GeronBook/Ch13/data/aclImdb/train/pos/12467_7.txt

1 line
3.7 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

This is the first Jean Renoir Silent film I have watched and perhaps rightly so since it is generally regarded to be his best, besides being also his first major work. Overall, it is indeed a very assured and technically accomplished film which belies the fact that it was only Renoirs sophomore effort. For fans of the director, it is full of interesting hints at future Renoir movies especially THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID (1946) and THE GOLDEN COACH (1952) in its depiction of a lower class femme fatale madly desired by various aristocrats who disgrace themselves for her but also THE RULES OF THE GAME (1939) showing as it does in one sequence how the rowdy servants behave when their masters' backs are turned away from them and FRENCH CANCAN (1955) Nana is seen having a go at the scandalous dance at one point. Personally, I would say that the film makes for a respectable companion piece to G.W. Pabsts PANDORAS BOX (1928), Josef von Sternbergs THE BLUE ANGEL (1930) and Max Ophuls LOLA MONTES (1955) in its vivid recreation of the sordid life of a courtesan.<br /><br />Having said all that, the film was a resounding critical and commercial failure at the time of its release a “mad undertaking” as Renoir himself later referred to it in his memoirs which, not only personally cost him a fortune (he eventually eased the resulting financial burden by selling off some of his late fathers paintings), but almost made him give up the cinema for good! Stylistically, NANA is quite different from Renoirs sound work and owes a particular debt to Erich von Stroheims FOOLISH WIVES (1922), a film Renoir greatly admired and, on a personal note, one which I really ought to revisit presto (having owned the Kino DVD of it and the other von Stroheims for 4 years now). Anyway, NANA is certainly not without its flaws: a deliberate pace makes itself felt during the overly generous 130 minute running time with some sequences (the horse race around the mid-point in particular) going on too long.<br /><br />The overly mannered acting style on display is also hard to take at times particularly that of Catherine Hesslings Nana and Raymond Guerin-Catelains Georges Hugon (one of her various suitors)…although, technically, they are being their characters i.e. a bad actress (who takes to the courtesan lifestyle when she is booed off the stage) and an immature weakling, respectively. However, like Anna Magnani in THE GOLDEN COACH, Hessling (Renoirs wife at the time, by the way) is just not attractive enough to be very convincing as “the epitome of elegance” (as another admirer describes her at one stage) who is able to enslave every man she meets. Other notables in the cast are “Dr. Caligari” himself, Werner Krauss (as Nanas most fervent devotee, Count Muffat), Jean Angelo (as an initially skeptical but eventually tragic suitor of Nanas) and future distinguished film director Claude Autant-Lara (billed as Claude Moore and also serving as art director here) as Muffats close friend but who is secretly enamored with the latters neglected wife! <br /><br />The print I watched via Lionsgates “Jean Renoir 3-Disc Collectors Edition” is, for the most part, a lovingly restored and beautifully-tinted one which had been previously available only on French DVD. Being based on a classic of French literature (by Emile Zola, no less), it cannot help but having been brought to the screen several times and the two most notable film versions are Dorothy Arzners in 1934 (with Anna Sten and Lionel Atwill and which I own on VHS) and Christian-Jaques in 1955 (with Martine Carol and Charles Boyer, which I am not familiar with).