FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
While visiting a cafe, a renowned poet (Jean Marais) married to a newly pregnant wife (Marie Dea) witnesses an accident involving a drunk young poet (Edouarde Dermithe) and a Princess (Maria Casares), and is taken with them to Casares’ chateau. After being driven home by Casares’ chauffeur (Francois Perier), Orphee (Marais) soon finds himself caught up in a confusing world of secret messages and ambiguous borders between life and death.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Artists
• Death and Dying
• French Films
• Jean Cocteau Films
• Love Triangle

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “enigmatic but spellbinding version of the Orpheus-Eurydice myth by Jean Cocteau” — “derived from his first play” — presents a “deeply personal work” about a contemporary poet who, “like Cocteau… fears that while his art has brought him fame it may not bring him immortality and that young poets with different styles and themes may be the voices listened to in the future.”

Peary asserts that Cocteau “takes the experiences of the classical Orpheus — his pursuit of and cat-and-mouse game with Death, his journey into the underworld after Eurydice” and “uses them as the means by which Marais learns about death, eternity, love, his art, [and] himself” — and, as a poet capable of “surreal experiences,” he “has no restrictions on his imagination: people can come back from the dead; pass through mirrors; [and] travel through a netherworld while time stands still back home.”

Peary argues that the “film would work better if Orpheus’s love for [his] wife Eurydice (Marie Dea) were more convincing; as it is, [he doesn’t] understand why Death [Casares], who loves Orpheus, would send him back to his wife, especially since he desires Death more.”

(To me, this seems like a classic instance of all characters in the play — including Death herself — acknowledging The Poet’s genius and doing what they can to ensure his fame, work, and genetics, are allowed to flourish.)

Peary concludes his review by pointing out that “Nicolas Hayer’s cinematography is excellent, the special effects are magical, the underground sets are haunting, and the dynamic Cesares gives that fellow who played Death in The Seventh Seal a run for his money.”

While I appreciate Cocteau’s artistic vision — like Peary, I admire the cinematography, sets, effects, and dynamic Casares’ performance — I’m not a personal fan of this film. Tales of self-absorbed (male) artists who believe their creative output takes precedence over all else, and who treat their loyal spouses terribly, are exactly not my cup of tea — so for me, this movie remains of historical curiosity and little more. However, film fanatics will surely want to check it out once.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Maria Casares as the Princess
  
• Creative low-tech special effects
  
  
• Nicolas Hayer’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
Yes, once, for its historical relevance.

Categories

• Historically Relevant

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Criterion Collection Essay
• NY Times Original Review
• Q Network Review
• TCM Article
• TV Guide Review

Synopsis:
A poverty-stricken pensioner (Carlo Battisti) living with his beloved dog Flike (Napoleone) seeks helps from a pregnant young maid (Maria Pia Casilio) in preventing eviction by his unfeeling landlady (Lina Gennari) — but Maria has problems of her own, and none of Umberto D. (Battisti’s) longtime friends seem willing or able to help him out financially.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Elderly People
• Italian Films
• Pets
• Survival
• Vittorio De Sica Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that in this “sad but beautiful postwar social drama” — focusing “on an individual member of the dispossessed aged” — director Vittorio De Sica wisely doesn’t “make his hero into a sweet grandfather type whom you automatically love and feel sorry for,” instead showing “his gruff exterior and stubbornness” — though we also see “his loving gestures towards his dog and his concern for the lovely unmarried young maid (Maria Pia Casilio), who is pregnant and will soon be cast into the street by the landlady.”

Peary points out that this “realistic film has many deeply moving sequences — you won’t forget Umberto sitting in his room, which has been virtually destroyed because the landlady is having it converted into a parlor”:

… “or Umberto searching for his dog at the pound”:

… “or the maid silently going through her morning routine while obviously thinking of her unhappy future.”

An ongoing theme of the film is that Umberto is “too proud to ask his well-off acquaintances for a needed loan (and they never offer it)”:

… “or join the growing number of beggars in the city” — though he does attempt to sell as many of his items as possible to collect money for his back rent.

However, “Umberto feels increasingly lost and tired, and would commit suicide if he didn’t worry about the welfare of [his] dog.”

