Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo
Avatar
Added by johanlefourbe on 28 Dec 2019 02:18
630 Views
3
vote

1001 Movies ... my own version (1930's)

Sort by: Showing 1-50 of 59
Decade: Rating: List Type:
People who added this item 184 Average listal rating (92 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.3
Earth (1930)


Notes: To be honest, I really had a hard time to connect with the damned thing after all. The fact that I saw a very poor copy on YouTube probably didn’t help but the issue went beyond that I’m afraid. I have to admit that I’m not really familiar with the old Soviet propaganda movies (it was only the 2nd movie I have seen in this genre). Anyway, I was rather amazed by how this movie was filmed and edited. Indeed, it is usually considered as a masterpiece but probably 90% of the shots were some close-ups which is such a weird way and, to be honest, rather uncomfortable way to shoot a movie. I thought it was even more bewildering since it was a silent movie. Indeed, most silent movies do actually the opposite, they focus more on wide shots showing the characters being more active to compensate the lack of dialogues. However, in this movie, you get instead a succession of faces constantly moving their lips but in complete silence. Considering the story itself, well, there was actually no real story and no characters involved, it was either a beautiful allegorical poem about the glory of the rise of the poor farmers against the landlords or some blatant Soviet propaganda, depending on where you stand regarding this matter. Anyway, it had been a while since I have struggled so much with an old classic so maybe I should give it another try at some point in the future.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 380 Average listal rating (225 ratings) 7.7 IMDB Rating 7.3


Notes: To be honest, it has been ages since I have seen this flick and I should probably re-watch it at some point. After his first surreal experiment with Salvador Dali with ‘Un chien andalou’, Luis Buñuel was this time working on his own but he still managed to deliver another surrealist cult-classic and, from this point, Buñuel would be the master of the genre through his whole career. At least, this movie had some kind of a plot but it was hardly what Buñuel cared about. Indeed, the whole thing was pretty much a succession of really weird and sometimes pretty messed up scenes and it is hard to imagine a major director trying to bring up something like this nowadays. David Lynch might be the most obvious exception but the fact that he has stopped making movies for already more than a decade shows how hard it is, even impossible, to make something truly surreal in the current movie business. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, even though it might be an acquired taste, I thought it was quite fascinating to behold.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: To be honest, even though some older movies are still considered as classics, in fact, they feel rather dated and I’m not always a fan of them (especially comedies like ‘Some Like It Hot’ or ’Breakfast at Tiffany's’). However, some other movies are still as powerful as when they were released decades ago and this movie was definitely one of those. Basically, it is one of the first great war movies and the whole thing was quite impressive to behold. Indeed, it was just terribly realistic and greatly done and even though this flick was very old, I thought the whole thing was still completely spellbinding. It gives such a bleak view on the concept of war and, as a result, this movie belongs to the great anti-war features. I also liked the fact that it didn’t focus on a single character, there is no hero here and that’s the best way to deal with this subject because, in a war, it is never about the individuals but always about the group.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1323 Average listal rating (830 ratings) 8.6 IMDB Rating 8.5
City Lights (1931)


Notes: To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this movie, like all the major masterpieces directed by Charles Chaplin, I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Anyway, I have noticed that, according to IMDb, this movie is supposed to be the best one delivered by this great master but I personally prefer 'Modern Times' and 'The Great Dictator' because I believe they are socially and historically more relevant than this movie which I considered as merely a romantic comedy. Back then, Chaplin was apparently facing some extreme pressure to make the film as a talkie, but his popularity and power in Hollywood were such that he was able to release the film as a silent feature (with recorded music though) at a time when the rest of the American motion picture industry had converted to sound. Just a moment ago, I mentioned that it was merely a romantic comedy but I should add that it is also probably one of the very best one in this genre though. Indeed, it is funny, beautiful and really poetic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 108 Average listal rating (60 ratings) 8.1 IMDB Rating 7.3
Limit (1931)


Notes: Mario Peixoto definitely delivered a strange movie here, that’s for sure, and I have to admit that I had pretty much no clue what the damned thing was actually about. Apparently, one woman had escaped from prison, another woman had left a bad marriage and there was a man in love with someone else's wife but, to be honest, it didn’t get all that at all. It’s also interesting that this movie would be Peixoto only directing effort but, even if the guy was only around 21 years old at the time, his movie would still manage to become one of the best Brazilian movies ever made, no less than that. Anyway, even if I didn't really get what it was all about or what the hell was actually going on, I have to admit that I really dug the beginning scenes though. Above all, I think I especially enjoyed the melancholic haunting score and, in combination with the surrealist visuals, it made the whole thing quite spellbinding to behold. Unfortunately, they didn’t stick to this score and, after 15 mins, they went instead for some generic violin tune which was not awful but this movie definitely didn’t have the same impact at all anymore. As a result, I had a hard time to keep my focus on the damned thing. Furthermore, even though I do appreciate a surrealist/experimental movie when it is rather short, 2 hours of this was just seriously challenging though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 204 Average listal rating (97 ratings) 7.4 IMDB Rating 7.5
Tabu (1931)


Notes: I wonder if it was, after ‘Nosferatu’, only the 2nd movie directed by Murnau that I have seen so far and it is quite impressive how the two movies were so different from each other. With this in mind, I’m not surprised that Murnau was considered as one of the great masters of silent movies and I should definitely check his other movies. Eventually, what I enjoyed the most about this movie was its visual aspect. Indeed, the vintage footage was quite beautiful to look at and, while ‘Nosferatu’ was a dark fantastical tale and still one of the best horror movies ever made, this movie was so luminous with some gorgeous natural landscapes. It also felt quite realistic (at least, it seemed to be) and I wonder if they made up all this ‘tabu’ stuff or if it was some actual tradition in Bora Bora back in those days. Anyway, they basically gave a mix of some realistic beautiful exotic footage from this remote island with a basic but efficient doomed love tale and this mix worked surprisingly well. Still, eventually, even if the damned thing was very well made, the story was still too basic for my taste though. The biggest issue was the fact that none of the characters was developed whatsoever. Anyway, even if it didn’t completely blow me away, it was still a solid watch.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 249 Average listal rating (146 ratings) 7.2 IMDB Rating 7.2


