didierfort

It was already the third time that Danielle Darrieux and Albert Préjean were opposed in a movie. (Sorry for this, Didier.)

They were the leads in the French cast of a multi-language German production, "Der Schlafwagenkontrolleur", "Le Contrôleur des Wagons-Lits" in its French version, directed by Richard Eichberg, released on February 1935.

And they were already opposite before (but not to end the movie together), sharing the lead with Mireille Perrey and Claude Dauphin, in René Guissart's "Dédé", released on December 1934, a mere six months before this "Drôle de Gosse". Yes, young Miss Darrieux, as soon as she was in the business, became very much in demand. (Nothing mysterious in this: just take a sip of five minutes of any of her early movies and you'll understand why producers and directors felt compelled to offer her leading parts).

But, to return to the present topic, this third association was the less convincing. The main reason, in my opinion, was the holes in the characterizations of the parts. As dbdumonteil has already underlined it, Préjean's behavior is somehow puzzling, which leads to problems with the other main character, Miss Darrieux's, who spends the second half of the movie in loud and erratic activities that almost embarrass the viewer.

Obviously, it's not the actors' ability but the writing which is in cause here. And I still wonder why I gave the movie a 7/10 mark... For what the notes are worth, yes, but... Maybe because I was under the influence of one of those recent French payed-by-TV-soon-on-TV pseudo-comedies that over-crowd big and little screen nowadays... So yes, in that respect, Joannon-Mirande's stuff is well worth a 7/10. But compared to "Dédé" or Eichberg's work, or what was to come... On an other side, Darrieux didn't always win, and some of her pre-WWII comedies were not half as good as this one --I'm thinking of "Mademoiselle ma Mère" (Decoin, 1937), for instance, which is far louder, heavier, and almost inept. Yes, Darrieux is human, after all, and could have a miss, even when filmed by her loving Decoin.

In Léo Joannon's filmography, this movie is one of his ups--he had many many downs, but nevertheless he is an interesting director to follow, along his very long career. (We'll talk of this another time, but to name one, his half-crazy and hallucinated "Le Défroqué" was one of his best movies and, thematically, a real UFO in the French cinema skies.)

But "Quelle drôle de gosse" is a let-down, though, minor but a let-down when compared to "Vous n'avez rien à déclarer?" (1937) of this same Joannon who desperately need a solid script and consistent dialogs when making a comedy. Allégret, Anouilh, Aurenche, Veber had delivered the goods then. Here, scenario and dialog are not up to the par.

C'est la vie.

(Didier_fort at homail.com)

This is a bi-lingual film, as it happened quite often in French cinema, when there was a necessity for it: French actors (mainly actresses) speak French, German ones speak German, and they quite often offer their own translations, vocally.

This is not Duvivier's first talkie. He had already directed a melodrama, 'David Golder', with Harry Baur, then the outstanding (at least for the editing, if not for the story) 'The Five Accursed Gentlemen', both in 1931.

So, after 'great' (and somehow heavy) melodrama and exotic adventures flick, Duvivier is now entering another genre, some sort of ciné-roman, a sentimental story. But in flying colors!

First, the story. Simple and complicated in its details, but easy to follow for the viewer, it is tightly waterproofed. Duvivier shows there his trademark respect for the audience.

Then, the means. The score is not the movie forte, though it's not negligible nor boring. Once again, it is the editing which make the job. Many sequences are based on short cuts giving fast pace: the evocation of the main protagonists' work (the telephone linking the world together), the Paris tour (with recurrent gags), the solemn arrival of the 'President of the Trans-oceanic Republics' in Berlin under a driving rain, the official banquet, the final brawl. Through frames and cinematography, some images are testimonials to German impressionism. And the actors. They have the age of their parts (Josette Day was 18, Wolfgang Klein 20) and they act the way it has to be done in talking movies, already far from silent movies habits. (Nevertheless, you'll notice that the movie is almost entirely understandable without any sound: Duvivier gives a great importance to the writings, letters, telegrams, signs in the street, train station boards, clocks.) The rest of the cast is up to the task: Germaine Aussey, Karel Stepanek and Hans Henninger the Berlin pals, and Charles Redgie, in one of his usual parts seen elsewhere (Maurice Tourneur's 'Samson', Yves Mirande's 'Café de Paris'), verging to slapstick, but noir-ish, this time.