Umberto D. is an emotionally challenging film to watch, especially given how strongly its central issues continue to resonate today — we’re not a whole lot closer to providing any kind of security to those living on the margins of survival. As usual, it’s non-governmental organizations that step up to provide a safety net, as when Umberto goes to a private Catholic hospital to recover from tonsillitis and receives a week of care, shelter, and steady food:

Meanwhile, the unfeeling nature of the ever-present bourgeoise is epitomized by Umberto’s self-absorbed landlady, who bears a passing resemblance to Lana Turner:

This neo-realistic classic (often considered the final film of the “movement”) remains well worth a look by all film fanatics — who should nonetheless be prepared to shed some well-deserved tears, especially during the moments leading up to the “glorious final shot, which allows Umberto D., Flike, and us at least a moment of relief.”

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Carlo Battisti as Umberto D.
  
• Maria Pia Casilio as Maria
  
• Fine use of location shooting in Rome
  
• G.R. Aldo’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
Yes, as a foreign classic.

Categories

• Foreign Gem
• Genuine Classic

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Q Network Review
• Criterion Collections Essay (Peter Becker)
• Criterion Collection: Seeing Clearly Through Tears

Synopsis:
A young woman (Nicole Stephane) living with her sickly brother Paul (Edouard Dermithe) finds their enmeshed relationship threatened when their friend Gerard (Jacques Bernard) and her new coworker Agathe (Renee Closima) — who looks much like a student named Dargelos who once threw a stone-filled snowball at Paul — move in with them.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• French Films
• Incest and Incestuous Undertones
• Jean Cocteau Films
• Jean-Pierre Melville Films
• Love Triangle
• Siblings

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that the “powerhouse duo of scenarist Jean Cocteau (who adapted his own novel) and director Jean-Pierre Melville combined to make this fascinating, though flawed, precursor of la nouvelle vague.” He points out that the “story centers on [the] bizarre, always combative relationship of a young Parisian woman, Elisabeth (Nicole Stephane gives a dynamic performance)”:

… “and her slightly younger brother, Paul (Edouard Dermithe), with whom she has always shared a room and for whom she has incestuous feelings.”

After outlining the film’s odd narrative, Peary describes how each of the four main characters eventually “becomes emotionally distressed,” noting that “the ‘stolen kisses’ theme, the pretentious young characters, the males who allow women to push them around, the narration that reveals characters’ foolish, innermost thoughts and motives, and the characters who are driven by their hearts were certainly an influence on Francois Truffaut.” He also points out that “the unpredictable and fascinating Elisabeth anticipates Jeanne Moreau’s Catherine in Jules and Jim, particularly in how she relates to Paul and Gerard in their scenes together”:

… and he notes that the “opening snowball sequence is taken from Cocteau’s 1930 debut film, The Blood of a Poet.”

This surreal-ish film will likely most appeal to those who enjoy Cocteau’s sensibilities — and to that end, there is plenty to reflect on and analyze, including but not limited to themes of homoeroticism:

… gender fluidity:

… incest:

… and the similar appearances of not only (male) “Dargelos” and (female) “Agathe” (played by the same actress):

… but also “weak and passive” Paul and “fire and ice” Elisabeth. The eventual machinations Elisabeth resorts to in the final third of the film reveal her to be a monstrously possessive female on a par with horror film villainesses or sociopathic femmes fatales; it’s just too bad we don’t quite understand the “why” behind what she does or anything else that goes on in this twisted universe.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Henri Decaë’s cinematography
  
  
  

Must See?
No, but it’s certainly worth a look for its historical interest.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Q Network Review
• Criterion Collection Essay

Synopsis:
When a stationmaster (Fernand Ledoux) kills the former lover (Jacques Berlioz) of his wife (Simone Simon) in a jealous rage, a train conductor (Jean Gabin) accidentally becomes involved in their cover-up and soon falls in love with Simon.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Domestic Abuse
• Femmes Fatales
• French Films
• Homicidal Spouses
• Infidelity
• Jean Gabin Films
• Jean Renoir Films
• Plot to Murder
• Simone Simon Films
• Trains and Subways

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Jean Gabin, France’s top romantic idol prior to WWII, had one of his best roles in Jean Renoir’s updating of Emile Zola’s novel,” playing a “world-weary… train engineer who is tormented by debilitating headaches that drive him toward violence.”