Notes: To be honest, I don’t think this movie grew old very well. I mean, 90 years after it was released, so many vastly superior gangster flicks have been released such as ‘The Godfather’ 1 and 2, ‘Goodfellas’, ‘Scarface’ and many others. And yet, even if this movie was maybe not the first in this genre, it was certainly a major trendsetter, the precursor of all the gritty gangster movies that came in the 30’s but also afterwards up until nowadays. On top of that, even if the movie itself didn’t really impress me, I have to admit that Edward G. Robinson was pure gold though. Indeed, the guy was just so convincing and even if you maybe didn’t like his character, he was still seriously charismatic. Sure, he was definitely not a nice guy but he was tough and rather smart and, eventually, it all made sense how Little Caesar managed to climb up the ladder in the mob world. As a result, this realistic approach made the whole thing quite compelling to behold. However, the rest of the movie didn’t have much to offer, I’m afraid. Indeed, none of the other characters was remarkable whatsoever. It’s also interesting that there was only one female character involved, a character barely developed, and you might wonder why the main character didn’t have a girlfriend or a lover which is usually a main attribute for any average gangster. Even if it didn’t complete blow me away, it was still a really solid vintage gangster flick though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1505 Average listal rating (843 ratings) 8.5 IMDB Rating 8.3
M


Notes: Honestly, it has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should definitely re-watch it at some point whenever I get the opportunity. The point is that this flick is just a massive masterpiece and it really blew me away the first time I saw it. Basically, in my opinion, it is the ultimate psychopath movie and during the last 90 years, they have tried to improve the formula but they never improved on the blue print developped in this feature. The funny thing is that I have always been a little bit dismissive towards the serial killer sub-genre. Indeed, most of them, even such massive classics like ‘The Silence of The Lambs’ and ‘Seven’, are so far-fetched, so over the top, I always have a hard time to really connect with them. This one is different though. Indeed, there are no chases, no shootings, no explosions like you see in your typical US thriller. What you have instead is just a frightening and fascinating psychological study of a sick mind and I thought it was much more interesting to behold.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 134 Average listal rating (71 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.3


Notes: Since Jean Renoir is one of the best French directors ever, I was really curious to check out this flick. It also stars Michel Simon who was back then the best actor in France. Eventually, I thought it was pretty good but not Renoir's best work. Indeed, I thought the story was a little too simplistic, there is no plot and there are only a few characters developped. I know that many people would said that it is actually the strength of this movie that because it is simple that is why it is so great but I wasn't really blown away by the whole thing. The best thing about it is how relevant it is, almost 90 years after it was made. Indeed, the different attitudes of people coming from different social classes, the way norm and values dictate our behavior, it was really spot on here with this movie. They made a remake a few years ago starring Gérard Depardieu, another giant of the French cinéma, I haven't seen it yet but I heard it was not really that good. The acting was pretty efficient here above all by Michel Simon who was pretty hilarious.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 438 Average listal rating (241 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.6
Vampyr (1932)


Notes: Even though Carl Theodor Dreyer himself was Danish, this movie really felt like it belonged to the German expressionism. It was also pretty obvious that it was produced at the end of the silent movies era as there were very few sounds and dialogues and most of the story was told through some (rather massive) cards with caption and some whole pages of a book dealing with vampires. I don’t know, maybe the damned thing was too random for my taste but there is no doubt that the atmosphere was grim and quite mesmerizing at the same time. Indeed, it’s rather difficult to imagine a vampire movie nowadays without either a rather heavy script or some huge action scenes. This one was actually much more straightforward and, when you think about it, really simple and, yet, its stripped-down aspect was really intriguing. Concerning the actors, they were apparently almost all non-professionals but even though they all had a striking look, I had a rather hard time to connect with any of them. It probably had to do with the fact that most of what we learned about them was through some title cards and not through the dialogues or their performances. Anyway, even if I wasn’t completely sold, it was still a solid watch.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 149 Average listal rating (75 ratings) 8.4 IMDB Rating 8


Notes: I have to admit that I haven’t seen many Asian silent movies and it was the first time I saw an Asian silent comedy. It was so intriguing because it was probably the first silent comedy I saw which wasn’t from the US. Anyway, the damned thing was just so funny, original and surprising. Indeed, I think it was also the 1st time I saw a silent comedy with some children as the main characters and these 2 kids were just hilarious. Seriously, it was just impressive how they could deliver such strong performances while they were not even 10 years old at the time and it was even more impressive when you think that they had to deliver such performances without using any dialogues. Eventually, I’m pretty sure those two young boys gave some of the best children performances I have ever seen. Concerning the rest of the movie, at first, it did feel rather random, at least, too much to really make an impression. However, slowly, I have to admit that the damned thing really grabbed me and, towards the end, beyond being seriously entertained, I became actually quite fascinated by the damned thing. Indeed, it is usually a known fact that, in Japan, respect is so important towards your parents or your boss, much more than in Western countries and I can imagine it was even more so back then in the 30’s. However, towards the end, you had this very young boy throwing a tantrum against his father which was just so surprising but also so intriguing because it seemed to go against so many stereotypes regarding Japanese culture.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 190 Average listal rating (100 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.3


Notes: I have to admit that even though I had heard of Jean Cocteau, it was actually the very first movie he has made that I have seen so far. In general, I wasn’t familiar with Cocteau’s work at all, the guy was mostly a poet but his Art was very diverse including poems, novels, plays, essays, drawings and, of course, films. This movie was basically his directorial debut and, well, it turned out to be a pretty wild surrealist picture, that’s for sure. Indeed, it was basically a succession of rather intriguing but also sometimes disturbing scenes and, to be honest, it was rather difficult to see what Cocteau was getting at exactly. Basically, it was some kind of visual poem which was interesting but I was also seriously random and I was rather relieved that it was rather short. In fact, it could have been even shorter in my opinion. Indeed, such surrealist wild movies are interesting but, even though I love Art, I don’t feel like watching the same painting for 50 mins. By the way, with the current CGI technology, can you imagine what such directors like Jean Cocteau or Luis Buñuel could have come up with? It’s too bad that, even though this modern movie technology is such a great tool box, it’s mostly used to create some monsters or huge explosions in your average blockbuster popcorn flicks.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1050 Average listal rating (613 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9
Freaks (1932)