Finally, the meanings. All Duvivier's obsessions and concerns are already here. Innocence lost (the —litteral— deception of the heroes but also the strange insert of this 'president-king' surrounded by his many wives-virgins), loneliness in modern times (the 'Automat' restaurant in Berlin, the song in Montmartre cabaret and its effect on the audience), modern forms of consented slavery (work in the telephone centrals, stupid mass touring in Paris), and last but not least, the need and power of love (the song in Montmartre —the Christ is not that surprising, it's a wooden statue not misplaced here, a 'haut lieu' of artistry—, the happy resolution, which is not contrived and has many aspects, since not only Lily needs to forgive and show she's willing to, but Annette has the same though a bit twisted need for love, through seduction, and is too happy to see her former lover come back to her).

The movie takes us through an early thirties Paris (and then in a 'decaying' Berlin), and uses opposite or at least very different locations to contrasts the characters and their goals: 'Le Bal nègre' for Annette who tries to seduce Erich, 'Le Lapin à Gill' where Lily brings Max (she thinks he is Erich) and where is heard the song, 'Chanson lasse', our friend dbdumonteil told us about. (By the way, mon cher Didier, this is not the first mention of Duvivier's name inside the movie: the 'pneumatique' —sort of telegram— Annette is sending to her lover Dumont has "rue Duvivier" for subscribed address!)

Among the bizarre and/or funny inserted pieces, there is also this sequence with the 'Trans-oceanic' orchestra —after using German, then French, then English, the understanding will come through the 'Trans-oceanic' language, obviously invented, a moment that predates one of the funniest scenes of Guitry's 'The Pearls of the Crown'.

Well, that's enough to say my point: the third talkie directed by Duvivier is already a masterpiece, with great inventive editing, arch-efficient pace and tightness of the story-telling for this ciné-roman already full of Duvivier's vision and visions.

A powerful romance.

NB: I see on the IMDb page that the music of 'Chanson lasse' is here attributed to Armand Bernard (a French character actor of the funny kind who knew how to write good music too), but in the movie, during the sequence in 'Le Lapin à Gill", the Montmartre cabaret, it is announced like this: "lyrics of Julien Duvivier, music by Karol Rathaus", the author of the film score.

(Didier_fort at hotmail.com)

I like Richard Pottier. I find him quite inventive in his ways to tell a story and his attention to visual details and charades.

This movie doesn't disappoint on these matters.

Written by Carlo Rim and Jacques Prévert (who made the lyrics of a poor little song badly sung by Suzy Prim), the film is a bit hampered by the interpretation of the leads, and/or the lines they have to deliver.

Jean Galland and Renée Saint-Cyr sound like if they were on the stage of the "Folies dramatiques", Jules Berry is close to self-parody, Suzy Prim is, well… she's not very good.

But the whole set is saved by Signoret (Gabriel Signoret, not related with Simone), extremely touching, restrained and effective as the prosecutor. His part is the best thing of the movie, with naturally the pace and the elements of the story and the inquiry—though the final and far-fetched whodunit solution is some kind of a let down, like dbdumonteil already told.

Quite a watchable and entertaining movie, whose uneven interpretation can be forgotten or forgiven.

I'm talking of the private eye Nestor Burma, played by René Dary, who shows muscles, nerves and brains.

In the immediate post-war, French attendances were thirsty for detective stories and thrillers Hollywood-like. This one, directed by Jacques Daniel-Norman and based on a Léo Malet's novel, was trying to fill the gap. Sophie Desmarets is in it, funny and gorgeous. And her performance must have made its mark on writer Léo Malet's mind, since he never missed an opportunity to give homage to her in his following novels.