Peary notes that this “fatalistic, moodily photographed murder drama undoubtedly influenced American film noir, thematically and visually” — though interestingly, Simon’s character is presented from the beginning as the sympathetic victim of not only an abusive husband but a traumatic past, and her willingness to manipulate Gabin only gradually emerges. With that said, Peary argues that “the way femme fatale Simon uses sex to take control of Gabin — to make him act stupidly so he’ll fall into a trap — reminds [him] of how Kathleen Turner handles William Hurt in Body Heat,” and that’s one possible way to interpret things here.

Regardless, we’re kept genuinely in suspense throughout, wondering what moves each individual will make next given that none of them — Gabin, Simon, or Ledoux — is predictable. Renoir makes excellent use of real-life railroad locales, and the investment he made in encouraging Gabin to learn how to actually conduct a train shows up in the film’s overall air of authenticity:

Watch for Renoir himself in a cameo role as the unfortunate passenger who ends up wrongfully taking the blame for Berlioz’s death:

Remade by Fritz Lang in 1954 as Human Desire, which is equally worthy viewing.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Jean Gabin as Jacques
  
• Simone Simon as Severine
  
• Fine cinematography
  
  

Must See?
Yes, as one of Renoir’s best films.

Categories

• Foreign Gem
• Genuine Classic
• Important Director

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• Criterion Essay
• Q Network Review

Synopsis:
When the pampered wife (Danielle Darrieux) of a general (Charles Boyer) secretly sells a pair of earrings to cover some debts, she unleashes a series of lies and duplicities which are compounded when she falls in love with an Italian baron (Vittorio De Sica) and is given the earrings back as a gift from him.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Charles Boyer Films
• Danielle Darrieux Films
• French Films
• Infidelity
• Love Triangle
• Max Ophuls Films
• Vittorio De Sica Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “breathlessly beautiful Max Ophüls film about ‘un grand amour,’ a love of the heart” — “adapted from a novel by Louise de Vilmorin”, who claimed the filmmakers “didn’t get one thing right” — has “elements of a standard melodrama or even a silly farce (in which a husband keeps buying the same earrings):

… but Ophüls’s presentation is so elegant… and the actors are so classy that we’re soon caught up in the romance and are vicariously experiencing the lovers’ simultaneous feelings of pleasure and anguish.”

He points out that “Danielle Darrieux gives an exquisite performance as the frivolous, fickle wife of a humorless general,” who secretly buys back the earrings “and gives them to his mistress, who eventually sells them.”

Equally impressive (though less central) are the performances by both Boyer and De Sica, who artfully embody their upper-crust characters in ways that consistently feel plausible.

However, the true “star” of the show (as always) is Ophüls’s vision and camerawork. Working in collaboration with his incredible team (including DP Christian Matras), Ophüls knew exactly what he was going for at each moment of the storyline, and brought that to fruition. This tragic classic remains well worth a look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Danielle Darrieux as Louise
  
• Charles Boyer as Andre
  
• Vittorio De Sica as the Baron
  
• Stunning cinematography and direction
  
  
  
• George Van Parys’s “splendid score”

Must See?
Yes, as a genuine classic.

Categories

• Foreign Gem
• Genuine Classic
• Important Director

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Criterion Collection Essay
• Q Network Review
• TCM Article
• DVD Savant Review

Synopsis:
A narrator (Anton Walbrook) tells a tale of romantic liaisons across 1900 Vienna: a prostitute (Simone Signoret) picks up a young soldier (Serge Reggiani) who then hooks up with a maid (Simone Simon), who in turn has a fling with the bookish son (Daniel Gélin) of the wealthy family she works for — but we soon learn that Gélin has been having an affair with a married woman (Danielle Darrieux) whose husband (Fernand Gravey) is about to engage in his own affair with a 19-year-old model (Odette Joyeux). Meanwhile, Joyeux is quickly seduced by a poet (Jean-Louis Barrault) who has also been romancing an actress (Isa Miranda) in one of his productions, and Miranda has a fling with a count (Gerard Philipe) who goes out later that evening and meets up with Signoret — thus bringing the chain of sexual encounters full circle.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Anton Walbrook Films
• Danielle Darrieux Films
• French Films
• Infidelity
• Love Triangle
• Max Ophüls Films
• Play Adaptation
• Prostitutes and Gigolos
• Sexuality
• Simone Signoret Films
• Simone Simon Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “Max Ophüls’s charming adaptation of Arthur Schnitzler’s play” utilizes “the constantly moving, seeing, penetrating camera that was Ophüls’s trademark,” which “serves thematically both to establish the dizzying, intoxicating nature of l’amour and to convey its transitory nature.”

