Der Dieb von Paris

A pendant piece to VIVA MARIA. Louis Malle certainly, unlike some other fifties hipsters but also along with some other fifties hipsters, knew that something was happening in the sixties but didn't quite know what it was. It was, of course, sex, drugs and rock 'n roll - thousands of people in the street- the whole anti-establishment thing. Malle knew this and he didn't know this. He knew this instinctively but not specifically. In LE VOLEUR he presents a story of a young man, who, upon completing his education and military service, is cheated out of his inheritance and thwarted in love by the greed of the older generation disguising its self interest in pious social formalities. He almost accidentally discovers his talent for burglary and decides that it is his life's calling. This is a trope familiar to French existentialism especially in the films of Bresson and Melville.

Belmondo, as the young man, Georges Randal, decides that he is going to attack the smug bourgeoisie one villa at a time. His sex life was what could be described as extremely contemporary. He lives on the boarders of respectable society. A life on the edge if you will. He shares his values with all sorts of nefarious characters in a sort of underground movement. While some have plans to turn the movement into something like a concrete political organization Belmondo prefers to keep it on a personal and individual level. The chief mover behind the politicizing of the movement is shot down after a political speech made by a reactionary politician. Even after achieving an enviable financial security Belmondo continues with his chosen profession, dedicated to the implication that it continues his never ending war against a hypocritical and selfish bourgeois society. A very sixties concept except that LE VOLEUR is a period picture, set in La Belle Epoch, the decades before the turn of the last century.

VIVA MARIA is also a period picture but more overtly about revolution. Malle certainly had a feeling for the zeitgeist but was, as something of a bourgeois himself, distancing himself from identifying too fully with revolutionary politics as say someone like Regis Debray, a man of Malle's class who fought with Che Guevara in Bolivia.

Certainly as all of the aspects of the cultural revolution of the late sixties came into sharper focus Malle, like the Belmondo character, avoided direct participation or indeed comment upon either the situation or any organized dissidence, preferring to make his statement by going within. His subsequent films included documentaries on India and fiction films dealing with incest in Vichy (LE Soufflé AU COEUR) and a collaborationist youth during the war (LACOMBE LUCIAN). He was to abandon France ten years after LE VOLEUR and made films in America before returning once again, ten years after, to France and a film about the ethics and morality of wartime collaboration (AU REVOIR LES ENFANTS) and, more pointedly, May '68 (MILOU EN MAI). But from VIVA MARIA and LE VOULEUR it was a long time in between laughs.

LE VOLEUR is commendable, above all else, for it's single minded purpose, reflected in the dedication to his vocation by Belmondo. No crappy cinematic tricks. Guys who want to retire do so even after one last job, men who walk into the frame do not turn out to be undercover anythings, coincidences and ironies do not abound at the touch of a screenwriters whim or sloth. The sequence with Charles Denner, who is superb, is a highlight of the film. Geneviève Bujold has never looked more beautiful than in this film. If LE VOLEUR has one fault, it is that there are too many beautiful women in the film, a fault more revealing about the way times and standards have changed, than about Mr. Malle.

LE VOLEUR, along with VIVA MARIA are perfect examples of what the Nouvelle Vague matured into, sort of its middle age, a strong combination of spirit, skill and generous budgets. A rare film to catch but entertaining, exciting, sexy, fun and intellectually stimulating. Highly recommended.

Recovered and digitized versions of old movies are often a joy for movies fans. We have the opportunity to see films made 40, 50, 60 years ago in conditions similar to those at the premiere and sometimes even in better conditions. The curtain of fog and the degradation of the media are eliminated, which allows us to see the faces of the actors, to hear their voices and the soundtrack clearly, to enjoy costumes and decorations in colors and with refreshed contours. We can enjoy the qualities of the films, but the flaws can also be seen more clearly and the problems highlighted. This is also the case of the film 'Le Voleur' (the English version was titled 'The Thief of Paris') by Louis Malle, made during the period of maximum success and popularity of the director. The recovered version released a few years ago reveals to us as an elegant but old-fashioned film, with a content in which light entertainment is combined with a fringe ideology which I believe was already old-fashioned in 1967 when the film was released, and which seems even less plausible today.