Notes: I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie but since it has a solid reputation, I was quite eager to check it out. Eventually, I have to admit that I was quite blown away by the damned thing. Seriously, I had never seen anything like this before and, while watching this movie, I was really wondering why they never made more movies about this subject. The problem, if they would make a similar movie nowadays, if it would be fake, it wouldn’t really work but, if it would be for real, then most people would be probably outraged by the damned thing. Basically, this movie was made more than 80 years ago, when the movie technics were maybe not as elaborate as they are today but, on the other hand, there were no real ‘rules’ or actual censorship so the movie makers could still make pretty much whatever they wanted and get away with anything without much trouble. Coming back to our main feature, after all these years, it is still a really weird movie but, somehow, I think its 'weirdness' was actually positive, in spite of its controversial subject.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 34 Average listal rating (19 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.2
Outskirts (1933)


Notes: I have seen a few Soviet movies during the last months and they were usually all rather hard to digest. Indeed, with such Soviet propaganda features, the characters are not developed whatsoever, instead, they focus more on such concepts like, for example, the proletariat was/is a specific entity. However, this movie turned out to be even more difficult to decipher though. Seriously, even though I saw it just yesterday, I’m still not sure what it was all about. The best I can come up with was that they wanted to display the last years of the Russian empire and how WWI was basically the last drop launching the first revolts and basically the whole Russian revolution. As a result, you get a fairly negative view on WWI which was basically a useless war during which the Russian soldiers were fighting some poor German soldiers who had more in common with them than with the Tsar and aristocrats who sent them to this bloodbath. There were also interesting artistic choices. Indeed, even though there was some sound, it was never, let’s say, complete. For example, if someone would talk, that’s the only thing you would hear. Or when there would be some crowd scenes, you would hear only the clopping of the horses’ hooves. There were also some really unexpected funny moments when some characters would pull out their tongues or would wink at the camera.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 167 Average listal rating (107 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.6


Notes: Even though I was rather oblivious about Buster Keaton’s work for a very long time, like with Charles Chaplin, I saw many shorts starring Laurel and Hardy when I was a kid and, back then, I thought these guys were just hilarious. However, I think it was at least 25 years ago the last time I saw one of their movies so I was wondering what I would think of them after all these years. Well, first of all, with this title, you might expect the comedic duo to go to some exotic location but you would be disappointed, as they eventually ended up at some convention in Chicago. At the end of the day, it was just about two ordinary guys who had nothing else more exciting to do then fixating on some fraternity. In fact, most of the movie was basically a play taking place at Hardy’s place involving usually the two men and sometimes their wives. So, it was nothing really complex or ambitious but it was obviously not the point. Indeed, it was more about the interactions and dialogues between these two guys and, even if it was not as hilarious as what I remembered as a kid, it was still certainly entertaining though. To be honest, in my opinion, Stan Laurel verges sometimes too much towards Chaplin but Oliver Hardy is always there, making sure he snaps out of it, and the combination of them together made them so unique and so successful.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 159 Average listal rating (91 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.4


Notes: First of all, it has been ages since I saw this flick and, to be honest, I have to admit that I don’t remember much about it. I mean, sure, it is a decent early Buñuel, no doubt about it, but if it would have directed by someone else, I’m pretty sure it would have been completely forgotten by now. Still, it’s interesting that Buñuel would start his career with a hyper-realistic documentary when he will be eventually known as one of the most surrealist directors that ever worked. Anyway, the stuff displayed in this documentary was actually pretty extreme and, somehow, you might hope it was some kind of dark mockumentary but it was apparently the real deal (in fact, this movie was even banned in Spain from 1933 until 1936). However, some people consider this film as a parody of the similar documentaries made back then. Apparently, the film was deliberately factually wrong and exaggerated, narratively inconsistent and staged. Anyway, even if I wouldn’t call it a movie that you have to see at all costs, it was still a decent watch.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 203 Average listal rating (107 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.2


Notes: Jean Vigo is one of these mythic movie directors who managed to deliver only one masterpiece (‘L’Atalante’) before dying very young. Vigo did also manage to direct a few shorts and this one is probably the most famous one. Well, to beginning with, I just loved this title. I mean, even though this movie was made 60 years before I myself went to junior high-school in France, I completely could identify myself with these kids who felt completely misunderstood by the school and by the establishment in general. In their case, it was actually much worse though since, at least, I didn’t have to sleep there. This movie also displayed the unrest and melancholy that you can experience at this age, when you start to realize that your games are becoming childish and that you discover that the grown-ups around you are not so great after all. So, the approach was definitely quite realistic and I’m pretty sure that this movie must have been a major inspiration for François Truffaut when he made ‘Les quatre cents coups’ 25 years later. However, in spite of Vigo’s realistic approach, there was also a few seriously surrealist moments, the kind of wild combination you would see only back then when they were still experimenting on how to make a movie and these few surrealist bits made the whole thing even more unique and even quite poetic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1241 Average listal rating (785 ratings) 7.4 IMDB Rating 7.9
King Kong (1933)


Notes: To be honest, it was after all a rather silly story (the fact that I had seen before so many remakes and rip-offs of course didn’t help). Another thing that slightly bothered me was that the damned thing turned out to be such a scream party. Seriously, from the moment Kong finally showed up, it was pretty much a non-stop screaming contest, especially from Fay Wray who basically spent half of the movie screaming her lungs out. Still, there is no denying that this movie was such a huge milestone in movie making history and the general silliness was compensated by some massive ambition. In fact, it might be one of the most ambitious movies I have seen. Especially visually speaking, I was expecting to see an old and clumsy movie but, eventually, I was just impressed by how awesome the whole thing actually looked, even 90 years after its release. Furthermore, as I mentioned before, this movie was also a huge milestone as it was obviously a precursor for all the monsters movies that came afterwards but it was also a huge inspiration for all the bombastic blockbusters that came decades later such as ‘Jurassic Park’ or even the ‘Tranformers’ franchise. Eventually, it is quite fascinating that, even if this movie was basically a B monster with a rather silly plo, it still did end up being one of the most influential movies ever made.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 398 Average listal rating (212 ratings) 8.3 IMDB Rating 7.8


