September 10, 2026
FILM: ONE MINUTE TO MIDNIGHT
WRITTEN & DIRECTED BY NICOLAS PARISER
STARRING: MELVIL POUPAUD, CHIARA MASTROIANNI, GOLSHIFTEH FARAHANI
RATING: 3 ½ out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
The title of Nicolas Pariser’s new film One Minute to Midnight (French title: Un Peu avant minuit) suggests a finality, a moment before a change will come. The world is evolving around Leo (Melvil Poupaud) and that minute is long-lasting and surprisingly personal compared to the events outside himself. What he discovers by the end may not necessarily be earth-shattering but it does change a perspective he’s had about his entire life suggesting those final moments may affect one’s individual sense of self more than the world around them.
During the opening scene, the camera offers the setting in Paris. It slowly pulls in to reveal a poster with an event entitled “Army in the Suburbs.” This detail is not really noticed by Leo who is walking the street, perhaps aimlessly. Leo’s current relationship is ending and the father he never knew in Italy has just died. With a plan to attend the will reading, Leo finds himself with more days than he thought until that day will occur. So, he spends most of his time connecting with various people in his life including his daughter Emma, who is participating in the revolution that seems to be happening outside the city. Leo is oblivious to that and we only see signs of it: police cars, posters, arrests, a demonstration. This is not where Leo’s head is at.
Such a premise might be difficult for the more socially-conscious of us to accept. Leo feels compelled to meet up with people from his past to fill the time. He was raised without a sense of his own past, especially who his father was. While with his friends, discussions are had about relationships and affairs. An old colleague has recently been charged with several accounts of rape and assaults. The suggestion is that he, like Leo, was part of a different generation than the one that is fighting fascism and a possible dictatorship in France. In fact, another former colleague, Francois, is making a television series about their younger lives at the turn of the century, including a character playing young Leo. None of it seems political.
The film suggests that many older people are more concerned with their sex and personal lives than any real causes and changes to the social situations happening in the world. At one point, Leo is called out for “pretending to do stuff.” He’s idle rather than a doer. He is currently a teaching assistant instead of a teacher. Since Leo seems to be wandering around for much of the film without any clear sense of purpose to his life, might writer/director Nicholas Pariser be saying that late Gen Xers (Leo is 49) have become complacent? Maybe it happens to all generations. We become more nostalgic than concerned about present life. The exception in Leo’s life may be Gustave, a former film buff who has now become a devout Jew. Gustave notes that the strongest force in the universe is sexual desire. If that is the case, do we become blind to everyday life because of it? Should we become more serious than idle about the world we live in?
Watching the film, I was reminded of Richard Linklater’s Before Trilogy, where characters played by Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy are very philosophical in their twenties when they first meet and walk through European streets. Two decades later, they are at odds with each other on a more intimate level. Woody Allen has also tackled this idea in his 1979 film Manhattan where adults are more concerned about their relationship issues than they are about the larger problems in the universe. Even in 1983’s The Big Chill, former college friends from the 1960s are ashamed at how they’ve mostly lost their sense of idealism and fight. In this regard, is Pariser really doing anything novel here? There is also a reference to Millennials perhaps being the same as people from other generations. Is it a natural flow throughout adulthood to become more self-involved?
At times, watching these long discussions (they also appear in all of the films mentioned and I love each of them) can get tiresome. There’s a LOT of walking and talking. However, I think there’s a lot to be said about where people’s minds go as they age and why they might not protest or get involved with looming social-political strife. Pariser’s film acknowledges where certain generations are at emotionally during later points in life, for better or for worse. Is it necessary to apologize for where they’ve been and where they are today? Is this complacency leading to a moment of doom?
One Minute to Midnight is premiering at the Venice and Toronto International Film Festivals this week.
FILM: ONE MINUTE TO MIDNIGHT
WRITTEN & DIRECTED BY NICOLAS PARISER
STARRING: MELVIL POUPAUD, CHIARA MASTROIANNI, GOLSHIFTEH FARAHANI
RATING: 3 ½ out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
The title of Nicolas Pariser’s new film One Minute to Midnight (French title: Un Peu avant minuit) suggests a finality, a moment before a change will come. The world is evolving around Leo (Melvil Poupaud) and that minute is long-lasting and surprisingly personal compared to the events outside himself. What he discovers by the end may not necessarily be earth-shattering but it does change a perspective he’s had about his entire life suggesting those final moments may affect one’s individual sense of self more than the world around them.
During the opening scene, the camera offers the setting in Paris. It slowly pulls in to reveal a poster with an event entitled “Army in the Suburbs.” This detail is not really noticed by Leo who is walking the street, perhaps aimlessly. Leo’s current relationship is ending and the father he never knew in Italy has just died. With a plan to attend the will reading, Leo finds himself with more days than he thought until that day will occur. So, he spends most of his time connecting with various people in his life including his daughter Emma, who is participating in the revolution that seems to be happening outside the city. Leo is oblivious to that and we only see signs of it: police cars, posters, arrests, a demonstration. This is not where Leo’s head is at.
Such a premise might be difficult for the more socially-conscious of us to accept. Leo feels compelled to meet up with people from his past to fill the time. He was raised without a sense of his own past, especially who his father was. While with his friends, discussions are had about relationships and affairs. An old colleague has recently been charged with several accounts of rape and assaults. The suggestion is that he, like Leo, was part of a different generation than the one that is fighting fascism and a possible dictatorship in France. In fact, another former colleague, Francois, is making a television series about their younger lives at the turn of the century, including a character playing young Leo. None of it seems political.
The film suggests that many older people are more concerned with their sex and personal lives than any real causes and changes to the social situations happening in the world. At one point, Leo is called out for “pretending to do stuff.” He’s idle rather than a doer. He is currently a teaching assistant instead of a teacher. Since Leo seems to be wandering around for much of the film without any clear sense of purpose to his life, might writer/director Nicholas Pariser be saying that late Gen Xers (Leo is 49) have become complacent? Maybe it happens to all generations. We become more nostalgic than concerned about present life. The exception in Leo’s life may be Gustave, a former film buff who has now become a devout Jew. Gustave notes that the strongest force in the universe is sexual desire. If that is the case, do we become blind to everyday life because of it? Should we become more serious than idle about the world we live in?
Watching the film, I was reminded of Richard Linklater’s Before Trilogy, where characters played by Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy are very philosophical in their twenties when they first meet and walk through European streets. Two decades later, they are at odds with each other on a more intimate level. Woody Allen has also tackled this idea in his 1979 film Manhattan where adults are more concerned about their relationship issues than they are about the larger problems in the universe. Even in 1983’s The Big Chill, former college friends from the 1960s are ashamed at how they’ve mostly lost their sense of idealism and fight. In this regard, is Pariser really doing anything novel here? There is also a reference to Millennials perhaps being the same as people from other generations. Is it a natural flow throughout adulthood to become more self-involved?
At times, watching these long discussions (they also appear in all of the films mentioned and I love each of them) can get tiresome. There’s a LOT of walking and talking. However, I think there’s a lot to be said about where people’s minds go as they age and why they might not protest or get involved with looming social-political strife. Pariser’s film acknowledges where certain generations are at emotionally during later points in life, for better or for worse. Is it necessary to apologize for where they’ve been and where they are today? Is this complacency leading to a moment of doom?
One Minute to Midnight is premiering at the Venice and Toronto International Film Festivals this week.