Marius

Marius (1931) : Brief Review -

A Cult Classic. Just WOW. French Cinema shows why Men can never understand selfless Women and believe me every man gonna drop tears. I love those rare moments when I write review with tears in my eyes and i am very grateful to Alexander Korda for this Classic Tear-jerker because it worth every single drop of my tears. So Marius is not in IMDb Top Rated, not in any popular films list then just burn those lists, I don't give a damn to such low standard list. You know, i have a special place in my heart for some films where I get to see rich content driving to selfless sacrifice, just for the reference I would mention 'Casablanca' (1942) here, and Marius is closest or leveled to that Masterpiece. Not to forget that Marius came 11 years before Casablanca so obviously it deserves more credit. There have been films where we saw Women sacrificing so much for the Men they love but i don't think any movie will come close to Marius as far as the quality and emotions of storyline are concerned. The film about Marius who is faced with a choice whether to fulfill his passion by sailing the seas or stay and marry the woman he loves. One thing is certainly wrong with the film that it is not flawless in the first half. It is more like a comedy in the first half but then it gets to the main point in the second half and leaves you Speechless. I might be running short of words to explain how gorgeously and smoothly this films shows Woman's sacrifice and how painful it was to see the climax. There are so many heart-touching scenes in the last one hour which teach you a lot about Women's selfless love and Father and Son's Relationship. This film is named after a Man but glorifies the Woman and i bet every Man who sees this film is going to feel it for her, roll down tears for her. I don't want to say anything more than it's a MUST WATCH and i am feeling blessed to have this Cult French Drama.

RATING - 8.5/10*

By - #samthebestest

Idyllic piece from the childhood of the cinema of sound and music, when films actually mainly were just screened theatre, and as such this film is an outstanding example. Marcel Pagnol's script is actually a play, and the players here make more than the best of it - they are all virtuoso performances. The dialog is not very witty, there is nothing special to it, and neither is the cinematography, which hardly had had time to get born yet in the sound films, but wich was on its way. So the assets here are mainly just the acting, and the environment coulndn't be more picturesque - the harbour of old Marseilles with its shabby joints, bars and cafès, and they drink a lot throughout the film. The question is, will Marius marry the girl he actually loves, or will he go to sea for the adventure he loves and longs for? It is not settled until in the very last moment, while Fanny and his father César both love him the more for whatever he chooses to do. - To be continued.

This is, of course, the first leg of one of the all-time great trilogies and Londoners were able to see all three - weighing in at a little over six hours - in one day recently. When you know that a given title was made at the dawn of the talkies - in this case 1931 - you go prepared to make allowances if only subconsciously but such is the artistry on display here you soon forget even that and just bask in superb ensemble playing led by the irreplacable Raimu. An Academic writing about 'French' film recently dismissed Pagnol as a 'minor' writer. Yeah, you didn't misread. These are the guys entrusted with the further education of a whole generation. Personally I don't know how many 'minor' writers are invited by the Academie Francaise to join its ranks but Pagnol (who at the time the trilogy was made was the youngest writer to be admitted to this august body) isn't one of them. I shouldn't really write the words Academic and Pagnol in the same sentence because Pagnol is a dirty word in Academe. The reason? He's POPULAR and, by definition, 'accessible' which means that the average Joe can UNDERSTAND what he's saying and where he's coming from thus leaving nothing for the Academics to 'interpret'. Write a book that three people buy and one of them understands about 40 per cent of and you've got it made academic-wise. You'll be 'taught' for years and academics will write books ABOUT your book in inpenetrable jargon that only OTHER academics can understand - it's the written equivalent of a Masonic handshake. So no laurels for Pagnol. So what. This first episode - and each of the three stories is self-contained despite featuring the same locale and characters; Alan Ayckbourn did much the same thing 50 years later with 'The Norman Conquests' - spreads the tablecloth and sets out the banquet; locale: the waterfront, Marseilles; principals; Cesar, the bar owner, Marius, his son, Fanny, the ingenue, in love with Marius, Panisse, the sail-maker also in love with Fanny though 30 years older; supporting characters; Honorine, mother to Fanny, and Claudine, sister to Honorine, Piquoiseau, Escartifigue, Monsieur Brun, light relief. These are the basic threads which Pagnol weaves into a tapestry to rival that of Bayeux. Having set the scene masterfully and introduced us to the characters we get the conflict: Fanny loves Marius, Marius loves Fanny but he also loves the sea and waiting in the wings is Panisse in case the lure of what Gene O'Neill describes as 'dat ol' debbil sea' proves too much. Incredibly the citizens of Southern France, Toulouse, Avignon, etc, though highly intelligent and sensitive still feel bitter and resentful and unforgiving of Pagnol whom they see as someone who portrayed them as little more than buffoons. This first part gives the lie to that accusation. 9/10

I don't know how much new I have to say about this movie that others have not said already. I have watched this movie over and over, I have had the pleasure of teaching it in a French literature and culture course. Every time I watch it I marvel at how well it is done. The acting is uniformly excellent - but then, these actors had performed the play from which this movie was drawn hundreds of times and had been hand-picked by Pagnol. They will definitely strike modern audiences as theatrical, but that is one of the points Pagnol was making about the people of Marseille: they were fond of drama and "performed" in life. The script is clever, and sometimes hilarious. Scenes like 1) César teaching Marius how to make a mandarin-citron (a drink); 2) César, Panisse, Escartefigue, and M Brun playing a round of cards with César cheating; 3) Marius fuming when Panisse makes passes at Fanny in the bar; and many others are even funnier the 10th time than the first. The music is wonderful. In short, this movie is a marvel, full of acting gems. See it!

With its stagy direction, its straightforward storyline and its lovable character depictions this first part of Marcel Pagnol's Marseilles trilogy offers a welcome relief from today's often all too florid movies.

Of course, it all seems quite broad, static and dated at first, but if you look behind the theatrics, the powerful sincerity and humanity of Pagnol's vision - coupled with some wonderful performances and the writing's flawless mélange of bitterness and sweetness, of jocular humour and heartwarming sentiment, of life's average highs and lows - more than make up for it.

8 out of 10 cuckolded sailors