Notes: Well, even though I really enjoyed this movie, it didn’t have the same impact ‘Zéro de conduite’ had on me. Basically, I was immediately able to relate with his famous short as it was dealing with some rascals in a French junior school. Indeed, it felt so recognizable even if the damned thing had been shot 60 years before I went to such a school myself. Eventually, connecting with these few characters living in a barge was not so obvious, at least, to me. Furthermore, even though this movie has been pretty much universally praised as being a masterpiece, I think it was pretty obvious that it was Vigo’s directing debut as his characters were still barely developed. I mean, we do get slightly more information about Jules (apparently, the guy had been all around the world) and this character was unsurprisingly the most interesting of the bunch. The fact that Michel Simon, most likely the best French actor at the time, delivered another really strong performance probably did help as well. Still, there is no denying that Vigo had a unique directing style and the damned was quite spellbinding to behold. Indeed, it might seem a rather quaint love story but the fact that it takes place on a raggedy even rather filthy barge was quite striking and actually really poetic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 75 Average listal rating (45 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.3
Man of Aran (1934)


Notes: I have to admit that I had never heard of the Aran islands before but it definitely didn’t seem to be the most welcoming place to live. On the other hand, I already saw a couple of movies directed by Robert J. Flaherty, especially the impressive ‘Nanook of the North’. Eventually, the guy was rightfully considered as the precursor of the modern documentaries, even if there was always something fake in pretty much all his movies. For example, in this case, even though the shark hunting was quite spectacular, it was apparently something they haven’t done for many years, even decades. However, there was one thing that wasn’t fake and it was the sea itself. Indeed, I can’t remember the last time I saw such incredible sea footage showing how the sea can be and, apparently, always is raging at these remote Irish islands. Especially at the beginning, you get to see this family of fishermen going back and forth trying to retrieve some net and this scene was just so weird and yet quite mesmerizing at the same time. It’s too bad the copy I saw on YouTube was pretty weak (on the other hand, I should have maybe lower my expectations since this movie is almost 100 years old). However, even so, the damned thing was still visually quite impressive.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 66 Average listal rating (41 ratings) 8 IMDB Rating 7.7


Notes: I think it must be the oldest Asian movie I have ever seen and, yet, I thought the approach on the topic of prostitution was actually quite modern. Indeed, this movie was basically a really humanist movie, giving a sympathetic look on this profession and I was actually rather surprised when the school principal would stand up for her. I really didn’t expect, even if it didn’t work out. However, this dramatic turn of events was actually more accurate, I’m afraid. Indeed, even nowadays, prostitutes are rather despised, even though the vast majority of these women certainly didn’t choose this job because it would be a great career move. What was also interesting is that, even though it was a silent movie, the acting was actually really subtle, especially by Lingyu Ruan who was just quite spellbinding to behold. Ruan, with her charisma and talent was apparently a huge star back in those days in China. However, to be honest, the whole thing was still a little bit dry. Basically, this poor girl ended up in a very precarious but also lonely situation but this character and her situation didn’t really evolve through the whole thing (ok, it did get slightly worse towards the end, I‘ll have to admit that). Furthermore, to see her ‘boss’ constantly harassing her over and over again became slightly redundant at some point. Basically, it was a rather well made but fairly simple tale after all and if you expect something epic, you might be disappointed.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 896 Average listal rating (565 ratings) 8.1 IMDB Rating 8.1


Notes: Since it is such a classic, I really had to watch this movie at some point. Eventually, I ended up with some mixed feelings. Indeed, it is now almost 90 years old, it has obviously become a blueprint for all the romantic comedies that came afterwards and, therefore, it definitely deserves some respect. On the other hand, I can't say I was blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, I did enjoy it and I thought it was entertaining but that's about it, I'm afraid. I mean, Clark Gable was damned charming and provided a decent performance but, honestly, I didn't care much about the story or the characters involved. With the old classics, it can go either way in my opinion. For example, 'Citizen Kane' remains a tremendous and fascinating picture even 70 years after being released but some other movies like this one while they were great when they came out, kind of lost a little bit of their glory after all those years. Of course, it is a matter of taste and some viewers are still huge fans of this movie.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 340 Average listal rating (199 ratings) 6.6 IMDB Rating 6.8


Notes: I wonder if it was Alfred Hitchcock's first real success. I mean, before that he already did direct around 20 movies but they were rather obscure and forgotten nowadays. Anyway, Hitchcock would even remake this flick 20 years later with James Stewart and Doris Day with even more success. Since I already saw the 2nd version, I wasn’t really sure what to expect this time but I was rather pleased that the two movies didn’t have much in common actually. I mean, the basic plot is indeed similar but the execution was really different so it is really worth a look to watch both movies. Basically, it follows the usual gimmick used by Hitchcock, which is to put some ordinary folks in some obscure thriller. The thing I enjoyed the most was probably Peter Lorre’s performance. The guy became famous with ‘M’, this was his first English language film and he did a great job. Indeed, all the other actors were decent but Lorre clearly stood out creating a spellbinding mannered man which was even more impressive when you learn that he didn’t even speak much English at the time. Anyway, to conclude, even if it is not one of Hitchcock’s masterpieces, it is still a pretty good thriller though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 57 Average listal rating (29 ratings) 6.9 IMDB Rating 7


Notes: Unfortunately, after watching a pristine restored version of ‘The Kid Brother’ on YouTube, for this movie, the version I saw on YouTube as well was seriously bad. In fact, the beginning was pretty much unwatchable and I almost quit at some point. Concerning the movie itself, it turned out to be a strange and super romantic tale. For some reason, it did remind me of ‘When Harry met Sally…’ and how this movie could have turned out to be if the main characters were not so cynical. And, yet, with all its old-fashioned approach, I thought it actually did work which might be surprising since I’m also quite cynical like Harry Burns and Sally Albright. I guess there was something pure and unambiguous on how they approached a romantic relationship. To be honest, the movie didn’t have much else to offer though (with a running time of barely 85 mins, there was basically no time for it). There was also the fact that the story didn’t make much sense. Wouldn’t it have been more logical that Peter meet again Mary in Paris instead of during some completely random work assignment? In fact, even the the two main characters were barely developed at all. Still, there is no denying that Gary Cooper (who, for some reason, thought he was miscast for this part) really made the most of this material and the guy was just super charismatic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 326 Average listal rating (191 ratings) 7.7 IMDB Rating 7.8
Top Hat (1935)


