Maybe the slap-shtick brings more of les chuckles overseas. Some cultures are more able to look at misfortune or even misanthropy.

I appreciate not taking a treacly path, but there seems to be a mean-spirited undercurrent here; one that all the awkward hugs in the world may not dispel.

If everyone is an idiot, then who are we the viewers? That's a bit too harsh, but Dumont's world-view may be harsher. Ultimately the payoff of this long film (or short TV series) just did not deliver, of course the same may be said of "Twin Peaks" which I see referenced in other reviews.

I do feel like David Lynch would be happy to sit among his characters, and have a fine cup of coffee. As he does! I'd be a little hesitant to sit down with this directory and share a cup of whatever he's hoping to serve here.

I might watch more films from (or read some interviews with) the director, maybe he fancies himself a "bad boy of cinema." More likely the punchlines did not land with me, while some of the punches did. A friend had recommended this as a comedy, but the flavor for me at least was far more funny strange, than funny ha-ha.

I watched this series back to back as part of the London Film Festival. Whilst it had some nice touches it most definitely could have done with some serious editing. The story covers a number of gruesome and seemingly interconnected murders in a small town in Northern France. These are investigated by a pair of ineffectual policemen who adopt a number of quirky, but not necessarily humorous,mannerisms. The series also gives a great deal of attention to the lives of some of the local children. The series captures the geography very well but one feels there are too many shots that are not necessary or over long. Some of the more farcical moments are similarly overplayed and they tend to peter out. The plot is such that the murders are incidental.Life generally carries on with little or no impact or histrionics.The series struggles to know what it is and veers between light comedy,social drama and murder mystery without ever coming off the fence. The introduction of a storyline concerning immigration,racial and religious intolerance almost halfway through is also not given the attention it deserves. The death of Mohammed also illustrates the general indifference to life that one wonders if there was much point including it as it's never revisited. The depiction of France and French society is also pretty stark with casual overt racism demonstrated a number of times. The climax,if it could be called such a thing,is also unsatisfying with most plot lines left hanging. It felt at the end that this destination could have been reached far quicker and with more effect.

What a wonderful experience this was. I confess that I never thought that Mr.Dumont would be able to overlay his unique cinematic vision with humour but he has succeeded and I laughed out loud on many occasions. Yet even amongst what at times is a "slapstick" level of humour Dumont's humanity still forms the foundations of this film. To those familiar with Mr Dumont's earlier films the themes in Quinquin are consistent with his previous films – racial and economic tension that results in violence, good and evil and moral responsibility, Christianity, Islam and Pantheism, right wing politics, the media etc and a setting in the Northern France coastal and rural communities that will also be familiar from his earlier films.

At times "Quinquin" almost feels self referential from Mr Dumont's earlier work. Thus we have the tracking shots in country lanes from "La Vie De Jesus", the unconventional ( to say the least!) detective from "L'Humanite", the farming community from "Flanders", the religious conflicts from "Hadewijch" the pervasive presence of a possible evil force/the Devil from "Hors Satan" and quietly disturbing and unsettling moments of orifices, death and nakedness when we all lie exposed and ready to return to the soil.

The bizarre but oddly lovable Commandant der Weyden is incompetent but highly proactive compared with Pharaon de Winter's impassivity in "L'Humanite". Both detectives appear to be overwhelmed by the sadness of the horror of what they have witnessed. Both need the warmth of physical contact. In L'Humanite Pharaon hugs the killer as if to take away his guilt and in "Quinquin" der Weyden allows himself to hug his Lieutenant. Both need to feel the warm flesh of animals, Pharaon with the sow at litter and der Weyden with the horses. Both love/desire an unobtainable woman.

Again Mr Dumont makes use of disabled people in his cast but he refuses to be a hypocrite and treat these people with sickly sentimentality instead allowing them to appear as distinct individuals. With a large cast of unusual characters it feels to me as if Mr Dumont is asking society "what is normal?" We see the character Dany Lebleu spinning around until he falls to the ground ( an idea generated by the actor himself Jason Cirot – so much for exploitation!) but there are many scenes where this movement is mirrored by the supposedly more able- bodied. Mr Dumont questions our prejudices. Is the tantrum of the disabled child at the seaside café any more disruptive than the firecrackers that Quinquin and his gang regularly throw? Many people in a Dumont film have odd physical or character traits but these are accepted not exploited. Thus Quinquin has a hearing aid but this is never remarked upon and forms no part of the narrative. To Mr Dumont different is normal and normal is different.

The role that animals play in Mr Dumont's films are significant. We are all beasts, all part of nature despite our arrogance, despite our attempts to create a religious basis for our existence outside of nature but we are all "La bet'humaine". Surely it is not coincidence that most of the victims end up inside an animal? Ultimately there is no "killer" in this murder mystery. Mr Dumont refuses to blame the individual for the deaths in the film. There are motives such as infidelity, depriving someone of their inheritance, racism and so on but Mr Dumont seems to put the real cause of the acts within the context of an evil that overtakes people and causes their actions. The final beautiful scene of Dany looking skywards suggests to me that the possession has left him and the camera tracks away as the evil moves whispering across the fields in search of another victim to overwhelm.

Quinquin himself is our eyes. He shows the way that the violence of the past, the bunkers, grenades and bullets from the second world war, will overtake the young. Could Quinquin and Eve be the precursors of the tragic Freddy and Marie from "La Vie de Jesus"? There is an inevitability about the way that social corruption that will ensnare them and destroy the optimism of their love. The common flash-point for violence in both films is the jealousy towards people of African origin who are, as Quinquin says, "trying to steal our women". The humour comes in part from the very familiar Police detective duo tropes of speeding cars and helicopters, guns ( in this film fired aimlessly apart from a self inflicted death) and excited running across the beach/field to doggedly continue the pursuit but to what specific end we never know. Somehow Mr Dumont manages to strike a perfect balance between poignancy and the ridiculous, thus we have a scene where the overwhelmed der Weyden leaves a church only to be greeted by Lte Charpentier in full stunt mode screeching around the corner towards him with his car on two wheels.

Wonderful, surprising moments occur. Does "Spiderman" actually stick to the wall and climb it in the same way that Pharaon appears to levitate in "L'Humanite"? Or when Quinquin and his group turn up at the siege with faces inexplicably painted like Imps in a painting by Bosch. Somehow managing to be beautiful, funny, ridiculous and serious all at once, the film contains just about all of the major themes from love, death, relationships, politics, religion and good and evil. Mr Dumont is a unique genius who, like the handful of other true masters, has created his own cinema.