In what was probably meant as 'American style', the editing is quite frantic, and if talkative, the movie is at the same time packed with action. It blends fun, violence, dark moments and light romance.

I can't see why the movie is so poorly noted on IMDb. Is it that viewers didn't approve this Burma version? But Dary was no less Nestor Burma than were Michel Serrault or even Guy Marchand in the French TV series. And the movie, after all, had the approbation of Léo Malet.

Really, if you have the opportunity, give its chance to this rarity, you won't regret it.

([email protected])

I read dbdumonteil, my favourite reviewer —I usually agree with him and I love to disagree too— and well… I felt compelled to add something to pump-up his enthusiasm.

For if "Le dernier tournant" is good, if "La foire aux chimères" is very good, twisty and enthralling, this "Maison du Maltais" is one of the most flamboyant melodramas I've ever seen. And, to my eyes, the best thing Pierre Chenal ever made.

The story is classic melodrama with enough turns to entertain and appeal you all 87 minutes long.

The characters are clichéd at first sight, but finding redeeming features in their parts to finally become original.

The good-hearted hard working whore becomes a lady then finds herself compelled to inhabit for some minutes, twice, her whore's clothes and behaviour. The dreamer, Dalio, also knows transformations, three times in his case.

The two-fold story benefits of an excellent pace, great set-ups —the first reel's exotic ambiance is exceptionally well created— and great cinematography too, the best I've seen for any Chenal's works.

About the cast, the other reviewers said it already, but let me add this : Viviane Romance is here just as good as she'll be in Duvivier's "Panique", and maybe better. Isn't it enough?

If no, I'll say more : it's Dalio's part for his life-time. Jany Holt is cast in her category, and she does it just at her best.

More? Jouvet, stellar in less than ten minutes screen-time, astonishing, amazing…

OK, enough, you see my point: try to watch this one, along with the two other Pierre Chenal's movies named earlier, and admit with me that he was one of the great "petits maîtres" of French cinema, when he had the chance.

And for this peculiar movie, Stahl or Sirk didn't do better. Yes indeed!

([email protected])

How many directors had this film? It has been told --by Georges Lacombe himself-- that Yves Mirande never put a toe on the set. And we see Robert Vernay as technical adviser and writer too...

Anyhow, it's good, and most of the time very good.

The story is set as a classical whodunit in a closed room: it's New Year's eve, in a very posh and trendy café (Le Café de Paris, set in the 11th "arrondissement" of the French capital city). Big names are gathering there, and "poules de luxe" and other wannabees too, attracted by the light, the glamor and the perspective to make useful connexions.

One Lambert (Jacques Grétillat), press tycoon and feared black-mailer, is especially sought after. He arrives, short before midnight, his mistress with him. Many people around have already told all the evil they wished him, and among them some corrupted industrialists, an ambassador, journalists, a man who has been refused Lambert's daughter (Pierre Brasseur), an aristocratic go-between (Maurice Escandé)... and Lambert's own wife (Véra Korène), who is in the Café de Paris with her lover (Jules Berry) who doesn't know she is Lambert's wife.

Midnight, the light goes off (to permit each and everyone to kiss his/her partner)... and when the lights are on again, the horrified attendance discovers that Lambert has been stabbed to death.

Fortunately, there is a police superintendent (Jacques Baumer) already in the place.

One victim, one (and then three) inquirer... but so many possible murderers...

It's a treat. Many subplots are going on, all supported by brilliant and funny dialogs, among which the regular phone calls of a journalist (Carette) to his redaction, giving step by step the progress of the inquiry in an emphatic tone.

Most of the (very numerous) cast is at his best. Above all of them, Jules Berry, rather restrained here, hence more efficient than ever, and the rare and subtle Véra Korène, acting with a 'natural' rarely seen in those times.

Special mentions for Pierre Brasseur, Jacques Baumer, Carette, and Simone Berriau who is astonishing and excellent.

To me, it's the best of the movies signed by Yves Mirande. Try to catch it!