Notes: To be honest, even if it turned out to be a decent watch, I have to admit that I had a rather hard time to really care about the damned thing. I mean, sure, with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers involved, there were obviously some very good dancing scenes (I still prefer Gene Kelly though), the songs were not bad and there were even some funny dialogues here and there. Unfortunately, even though I am well aware that it is inherent to the genre, I thought that the story was really fluffy. On top of that, I always get rather bored when a romantic comedy is solely based on a misunderstanding as it is must be one of the most tedious and overused gimmicks in this genre. Anyway, it is pretty obvious that this movie didn’t really work for me but I have to admit that it was actually a very well made feature and it is a classic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 734 Average listal rating (462 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.6
The 39 Steps (1935)


Notes: Apparently, it is one fo the the oldest movies directed by Alfred Hitchcock that I have seen so far (already 80 years old!) and, I must confess, I'm not a huge fan of his very old British features. I mean, they are old pretty good and entertaining, that's for sure, but except for 'The Lady Vanishes' which really impressed me, none of them actually blew me away and this movie was not an exception. It seems that it is a very popular story since it has been adapted 4 times already and, apparently, this version is the most acclaimed one. Basically, it is one of those many British spy movies Hitchcock made back in those days and even though I enjoyed it, I couldn't shake the thought that he was still rehearsing before creating all his masterpieces he would deliver in the 40's and the 50's. Still, this movie is considered as a major British film of its time so I might re-watch it at some point in the future to make up my mind for good.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 329 Average listal rating (175 ratings) 7.2 IMDB Rating 7.3


Notes: Basically, it is one of those classics I knew I should watch at some point but I kept postponing it indefinitely since I was pretty sure I would have a hard time to care about the damned thing. And, indeed, If you are a real movie buff, you have to watch this movie at some point but, man, it remains a tough watch though... I mean, I have to admit it, it was pretty impressive from a technical point of view and it has a huge historical value but it is also seriously boring and quite sickening to behold. Basically, half of the movie is about Adolf and his demented buddies making some dreadful speeches and the other half is about some endless marches involving 1000’s and 1000’s of fanatics in uniform. Like I said before, it was quite groundbreaking at the time and you can imagine that Leni Riefenstahl couldn't resist the temptation of making such a huge production with a virtually limitless budget so she did some pretty impressive stuff visually speaking making the most notorious propaganda feature ever conceived. Still, I felt pretty sick during most of the duration and even their uplifting music couldn’t cheer me up.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 138 Average listal rating (75 ratings) 6.3 IMDB Rating 6.7


Notes: It turned out to be a really neat vintage UK science-fiction flick. Seriously, it was really impressive how much they did cover with a movie almost 100 years old and lasting only 90 mins. Indeed, I didn’t see it mentioned by other viewers or critics but, with this ‘wandering sickness’, they were pretty much the predecessor for all these zombie flicks that came afterwards (I mean, ‘The Walking Dead’ does sound extremely similar, doesn’t it?). Then, it was probably the oldest post-apocalyptic movie I have seen and it didn’t stop here. In this movie, you get to see some flat-screens and, even if it might not seem weird to us to see those, in fact, they would be invented only 70 years later. As far as I was concerned, the most hairy thing was how this movie was dealing with a large scale all-destructing war only 3 years before WWII actually started. So, it was definitely a prescient movie and you might wonder why it didn’t have more an impact back then and even nowadays. Eventually, I think it was because the whole thing was rather clunky which partially had to with the fact that they covered all of this (eventually, they covered a whopping 100 years) in only 90 minutes when, in fact, with so much material, they could have easily delivered a movie lasting 3 hours.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: I have to admit that I was not familiar at all with this kind of vintage Soviet movies. In this case, it turned out to be some kind of romantic-comedy dealing with a basic love triangle mixed up with some Soviet propaganda and this mix was quite intriguing to behold. Indeed, you can imagine that, if it would have been made in Hollywood back then, it would have been dealing with some characters from the upper class with some fancy costumes and houses and it would have been only about which guy would eventually end up with the girl. Here, the focus was put instead on this charming community of simple fishermen with nothing fancy about themselves or their lifestyle but that’s what made them endearing. The fact that their leader was a young woman who acted always modestly was also quite refreshing. Of course, there is a high probability that they were not actually as happy as it was displayed in this movie but that’s what you get with propaganda movies. Concerning the acting and the dialogues, well, to be honest, I can’t say it was really impressive though as these two guys seemed to be able to display only two emotions, total bliss or complete despair. Anyway, I thought it was still a really interesting watch.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 233 Average listal rating (142 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: First of all, to be honest, I have to admit that I have never been a huge musical fan. As a matter of fact, I saw ‘La La Land’ already a couple of times and even though it was a big critical and commercial success, I still had a hard time to care about the damned thing. Well, coming back to our main feature, since it is a huge classic, I still had to watch it at some point. Well, even though I usually prefer Gene Kelly, I must admit that Fred Astaire was really awesome in this flick. Indeed, together with Ginger Rogers, they had some great chemistry and they gave some really strong dance scenes here. Furthermore, I laughed a few times, above all thanks to the supporting cast which was pretty good. Still, even though I'm well aware that it is inherent to the genre, the plot was just so silly and frivolous and I really had a hard time to care about the story and the characters involved. Still, it is and remains a classic and it is definitely worth a look.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 323 Average listal rating (195 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: Basically, it is one of those big classics from the 1930's and, to be honest, I’m not really a huge fan of this genre and I had a rather hard time to really care about the whole thing. Indeed, they just don’t make movies like this anymore, such whimsical tales taking place in some idyllic version of the USA. The lead man, this time very well played by Gary Cooper, is completely flawless and virtuous and towards the end, everything is solved and it is as if all the problems in the world have been solved at once. Basically, it is all cute and charming but I guess I’m just too cynical for this material and, on top of that, I actually first saw the really weak and underwhelming remake starring Adam Sandler and that might have ruined this story for me. Anyway, I have to admit that it was still a sweet and cute tale and, thanks to the actors involved, it was still quite entertaining.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 165 Average listal rating (100 ratings) 6.3 IMDB Rating 6.5
Secret Agent (1936)


