Why is the French more popular than the Caro-Kann??

Hello,

So just for the kick, I've decided to vary a bit my repertoire. For instance, I've started to play the KID, with quite some pleasure, and the Ruy Lopez as white (before that, I played the Italian).

Now, when I play ...e5 in response of e4, I'm secretly hoping to get to a Marshal, for the kick of it. But this rarely happens. Now, I've randomly started to play the French. Not giving up e5, but just to try something different.

.But I don't understand it, why is this opening more popular than the Caro-Kann (which i played few years ago OTB)? Caro-Kann seems very similar in structure and plans as the french but without the light square bishop issue.

.I also hear a lot of commentator getting excited when a top GM uses the french (not the caro),  as if it was a wild attacking opening although I thought it was just supposed to be a solid opening.

Can someone brief me on those aspects...?
Have a good day (and great thanksgiving for the Americans!)

Well another proof that i don't understand the opening xD
I thought the french (as the CK) to be of closed nature where black plays for solid central pawn structure, often closed or semi-closed and waiting for counterattacking chances (and a good endgame, particularly in the CK)

In the Caro-Kann, black is looking for nothing more than to get his pieces out with a solid structure 

In the French, Black is going for an all out attack, usually on d4 but some lines, like the winwaer, it might shift to c3.

In return for the Bad Bishop, Black's wastes no time.  ...c7-c5 in one go, unlike the Caro-Kann where it takes 2 moves.

For example:

The Caro-Kann and the French Defense may seem similar from a classical perspective, but once you throw in the hypermodern theory (which is essential to playing the black pieces effectively), the general superiority of the French Defense becomes apparent.

As @ThrillerFan has already noted, the French Defense enables black to strike back quickly in the center (the c5-c7 thrust is straight out of Nimzowitsch's book My System)., and even though the light-square bishop is bad initially, the ability to undermine and then target the d4 pawn gains the initiative and enables black to gain good control of the center.

Another aspect here is that after 1. e4 e6 white almost has to play 2. d4, otherwise white is permanently weak in the center after 2. ..d5.  After 1. e4 c6, white can develop with 2. Nf3 or 2. Nc3, prepare a fianchetto with 2. g3 (targeting the d5 square on the long diagonal after 3. Bg2).  In the C-K 2. d4 is still a good second move for white, but far from his only option.

Thanks for the explanations ThrillerFan and Dsmith42! Quite helpful.
My first french game (blitzt) was a unusual line very early on, lost to a blunder but hold my ground

In that game, after 8. f4?, 8. ..exf4!! (en passant) consolidates the pawn white has given up in the opening and all but guarantees that the e6-pawn will eventually become a passed pawn.  Follow that with Nd7, Be7, and O-O and you're completely solid and white has negligible counterplay.  White blundered in allowing you to capture with 3. ..dxe4 in the first place (which was correct), that alone should usually be a fatal mistake.

Yeah, 3.Be3?! is a dubious gambit and even then White failed to follow up correctly.  After 3...dxe4, White should play 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5! With only a slight advantage for black.

Yes, I figured it was a weird opening choice. I just wanted to get a feel by playing a 3mn blitz game during a short break at work . Wasn't too interesting as an opening example though. Just wanted to post it quickly since the topic is still fresh  
I thought about 8... en passant, at that short moment I just thought it would only help white to develop with Nxf3, didn't see the long term goal of that...

The French is an imbalanced game where black has great winning chances. I don't feel like black has the same kind of chances in the Caro