Didier_Fort at hotmail.com

I do not intend to place this movie in Siodmak's career, neither to relate it to other French creations of the period, probably the most creative of French cinema. The other reviewers did it quite well.

I would just like to send some words about what I saw tonight.

The film is obviously a diptych. There is enough matter to make two complete movies. Or two "époques" of one, like were made "Les enfants du paradis".

The two stories, having their own mood and a complete background, could be seen independently.

The first is of exotic adventures, where fast women, arms smuggling, big money, betrayals, fights, near death by many ways and hazardous salvation are mixed in a convincing studio recreation. All the sub-plots are here, waiting for a bit more space to develop: a desperate romance between an out-cast and a lounge singer, the war at the gates of the 'Concession internationale', the 'Chinese' cruelty of the local tycoons (the biggest happening to be French and played by Pierre Renoir), the hypocrisy of the company owing Mollenard's ship, ready to discard him since he's trafficking weapons, yes, but no more for the company's interests. Harry Baur is at ease, more than I ever saw him, on this part, playing with loquacity and a physical tensity surprisingly high for someone of his shape. The side-kicks are perfect, even in their most clichéd moments. Suffice to name just one: Marcel Dalio.

The second époque is of solitary confinement and domestic hatred. Elements of this struggle were fore-said through the prologue of the movie. But when Commandant Mollenard, back to Dunkerque, on the verge to win his fight against the company, is badly hit by a sudden illness, his most feared future seems to become reality, as he can't escape from his wife, supremely incarnated by a Gabrielle Dorziat at the top of her art. The fight, anxiously anticipated by Mollenard, promise to be much harder an ordeal than any street fighting in Shanghai for the eponymous hero.

Two halves for one united work, each part being nourished by allusions, events, talks, referring to the other. The main recall of the first in the second is Mollenard's crew which plays a collective part, with the help of intelligently crafted dialogs. The second part of the film is announced in the first when Mollenard says to the representative of the company that he fears only one thing, to die "in her home, at Dunkerque".

Hence, the conclusion, superbly lead by the narration, in a collective bravado, is perfect.

Something about the music: there is none, or almost. And I have to think about it to notice that no music was needed. Actually, there is some music heard: in the opening and final credits, and also a song, 'Shanghai magic city', sung in the jet-set lounge, and most notably a short piece during the last minute, where two violins, a flute, an organ are enough to enhance emotion.

Some words on the actors. Harry Baur, I'll say it again, is in his best role, in my opinion. He is Mollenard in every square inch of his skin. Gabrielle Dorziat is great too, serving excellently a part which is absolutely not one-dimensional. Albert Préjean, as the second, Kérotré, is much more restrained than usually, and it fits him very well.

All the others, Devère, Baumer, and so on, are used for the best effects. This bunch of French screen second-tier players are what also makes this cinema so valuable.

And there is the short but smashing presence of Ludmilla Pitoëff (Marie, Mollenard's daughter). Never seen before on screen, never to appear again, the stellar beauty of the actress is one sufficient reason to watch the film.

I hope I made you understand that there are many other reasons.

"Mollenard"? Un grand film, tout simplement.

Well, it was the 5th of the nine movies Danielle Darrieux made under the direction of her then husband, Henri Decoin. And for me, it is certainly one of the best.

Shot on locations in Hungary, this is a sort of 'Bildungsroman', of the cruel sort, based on Vicki Baum's novel. Anita, a young new-wed wife, is going to the big city, for family matters. She is supposed to return before night, by the 6.00 pm train, but she misses it... And she'll learn the hard way that she is too small for big cities.

The copy I saw was in very poor condition. Some of the efforts in the editing look clumsy, but all is redeemed by the value of the story and its growing tension, and the quality of the cast, with special mentions for Pierre Dux, Jacques Dumesnil, Pierre Mingand and Marcel Delaître.

And, above all, Danielle Darrieux. Didn't the character wonderfully played by Charlotte Kady, in Bertrand Tavernier's "Laissez-passer", said it one for all: "Darrieux ? Elle a tout !".