He describes the film as “broken into several vignettes featuring a romantic sexual interlude between a man and a woman,” with “each vignette contain[ing] one character from the previous segment.” So, “when a husband and wife lie in bed speaking of fidelity:

… we have the advantage of having earlier seen her in an affair:

… and knowing that we’ll see him with his mistress in the following sequence.”

Peary writes that “Ophüls’s women glow; their actions are determined by their hearts — and they never hold back from a sexual liaison or feel guilt afterward. They are the personifications of love; they know its glories.”

On the other hand, “Ophüls’s men, while no buffoons, can’t appreciate love except on a physical level — they are always setting up rules, demanding loyalty, asking questions, thinking too much.” He ends his review by noting that “Simone Signoret is especially appealing — and beautiful — as a prostitute who is willing to give herself to soldiers for free”:

(though she arguably has too little screentime, despite appearing in both bookend liaison stories). This soufflé of a “bedroom farce” — provocative enough to U.S. censors for its release to be held up until 1954 — remains worth a look as the first of Ophüls’s four later European outings.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Fine camerawork by Ophüls and DP Christian Matras
  
  
  
  

Must See?
Yes, as another interesting and well-crafted outing by a master director.

Categories

• Important Director

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• Q Network Review
• Criterion Essay
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
Guy de Maupassant (Jean Servais) narrates three of his loosely related stories: in “Le Masque”, a dandy (Paul Azais) in a full-face mask collapses on the floor during a ball and is taken home to his wife (Gaby Morlay); in “La Maison Tellier”, a madam (Madeleine Renaud) whose brother (Jean Gabin) and niece (Jocelyn Jany) live in the countryside takes her employees (Ginette Leclerc, Mila Parely, Danielle Darrieux, Amedee, Mathilde Casadesus, and Paulette Dubost) on a trip to see Jany’s First Communion; and in “Le Modele”, an artist (Daniel Gelin) falls madly, tragically in love with a model (Simone Simon).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Artists
• Danielle Darrieux Films
• Episodic Films
• French Films
• Historical Drama
• Jean Gabin Films
• Max Ophuls Films
• Prostitutes and Gigolos
• Strong Females

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, the three episodes in this adaptation of Guy de Maupassant’s stories “all deal with the pursuit of pleasure (not necessarily happiness) and show how women of the heart (be they wives, dancing partners, lovers, or prostitutes) are essential to the stability of men.” He notes that the middle episode “is charming, full of the festivity, exuberance, and emotion that characterize Ophuls’s best work.”

However, he argues that “the other two segments are disappointing, flimsy, and — except for the wondrous interplay between Ophuls’s moving camera and the high-kicking, spinning dancers in the ball sequence of ‘The Mask’ — flatly directed.”

It’s hard to see how Peary could possibly make this claim, given that every single scene and sequence of this film is innovative in its direction. What’s less captivating overall (for me) are the stories themselves, which eventually build to a sense of coherence — pleasure always comes at a cost — but are not necessarily narratively compelling. With that said, it’s impossible to keep one’s eyes off of Ophuls’s prowess throughout this film: his camera is (almost) never not on the move, and it boggles the mind how many seamless tracking shots he manages to include, from the whirling opening sequences of the ball:

… to the extended sequence showing Renaud closing up her “house” for the night (significantly, we’re never allowed inside, instead simply watching everything from a distance, often through constructed barriers):

… to the devastating next-to-last sequence, shown from a woman’s point of view:

While this isn’t Ophuls’s best film, it’s well worth a look by all film fanatics simply to see his brilliance at work.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Ophuls’ incomparable camerawork
  
  
  
  

Must See?
Yes, once, for its masterful camerawork.

Categories

• Important Director

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Criterion Collection Essay
• Q Network Review
• TCM Articles