If we look at this film as pure entertainment, we can include it in the category of French films that tried in the 60s and 70s to revive the tradition of police literature sprinkled with justice heroes (like Fantomas) or charming thieves. The latter category also includes Georges Randal, the hero of the film played by Jean-Paul Belmondo - a burglar with a gentleman's costume and manners, who accidentally became a villain, remaining in the profession by vocation. The story of the film is based on a novel by Georges Darien, an anarchist writer and activist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, who shrouded his book in enough mystery to suggest that it was an autobiography (which it is not sure it was true).

As an entertainment film, 'Le Voleur' works acceptably. Jean-Paul Belmondo, who was then at his peak, acts with self-assurance and pleasure, anticipating his memorable role in 'Borsalino' three years later. Belmondo is surrounded by charming feminine presences, giving us the opportunity to remember some of the beautiful and talented stars of French cinema of that time. Geneviève Bujold did not impress me too much, instead Marie Dubois and Marlène Jobert are delicious. One performance I cannot skip mentioning is that of Julien Guiomar, as Abbot Felix, a Catholic prelate who knows as much about burglaries and stolen objects as he does about the Bible. The atmosphere of the time and especially the interiors of the bourgeois houses in Paris, Brussels and London are excellently revived. The less successful part of the film seemed to me to be the one in which to the personal motivations of the hero are added social elements, trying to make of the thieves' profession kind of a likeable righteous guild. No matter how repugnant are the bourgeois portrayed in the film, this attempt is not convincing, and not for moralistic reasons, but because even the actors, including Belmondo, fail to portray the characters' dilemmas. However, 'Le Voleur' is a more than acceptable entertainment, and not just for reasons of nostalgia.

This is a great satire of fin de siecle European society, but satire is not always funny. In fact, this is a tragedy along classic Greek lines, something which only becomes apparent in the final scenes, which give the lie to those critics who accuse Malle of being too sympathetic to his protagonist(s). Some criticize Belmondo's rather flat affect, but I believe that this is intentional, and an essential element of the tragedy. The film is widely recognized as satitirizing the bourgeoisie, but many miss the way it also satirizes the would-be Marxism of some of the protagonists. It is beautifully filmed, with a beautiful, all-star cast. By modern standards, it is a slow film, without much excitement, but it is worth watching, if you have the patience to watch it all the way to the end.

... and those gorgeous eyes to look at. The film would be a lot better if it were 30 minutes shorter, and if Malle didn't lovingly photograph those rich interiors, that gorgeous furniture that Belmondo treats so brutally with his burglar tools. Jacques Saulnier did the production design, and this is a really handsome film to watch. It is a precursor to Stavisky..., the Resnais film that Belmondo starred in some years later, another Saulnier production. The solitary nature of the crimes Randal commits does not allow the idea of a confederation of criminals against the bourgeoisie to develop--this is one of the themes of the script that fails to work.

The acting is always good. Guiomar as the crooked priest is always effective; you may remember him longer than you do Belmondo. Paul Le Person as a thief has some good scenes, as does Jacques Debary as the politician Randal robs while he's making a speech. The best scene for me was the Guiomar-Marie Dubois encounter, when she recounts a bogus story to the feigned surprise of the priest.

Louis Malle was one of the greatest French directors, along with Resnais and Chabrol, yet he didn't always make the films that his talent should have let him do. Le Voleur is just too ripe, too pretty, too focused on surfaces to work for me.

This movie takes a dive into the world of thieves of western Europe shortly before World War One.

The costume work and, generally, the work done to make this period piece as close to reality as possible, is highly laudable. This is probably what I liked most about this particular movie.

The cinematography helps capture this marvelously. The remastered version I saw was really something. Perfect for a cinephile!

The plot is well-done, as it explains the motivations and features of Belmondo and his gang.

The additional political element of the movie is though-provoking.

The potential incest plotline, though, left me negatively confused.