A last word to salute the very good Paul Misraki's score.

And now, I'm going to try to put the cast in its right order, on the IMDb file...

No, I can't believe that this film only get 3 users reviews, 419 voters, and not even one topic on its message board! It is one of the four immortal masterpieces —along with "Pépé le Moko", "La fin du jour" and "Panique"— of an immortal master, Julien Duvivier.

All in there is at the very top (and even the over-the-top is at the top!).

A clockwork scenario, the sharp dialogues, a cinematography like they knew how to make. And the best own's performances for Jean Gabin, Danièle Delorme, Lucienne Bogaert.

See it! Watch Duvivier's movies! Vive le cinéma!

Didier_fort at hotmail.com

My summary says all of my point of view. It goes even over the top, for a really excellent piece of propaganda should not be understood as propaganda… But since all the reviewers pointed that this movie, made just at the end of the war, was sugar-coating French supposed general behaviour during the war and German occupation, it's maybe time to speak about the film itself.

Though naive, it's a compelling story, extremely well shot and acted. Noël Noël, Paul Frankeur and above all Nadine Alari --I discover this very talented young woman-- are touching and in tune all along the reels.

René Clément shows his mastery in the filming, angles, movements and composition.

And the last scene before the epilogue, when father and son are meeting again, is an absolute tear-jerker.

Have a break, indulge yourself in watching Le Père tranquille. You won't regret those 90 minutes.

Tension is underlying this movie where many a form of hatred are at work.

This a Gabin's vehicle, again directed by Gilles Grangier, one of those more than decent films they made together in the 50's, with nothing of the self-indulgence that would hamper their association in the 60's.

The job is very entertaining, until the end. And, naturally, well crafted. La Rochelle is beautifully and thoroughly depicted here.

Please note the astounding performance of Georgette Anys as "Titine Babin". You may remember her as little more than a silhouette, for instance in two great Duvivier's works, "Sous le ciel de Paris" and "La fête à Henriette". In "Le sang à la tête", she has a part to play, a real one though short, and Mme Anys can inhabit it with an impressive strength.

What an unexpectedly good surprise! Among the few tens of movies I've seen these last months, this is is certainly the one to be fondly remembered.

About Roger Richebé I knew only the part he played as a producer, and the poor game of word Henri Jeanson had on his name "Richebé? Pauvre c.., oui" (those enough fluent in French will understand).

So, I went to this one only to have some black and white French speaking ante-Nouvelle vague feast, for Georges Marchal sake, and my own Arletty's re-evaluation, too.

And then… Everything is surprisingly good (for the very least), there.

The pace, first, very fast, very elliptic but never confusing, if you admit that the film is going to treat some adult stuff, and accept to be puzzled from time to time, like in real life encounters.

The narration, never heavy or scholarly explanatory. Besides, there are some very rare situations, in "little" and "big" moments, all along the film. The slap in the face to shut the mouth of the annoying lover is one of those.

The cinematography, very attractive (though the copy I saw was poorly preserved). There are some moments of pure virtuosity, for instance when Marceau has his first glance at the young woman he is going to fall for… and then falls, I mean, dives in the pool to reach her.

The actors are good, very very good. Some of them deliver a run-of-the-mill performance, but since their standards are high and they are very experienced theater comedians, it works perfectly well. I'm thinking about Simone Paris et Mona Goya, two of Guitry's middle cinema career regulars.

Among them, the great good surprise was coming to me from Arletty. She inhabits her very unconventional part with a perfect mastery.

And Georges Marchal has it all. Handsome, sexy, physical, tormented, spontaneous, "male chauvinist", desperate, convincing all along, even in the only hammy lines of the movie, delivered in the first five minutes.

Last but not least, the topics discussed there. Well… Well, have a watch by yourself, you'll be in awe. (I spent half of the movie mouth open!) Everything is good, fresh, adult, surprising, puzzling in there. And don't believe it's Allégret's-like stuff, the typical pessimistic late 40's early 50's lazy noir. Here, even the ending, open enough, will surprise you, in its last twist.