Notes: I have to admit, it is not one of Alfred Hitchcock's best movies but I still think it was pretty good. It was also nice to see a younger John Gielgud (it was his 4th movie only) and the rest of the cast was pretty good as well, especially the always awesome Peter Lorre. Basically, it is one of those typical spy films made by Hitchcock (check the title… You don’t get more generic than this!). Still, I thought it was really enjoyable. Indeed, even though it is more than 80 years old, even though you don’t have gadgets like in the James Bond movies or some awesome action scenes like in the Jason Bourne movies, I thought it was pretty neat as I still have a weak spot for those good old spy features where the focus was on the political intrigues and the dubious characters with several agendas.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 309 Average listal rating (198 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 8


Notes: To be honest, I have to admit that I'm not a huge fan of such classic screwball comedies. Indeed, even though some of them are still really popular, in my opinion, they usually didn't grow old very well. However, this movie was actually an exception and I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Obviously, it had all the trademarks of the genre but, even though it might seem really frivolous like the other movies in the genre, I thought it was actually quite sharp and so much satiric. Indeed, in such movies, we are supposed to care about the so-called difficult life of the Rich or Aristocrats but, here, they were all portrayed are completely hysterical and seriously dim-witted and the homeless seemed to be much more sensible. I also liked the idea that if we stopped complaining about our little problems and simply gave the people in need a chance, they would actually grab it with both hands. To be honest, I think it would have better worked if Godfrey didn't come from the same social class as his 'masters' and I didn't care much for the ending which was some typical screwball silly nonsense. Still, I really enjoyed this movie though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 44 Average listal rating (31 ratings) 7.4 IMDB Rating 7.6


Notes: For the last 40 years, the most illustrious French actor must have been Gérard Depardieu. Before him, also for at least 30 years, the title was probably held by Jean Gabin. Here, he worked again with Jean Renoir. Together, they made 'La Grande Illusion' which became one of the greatest classics in motion picture history. I didn’t notice before but this movie was actually an adaptation of a play written by Gorky. Anyway, they made this movie a year before 'La Grande Illusion' and even though it may not have reached the same status, it is still a very good movie. Indeed, the directing is real marvel, a combination of realism and lyricism. On the other hand, Jean Gabin was probably at the time at the height of his Art back and delivered an impressive performance. To be honest, I must admit that the whole thing might be rather depressing to watch but I didn't bother me whatsoever.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1864 Average listal rating (1206 ratings) 8.4 IMDB Rating 8.5


Notes: By now, I have seen all the movies directed by Charles Chaplin and, even though I really love 'The Great Dictator', this movie remains hands down my favorite Chaplin feature. Indeed, even as a kid, I saw the damned thing many times and, already at the time, I thought it was completely marvelous. In my opinion, with this movie, Chaplin managed to find the perfect balance between the funny bits with his usual awesome slapstick, the poetry and also the social relevancy. Back then, sound had already been invented for a while but Chaplin was still perfecting his own brand of movie, using sound only sporadically but the end-result was just tremendous, resulting in a movie completely entertaining and spellbinding to watch. In fact, it has been a while since I have watched it and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Like I said before, I was very young when I watched it the first time, I really loved it and I think it is a great way to introduce movies to children, instead of the usual animated features.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 276 Average listal rating (169 ratings) 6.9 IMDB Rating 7.1
Sabotage (1936)


Notes: It is not one of Alfred Hitchcock's most famous features but one of those many spy movies he made in England before moving to Hollywood. It was also an adaptation of a book written by Joseph Conrad. To be honest, I haven’t read the book but I have seen another version which was made exactly 60 years later by Christopher Hampton with an all-star cast. Anyway, even though Hitchcock didn’t have such a cast, the modern technology and probably had a smaller budget, his version was still better. Indeed, the story and the characters were actually not really interesting but his directing was, as usual, really efficient, creating a really tense mood. Furthermore, even though Hitchcock said that he regretted including Stevie's death, I didn’t see it coming and I thought it was quite powerful. I thought also that Sylvia Sidney, who I didn’t know before, was really charming (Hitchcock really knew how to pick his actresses, that’s for sure) and if Marion Cotillard had made movies in 30’s, she would probably have looked like this lovely lady. Anyway, even if it is actually nothing really amazing, it is still a solid vintage spy feature.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: First of all, I wonder if the English title was a literal translation of the Japanese title but it is probably one of the greatest titles I came across. It might sound cryptic but it completely made sense with this movie, especially during the very last scene. Concerning Sadao Yamanaka, I had never heard of the guy before, he apparently died pretty young but he was apparently a major influence on all the great Japanese directors that came afterwards such as Akira Kurosawa or Yasujirô Ozu. And, indeed, it was quite impressive how immersive the world created by Yamanaka was. He really gave you the feeling that you were transported 2 centuries ago in Feudal Japan and you basically spent most of the running time in some rather poor neighborhood with so many intriguing characters. It was also pretty neat how, even though the material was fairly dark and the hopes of the involved characters were rather bleak, there was still quite a lot of humor. And, yet, the damned thing was still missing something though. It might had to do with the fact that, since there were quite a lot of characters involved, many were not really developed whatsoever. Still, even if it didn’t completely blow me away, it was definitely a strong vintage Japanese drama.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 25 Average listal rating (13 ratings) 7.1 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: Well, it is another movie I have seen ages ago and I should probably re-watch it at some point. To be honest, I wonder how actually ended up watching the damned thing and I have to admit that I completely forgot that it was actually taking place in London. Anyway, even though it might be less famous than some of the other masterpieces directed by Marcel Carné such as ‘Hôtel du Nord’ ou ‘Le quai des brumes’, I actually much preferred this rather obscure flick. I mean, I really respect Carné’s work and I enjoyed all his classics but the big difference was that, in this case, this movie was just so hilarious. Seriously, the damned thing was actually pretty wild and I just loved it pitch-black humor. Furthermore, the dialogues were also really neat but it makes sense as they were written by Jacques Prévert, one of the most famous French poets at the time.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 522 Average listal rating (304 ratings) 8.3 IMDB Rating 8.1


