I watched **Apaches** by Romain Quirot, and while some aspects appealed to me, my opinion remains mixed. The film undoubtedly has ambition: revisiting the story of the Apaches, those young outcasts in early 20th-century Paris, with a polished aesthetic and a resolutely modern direction. Some shots are stunning, and the characters' energy injects a strong intensity into the whole. However, the screenplay sometimes felt lacking in depth. The stakes aren’t always clearly defined, and while the characters are intriguing, they remain somewhat superficial. The desire to stylize the narrative occasionally overshadows the emotional core, which made it harder for me to connect with the story. Additionally, the pacing is uneven: the middle of the film drags a bit, even though the more dynamic conclusion partly makes up for it. Despite its flaws, **Apaches** is a film I enjoyed. It has a distinct identity, and even though not everything works perfectly, its aesthetic, energy, and boldness leave a lasting impression. It might not be a perfect film, but it has a uniqueness that makes it worth exploring.

[Filmin] A lazy recreation of Paris 1900 in which the language, the staging and the mediocre special effects are hardly credible. That it uses the classic narration of revenge is not its main problem, although sometimes it is not understood why certain characters die, but Billie's narrative arc is, to say the least, implausible, and the mix of Tarantino style with cinematographer notes never fits in. The film is more disappointing because the idea was appealing, but the obsession with delivering a "modern" narrative ends in a ridiculous spectacle.

Like dancing with baby wolves, it moved so slow I felt I was always one step ahead. This revenge story of a Paris street gang ('thugs ' at the time were called Apaches by the press) at the end of the 19th century would've worked well as a fast-paced action film, especially if they could've decided if Billie was, in fact, a real bad ass or not.