(Didier_Fort at hotmail.com)

All right, this is not exactly what one is looking for when watching Clouzot's stuff.

But… actors are under control, pace is fast, the story raises many smiles, everybody is doing a very fine job with all the necessary craftsmanship.

All in all, it's probably the weakest of Clouzot's creations, but a very good, pleasant and smiling movie, above the average, as a light hearted comedy, of French (or anywhere else) cinema of the early 50's.

And seriously, how could anybody refuse to watch the trio Jouvet-Fabre-Bourvil?

Obsluhoval jsem anglického krále (Jiří Menzel, 2006, 2h00) is very hard a movie to write on. Obviously, Bohumil Hrabal squares things up with Czech history or nationalism. His main character, brilliantly set up by Jiří Menzel (let's remember "Trains closely watched" and "The Aventures of private Ivan Tchonkin") is a sort of naive though ambitious petty crook, almost reaching his aim transformed into an ideal (becoming a millionaire) until History catch him back, after February 1948.

An older man, though not broken, is opening the movie : Jan is freed after serving 15 years ("which, thanks to amnesty, became 14 years and 9 months") in state prison. We follow older Jan Dite in Sudentenland, now a desert since Germans were expelled after WWII. He remembers his rise - mainly through women, generally whores, caring with him because his charm et his sweetness and invention in bed. This is the center of numerous flash-backs making the bigger part of the film. Nothing wrong to say about musical score, special effects (delicate and charming), casting (all women are beautiful), acting, filming and editing. Everything works, no flaws.

The problem, if there is a problem, lies in the hero and almost all of the characters he is mixed with : all are of a rather repulsively vulgar cynicism, which becomes the philosophy Jan uses to transform his first poor dream into an ideal. And those who are not of this kind are lead by nationalism - narrow minded (the Czechs) or hideous (the Nazi school-mistress Jan falls for). Oddly enough, the only one redeemed for us is the head waiter in Hotel Paris, who is Czech, righteous and courageous. Is it to tone down Hrabal's thesis?

So the whole story looks like an enormous bitter (and sophisticated) farce Menzel filmed on behalf of Hrabal's feelings.

Besides, there is still something in the movie, which make its vision not one-sided : a bitter-sweet taste given by the face of mature if not old men in front of women beauty, and the visible and overwhelming nostalgia this beauty vivify in their mind. They remember, and they smile... Isn't it there some kind of a sketch, the sketch of a how-to-grow-old handbook?

I have seen this wonderful film yesterday, in well-known theater for movie lovers, in Paris Quartier Latin.

The story is based on Raymond Radiguet's novel of same title, and, as far as I remember the book, pretty close to it.

October 1917, in a bourgeois suburbia of Paris. François is a 16 year old "lycéen" ; in his high school, now partly an auxiliary hospital (the Great War is all around), he meets Marthe, whose mother is chief-nurse in the hospital. Marthe faints at her first contact with the wounded arriving en masse. François supports her and express his desire to see her "never get used to the horror". Seeing her the day after, understanding she is going to spend the day in Paris, François skips the classes to come along...

This film has very remarkable characteristics. The interpretation, first. Micheline Presle is impressive in the difficult part of a woman going from a submission to another, and conscious of this. She is even better than in "Falbalas". Gérard Philipe is quite alright, even when he has to cope with teenage attitudes (the actor is much older than the part, but very convincing nevertheless). Denise Grey and Jean Debucourt, old thespians, are a little bit declamatory but quite effective and their parts are complex enough to escape stereotypes. Palau is wonderful as Marthe's landlord, a mean old conformist. The rest of the cast is excellent, as it happened quite often in French movies of that time (let's think about the bunch of waiters in the scene at the restaurant).