Notes: This is indeed a true masterpiece directed by Jean Renoir and I thought it was just brilliant and worked on so many levels. Indeed, not only it is a great war drama, one of the best ever made, but there are also some thrilling escaping schemes and even some hilarious bits here and there. One of the thing I appreciated the most is that there was no bad guy, on either side, which is something actually quite unique. Basically, they had to kill each other because it was their duty but without the war, they could have been friends. All those characters might seem rather stereotypical but they were all actually really 3 dimensional individuals and quite spellbinding to watch, especially von Rauffenstein portrayed by the great Erich von Stroheim. And, obviously, it is a movie which deals with illusions, that this war would be the last one, that all those people from different social backgrounds (working class, wealthy ( Jewish or not), aristocrats) would get along after the war as well as they did while they were fighting together and that the Aristocrats were not actually a dying specie. Basically, it is one of the best movies about the 1rst World War and simply one of the best movies produced back then.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 15 Average listal rating (9 ratings) 7.3 IMDB Rating 7.4
Street Angel (1937)


Notes: It is considered as a classic of Chinese cinema from the 30’s and it is also a fine example of left-wing film. Indeed, it did appreciate that the Communist message delivered here was at least more subtle than what we got from the Soviet propaganda movies of the same time period. Eventually, they focused on the slums of Shanghai with great details and they certainly didn’t sugarcoat their living conditions. I also did appreciate the fact that they didn’t depict the characters as being perfect, in fact, they all seemed rather ignorant but it didn’t mean that they didn’t deserve our attention, in the contrary. Indeed, their shortcomings made them even more human and more interesting to behold. However, what I enjoyed the most was how, even though it might have been a really bleak drama, which it also was, there was also some room for some comedy and slapstick. How they managed to mix such various tones and genres was actually quite impressive. Furthermore, even though I’m not a huge fan of musicals, I have to admit that I really enjoyed the songs in this movie. And, yet, even though I admired the work done, it was still missing something to really dazzle me. Maybe it had to with the fact that, even though the characters all felt real, none of them was really fascinating after all. Or maybe it was because the copy I saw on YouTube was pretty sh*tty.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: Even though it is more than 80 years old, it is still an impressive piece of work. Indeed, at the time, it was the very first full length animated feature, a huge gamble for Walt Disney, but this gamble paid off as it was a huge box-office hit and it started the massive empire of Disney in the film business. Eventually, this movie would become the blueprint for their future work and, after all these years, the timeless fairy tales are still their most enduring trademark. Fortunately, they have the financial means to maintain their work and this movie has been restored already a couple of times and it still look quite amazing. Of course, they would improve and/or diversify their technic through the years but this one was already quite gorgeous to look at. To be honest, even though the story was charming and the dwarves pretty hilarious, the plot was decent but not really strong. For example, they spent half of the running time with Snow White getting to their home and getting acquainted with those fellows while everything involving the prince was seriously underwritten. Indeed, nowadays, this whole concept of this prince coming up from nowhere and basically saving the day seems rather hard to swallow for the modern audience (see 'Frozen' and 'Maleficent', also both Disney productions). Anyway, to conclude, even though it might seem outdated, it is still a timeless classic.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: Fortunately, it turned out to be much less hard to swallow than ‘Triumph des Willens’ which was a very interesting but also really despicable and nauseating movie. Sure, it was still some Nazi propaganda but it was also more than that. Indeed, it is a neat record of some vintage Olympic games as well and you can say whatever you want about Leni Riefenstahl but she definitely knew how to shoot a movie. For example, during many of the competitions displayed in this movie, she used some slow-motion which might seem like an obvious choice but I never saw sports being shot this way and I thought it was just so efficient and even quite beautiful to look at. To be honest, I’m not so sure about the introduction with these Greek statues. Sure, it was quite artistic but it felt also rather pretentious (on the other hand, what else should you expect from such a propaganda piece?). However, I have to admit that the transition to the discus thrower was pretty neat. The opening ceremony was also an interesting part. It’s in fact pretty much the same that we have nowadays, except for the fact that some delegations were giving the Nazi salute towards Hitler which was expected from Germany’s allies. However, I was rather appalled that the French athletes who do it as well but I guess these morons didn’t know that Germany would invade their country only a few years later. It was also something quite fascinating with this movie, the fact that while you had all these countries involved in some friendly sports competition, only a few years later, most of them would be eventually involved in one of the largest world conflicts we have ever seen. And, of course, it was just awesome to see Jesse Owens kicking their Nazi butts time and time again.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: After a rather weird slightly homo-erotic intro, fairly quickly, they went back to the Olympics and, in contrary to the previous chapter which focused only on track and field sports, this 2nd movie was much varied as it displayed all kinds of sports. Unfortunately, it did make the whole thing much more random and it didn’t help either that they focused on some rather obscure sports. It was also weird that all the competitions displayed were involving only male athletes. Indeed, it was only towards the end that they focused on the female diving competition but it was the only sport events involving some women. I thought it was also a missed opportunity that they didn't not end with something more spectacular but, eventually, it was rather short and quite anti-climactic. It didn’t help that the ending ceremony was included for some reason in the previous movie which, in my opinion, didn’t really make sense. Eventually, as far as I was concerned, I think it would have worked better to combine the two movies and cut it into a 3 hour long movie instead. On the propaganda side, it was much lighter this time around, above all since you didn’t get to see Adolf’s ugly face, but it was still really odd, awkward and even distressing to see some Nazi soldiers in full uniform taking part in some of the competitions. Anyway, some scenes in this movie were just mesmerizing to behold (the diving competition is rightly fully considered a classic sequence) and I don’t think I will ever get enough of watching such incredibly majestic athletes in slow-motion.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 147 Average listal rating (84 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.6


Notes: I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but Jean Renoir is regarded as one of the best French directors that ever lived so I was quite eager to check it out. This time, he was working with Jean Gabin who was at the time easily the most illustrious French actor. Indeed, together, they made 'La Grande Illusion' which became one of the greatest classics in motion picture history and, a year later, they made this flick. This time, it was an adaptation of a very famous book written by Emile Zola. On paper, the whole thing sounded like a great combination and it was indeed a really solid flick but, to be honest, I wasn’t completely blown away by the whole thing. I mean, as usual with Zola, the whole thing was a very grim social drama which is something I did appreciate but, somehow, I didn’t really connect with the story. Even if I don’t think it is really a masterpiece, it was still a pretty good drama though.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: To be honest, I was at first actually worried during the first scenes. Indeed, the whole thing looked way too cheesy for me, especially Errol Flynn with his tights, pointy hat and haircut which all looked quite ridiculous. However, from the moment Robin Hood went to Nottingham Castle on his own with just a bow and some arrows to provoke his enemies right on the spot, I was actually sold. Indeed, not only the action scene that followed was quite thrilling, but the boldness and recklessness of the character was just neat. Eventually, while watching this movie, it became pretty obvious that the main issue with the more recent versions is that they usually chose a grim and serious approach but it is completely misunderstanding the material. Indeed, the story is actually fairly ridiculous and, in this case, they turned it into a fun and light entertaining tale which was a perfect fit. In fact, I was also surprised by how much Disney’s animated version turned out to be pretty much a copycat of this movie. Seriously, they basically turned the characters into some animals and added a few songs but the mood and the plot were otherwise pretty much identical. This movie was also the obvious precursor of all the super-heroes movies which would rule the box-office more than 80 years later and it is rather surprising that it took the movie studios so long to figure out the commercial potential of the genre
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 135 Average listal rating (75 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.7


