The story of Venezuelan revolutionary, Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, who founded a worldwide terrorist organization and raided the OPEC headquarters in 1975 before being caught by the French police.

The drama depicts a jury forced to consider a homicide trial. At the beginning, they have a nearly unanimous decision of guilty, with a single dissenter of not-guilty, who throughout the play sows a seed of reasonable doubt. The story begins after closing arguments have been presented in the homicide case, as the judge is giving his instructions to the jury. As in most American criminal cases, the twelve men must unanimously decide on a verdict of "guilty" or "not guilty". (In the justice systems of nearly all American states, failure to reach a unanimous verdict, a so-called "hung jury", results in a mistrial.) The case at hand pertains to whether a young man murdered his own father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence. These twelve then move to the jury room, where they begin to become acquainted with the personalities of their peers. Throughout their deliberation, not a single juror calls another by his name because the names are unknown by the jurors. Several of the jurors have different reasons for discriminating against the witness: his race, his background, and the troubled relationship between one juror and his own son.
一名少年被控謀殺父親。法庭內，樓下老伯作供聲稱親耳聽到他大罵「我要殺死你」；對街女人作供聲稱親眼目睹他以刀刺進父親胸口；雜貨店老闆作供聲稱曾售賣兇器予少年。似乎，被判死刑將會是他的結局。
陪審團由十二位素未謀面的人組成，聽畢審訊退庭商議。無論陪審團作出任何裁決，必須一致。看似定局已成的判決由於其中一人的異議而爆發成激烈的爭論。十二名陪審員將如何決定少年的生死？

The drama depicts a jury forced to consider a homicide trial. At the beginning, they have a nearly unanimous decision of guilty, with a single dissenter of not-guilty, who throughout the play sows a seed of reasonable doubt. The story begins after closing arguments have been presented in the homicide case, as the judge is giving his instructions to the jury. As in most American criminal cases, the twelve men must unanimously decide on a verdict of "guilty" or "not guilty". (In the justice systems of nearly all American states, failure to reach a unanimous verdict, a so-called "hung jury", results in a mistrial.) The case at hand pertains to whether a young man murdered his own father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence. These twelve then move to the jury room, where they begin to become acquainted with the personalities of their peers. Throughout their deliberation, not a single juror calls another by his name because the names are unknown by the jurors. Several of the jurors have different reasons for discriminating against the witness: his race, his background, and the troubled relationship between one juror and his own son.
一名少年被控謀殺父親。法庭內，樓下老伯作供聲稱親耳聽到他大罵「我要殺死你」；對街女人作供聲稱親眼目睹他以刀刺進父親胸口；雜貨店老闆作供聲稱曾售賣兇器予少年。似乎，被判死刑將會是他的結局。
陪審團由十二位素未謀面的人組成，聽畢審訊退庭商議。無論陪審團作出任何裁決，必須一致。看似定局已成的判決由於其中一人的異議而爆發成激烈的爭論。十二名陪審員將如何決定少年的生死？

A part of Joan of Arc's life. At the beginning, Jeanne (Joan) has already left Domremy, she is trying to convince a captain to escort her to moxia.cc the Dauphin. It ends during Jeanne's first battle, at Orleans. Meanwhile, Jeanne is depicted more as a warrior than a saint (all cliches are avoided), with only her faith for strength.

When Parisian accountant Alex (Gilbert Melki) stumbles upon a routine identity check, he stops to watch. The police tell him to move along, but he insists on his right to do what he likes in public, a point of view that earns him a night in the cells. Still outraged in the morning, he is committed to a psychiatric clinic. Then starts an absurd and implacable machinery that plunges Alex inside a sort of kafkaian world. Once in the system, how is he meant to get out?
Emmanuelle Cuau's Very Well, Thank You is a very realistic story of a normal man who got caught up in a system where giving a late sick leave's certificate to your employer can be a motive of dismissal, where watching policemen doing their job can be considered as an "offence". A system, eventually, that shows us that today's society don't take into account the individual, but on the contrary play with him through laws, abuses of power, lies and paperwork.
A subtle, unsentimental political drama that is comic and horrifying by turns.
任職會計的阿歷士﹙基拔．梅爾基飾﹚有日在街上碰到警察進行身份的例行檢查便停下來觀看。警察叫他離開，但他堅持他有權在公共地方作他喜歡的事，這觀點使他被羈留了一晚。到了早上他依然是暴跳如雷，因而被送進精神病院。阿歷士亦因為制度的荒謬和部門的互不協調而無辜陷入某種卡夫卡式的世界中。一旦進入了制度內，他有甚麼辦法離開呢？
《多謝夾唔該》以寫實的手法講述一個普通人因社會的制度而陷入困境，這制度容許僱主可以用僱員遲遞交病假紙作為解僱的理由，或是看警察辦公可被視作“違法行為”。這制度最後向我們証實現今的社會並不重視人權，相反，它透過法律、濫用權力、謊話及文書工作來玩弄人。
這是一部既幽默但又令人心驚膽跳，導演手法寫情細膩但毫不感情用事的政治意識寫實電影。

Julien is a clockmaker with destructive impulses who decides to blackmail Madame X, a rich, attractive woman who traffics in stolen antiques. What he doesn’t know is that she has an even more dangerous secret that leads him to Marie, with whom he had fallen in love a year earlier.

中世纪的汉王朝，生活着一位遗世独立的画家王佛，他潜心作画，不为名累，却也穷困潦倒，居无定所。富家子弟林偶然机会经王佛点播，得以见识到世间景物更为美丽的一面，遂诚心拜在王佛门下。林向老师提供吃穿用行，散尽家财。貌美的妻子因此幽怨枯槁，自缢身亡。无怨无悔的林跟随师傅走过千山万水，专心修行。
某日师徒俩被士兵带入皇宫，面见天子。当他们战战兢兢，不知所谓之时，天子却道出抓捕他们的原委：当今天子自幼欣赏王佛的画作，一心认为世间万物便如画中描绘的绚烂雍容、华丽多彩，而当他发现真相并非如此时，对王佛便顿生恨意，遂决定弄瞎这位大师的双眼……