Scenery and locations are perfect. The river and the platform, the scenes at the lake, all is fine and more than fine. Two details are wrong (one "transparence" and a short shot with a model river boat are the two technical flaws of the film, to me). The cinematography is very classic, even in some rather sophisticated movements of camera. The construction is classic too, the use of flash-back being far from revolutionary at this time. But all of this routine and well-crafted filming is very very effective, permitting the concentration on the story and the evolution of the characters. One word about the score, signed by René Cloërec : a very beautiful romantic theme.

One of the great qualities of the film is the depiction of progress and variations of love, by touches, elliptic and precise. Passion burst out quite early in the 110 minutes of the film, but the writers - well then ill then well again famed Bost and Aurenche - know how to show the evolution of the lovers : François enjoying his new power and the overwhelming, contradictory sensations it procures to him. And the writers give to Marthe the best part of their talent : shy fiancée, then reluctant, then betrayer and would-be passionate lover, then betrayed, then true wife, then falling again, then passionate lover, she seems to understand, as soon as the events are happening, who really is the man who takes her in perdition ("I have two children", she said, holding François on her pregnant woman's lap, when in the train). And she understands everything about the destiny of a woman of her time and of her condition, a future she fights anyway, albeit weakly.

Now that a restored copy is available, this movie is being watchable again. Do not miss it! Do not! It's a great film.

Didier_fort at hotmail.com

I just catch this movie on "France 3", French TV-channel whose "ciné club" is alive and well, giving us gems to watch, promising even more.

What a good surprise of a film. The cinematic value is not little. Dieterle knows the angles. Photography is excellent. The music score is not overwhelming but useful, giving each place and situation their own sonic mood. (By the way, the copy broadcast was in very good state of preservation.)

The rhythm is good, the film being quite fast paced. Dialogs are simple, sometimes witty, more often cynical though it's quite difficult to know whether it's "vulgar cynicism" or "moral cynicism". I'm inclined to lean to the latter, since the end is quite moralistic.

The actors - I must confess they were all unknown to me - are excellent. All of them, in my opinion. Miss Leonard, as the French maid, raised many smiles on my tired face.

It was a perfect opportunity to remind me how valuable were American movies before the Hayes code, how adult and clichés-free. Many thanks to William Dieterle (and to French TV "ciné-club").

The year of release, the international cast and production, all misguided me when I sat to watch "the Night of the Generals", at night, on a French TV-channel (and it was a French-dubbed copy). I was vaguely waiting for a tedious pudding, full of villains and with some redeeming heroes, in a run-of-the-mill denunciations of Nazi craziness, 25 years later. Mislead.

The pace, the cinematography, the plots and their intertwining, some sorts of, er, modesty in the way to tell the story, all almost perfectly works.

I won't discuss some minor slips on the historical background. I could let me follow the characters, especially the minor ones (Inspecteur Morand, Fraulein Seydlitz), I finally agreed with O'Toole's performance (more "homme au masque de cire" than ever), enjoy some great lines (some reminiscent of "Monsieur Verdoux"), I found the romance between Hartmann/Courtenay and Syedlitz's daughter tense, subtly told and played...

I think the length of the movie is perfectly fit ; the last thirty minutes, in modern Germany, are very necessary and cynical in the right way.

Apart from the musical score (much too heavy and useless in the Varsovian part) and the very end - conventional and contradictory with what we are supposed to understand of Morand's quest -, the whole thing is a very good surprise.

Do not neglect this film. It's worth 145 minutes of your life.

Enormous responsibility : I'm the first to write for a movie awfully rated by those who took the pain to give a note.

Last Philippe Garrel's opus, "La Frontière de l'aube" has been booed at Cannes Festival. Can we see it as some homage vice rendered to virtue? I shall.

Enough for the official reception.

I won't make it too long to deliver my vision of this movie. In a delicate, dreamy, precise, sensitive way, Philippe Garrel has been giving new "lettres de noblesse" to the genre "fantastique".

The cast is worth it. Laura Smet shows that maturing can be a blessing for a young woman born in the show business. Her performance is simply outstanding. And director Philippe Garrel gave his best role to Louis, his talented son, often lost in over-written parts under Christophe Honoré's guidance