.5 out of 5 as well), is put this way: “Miguel Gomes makes beautifully polished images. Problem: we’re at the movies, not in a museum. Boring.” “Despite its sticky and fascinating aesthetic, the film leaves a mixed impression”, agrees Cinéphiles 44, giving the same rating. “The languid pace and lack of stakes ultimately wear thin, making this adventure tedious on screen.”

“‘Grand Tour’ is crushingly slow,” laments Lenny Moland (1.5 out of 5). “The film is barely watchable only thanks to the voice-over that explains the entire plot.” “Okay, the image is sometimes beautiful but overall, if you’re not initiated into Gomes’ work, it’s a complicated art that is snobbish and uninteresting in my opinion”, concludes Ak F (1 out of 5), giving it the lowest rating recorded to date.

In Summary

It’s (very) beautiful. But… While everyone acknowledges the visual qualities of “Grand Tour” and its well-deserved Best Director Prize, Miguel Gomes’ demanding cinema divides opinion depending on whether one can be swept away by the journey he proposes. It’s a hit or miss, but the phrase “form your own opinion” is quite fitting here.

What did you think of “Grand Tour”?

* Ratings recorded as of Thursday, November 28, 2024