Notes: It is not very often that a director get the opportunity to launch a whole new genre but that’s what happened with Marcel Carné. It was even more impressive when you take into account that it was Carné’s only 3rd directing effort. I’m pretty sure that the guy didn’t realize at the time that he would pretty create a new genre which would have a huge impact on the French cinema. This new style was called poetic-realism, a style which would become Carné’s trademark and he would keep it for a while with ‘Hôtel du Nord’ and ‘Le jour se lève’, some 2 other major French classics. Anyway, with Carné as a director, Jacques Prévert as a writer, Jean Gabin as lead actor, Michèle Morgan as love interest, you can’t do much better than that for that time period. Basically, even though it takes place in a realistic social background (‘realism’), the dialogues and emotions rise above (‘poetic’) and even though it seems that everything was shot on location, it was in fact shot in studios creating some interesting and stylish canvas. This approach would then be criticized and rejected later on by the French New Wave because it was considered as superficial. Anyway, even though this movie is really old, I is still quite fascinating to behold.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 579 Average listal rating (352 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.8


Notes: At first, I was wondering where the whole thing was getting to (I never read beforehand what a movie is about) and, during the first scenes, I thought it would be some kind of farce. Eventually, I understood that the hotel sequence was actually there only to establish all those peculiar characters. Indeed, the real action was to take place later on, on the train. There, it became one of those spellbinding thrillers that only Hitchcock could make back then more than 80 years ago. It was just fascinating to see this woman getting back to her seat and asking where was this old lady who simply vanished. I mean, this has been copied so many times through the years, it was just pretty neat to see Hitchcock's own version. Another fascinating aspect was the total lack of music. Indeed, music is usually a key element in your typical thriller and it constantly underlines the action, telling when you should pay attention, when you should be scared and it is usually quite effective but also really intrusive. Here, since there is no music queue, you are left alone wondering which emotions you should feel and I thought it was a great approach.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 745 Average listal rating (496 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.8


Notes: It turned out to be one of those typical screwball comedies from the 30's but, to be honest, I have never been a huge fan of the genre. Indeed, even though the plot was supposed to be ridiculous and shouldn't be taken too seriously, I still had a hard time to care about what was going on. On top of that, during the first 10 minutes, I wasn't really convinced by Cary Grant playing a nerd. Fortunately, as soon as Katherine Hepburn finally showed up, the whole thing started to grow on me. Indeed, I thought she was pretty amazing and, with Cary Grant, they had some really nice chemistry and the whole thing became then quite hilarious. I have to admit it, it had been a while since I laughed so much. However, during the second half, the whole thing did loose some steam but it was still quite enjoyable anyway. Anyway, even if I'm not a big fan of such screwballs comedies, this one is a classic and I really enjoyed it.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 76 Average listal rating (24 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: Being born in France, I was well aware of Marcel Pagnol’s reputation in my home country but, to be honest, I have to admit that I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the damned thing and it is impressive how much Pagnol managed to get from a such simple tale. Indeed, the action takes place roughly over only 2 days and it deals basically with a baker who can’t believe that his wife left him, not much more than that. And, yet, they delivered such a vivid depiction of a village in the South of France back in the 30’s. Within a few mins, it felt like I travelled through time and, as a result, it felt as if I was right there listening to the endless bickering of these villagers. It also touched me personally because I was myself born in a small French village. Sure, it was in the 80’s and in a complete different region but, still, it all felt so familiar. The other masterstroke was also to create such entertaining and complex characters. Sure, you might first laugh at them but, soon, you realize that they are much more than some laughable fools. Even Aimable, the poor baker, I was first thinking that the guy should get a grip over himself and go back to work but, actually, he was right. What was the point of all this if he had lost the only thing he cared for? It might also seem bewildering that he should probably never trust his wife again but he actually choses to and it did display the complexity involved in this movie. Indeed, he could get rid off of his wife and remain the rest of his days all by myself or he could stay with her and become completely paranoid but, instead, he choses to love her anyway after all that happened which was actually rather profound.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: First of all, I am really amazed that not so few listal members have rated the damned thing so far (in fact, I was the very first member who gave actually a rating). I mean, sure, it is very old, in fact, it is more than 80 years old but it is definitely a French classic and I would expect such a classic to receive more recognition. Anyway, I’m pretty sure that Marcel Carné didn’t realize at the time that he would pretty much create a new genre which would have a huge impact on the French cinema. He made this one between 'Le quai des brumes' and 'Le jour se lève' but even if it didn’t get much love from my fellow listal members, I thought it was actually pretty good. Indeed, it was probably not as strong as ‘Le quai des brumes’ but its lighter approach was really welcome. Eventually, this time, Arletty was the one running the show and she was really awesome here.
johanlefourbe's rating:
Load more items (9 more in this list)

Added to




Related lists

1001 Movies Chosen By Johanlefourbe
1001 item list by johanlefourbe
67 votes 1 comment
1001 Movies ... my own version (1990's)
118 item list by johanlefourbe
33 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1940's)
79 item list by johanlefourbe
5 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (2000's)
119 item list by johanlefourbe
15 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1970's)
110 item list by johanlefourbe
4 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1950's)
99 item list by johanlefourbe
4 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1980's)
110 item list by johanlefourbe
13 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (2010's)
120 item list by johanlefourbe
5 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1960's)
107 item list by johanlefourbe
5 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1920's)
40 item list by johanlefourbe
4 votes

View more top voted lists

People who voted for this also voted for


More lists from johanlefourbe