38 témoins

I'm sorry, but this movie might be the worst I've ever seen. It's about a murder which happens in an Urban area, in Le Havre, but no one claims to have seen nor heard anything. Of course, they are lying. This could be quite an interesting subject, but in this movie it's not. It is never explained why the witnesses didn't do or say anything. In the meantime a lot of people are staring at each other, using big words without meaning and making a problem out of nothing. And we get shots of the port of Le Havre which doesn't seem to have any purpose either. Not to mention the acting is really not any good, in particular Sophie Quinton is terrible. It would be nice if they tried to find a psychological explanation for this, but they don't. Instead there are these typical cliché characters, the noisy reporter, the straight up policeman and the antihero. I really regret seeing this and would not recommend it to anyone.

" Look outside the window

There's a woman being grabbed

They've dragged her to the bushes

And now she's being stabbed

Maybe we should call the cops

And try to stop the pain

But Monopoly is so much fun

I'd hate to blow the game"

PHIL OCHS - OUTSIDE OF A SMALL CIRCLE OF FRIENDS

What the folksinger depicts in his song is exactly what happens in the movie;by and large ,it is another version of "the accused" (Jonathan Kaplan ,1988)in which Oscar-winner Jodie Foster was raped before indifferent (or vicious ) eyes ,but here the witnesses claim that they've heard or seen nothing;all of them were in their apartment ,they did not intervene or even call the Police .

Given this harrowing subject,it is a pity that the movie is so dull and so mediocre ;the central character,the coward who wants to redeem himself is played by a Johnny -one-note Yvan Attal;his girlfriend is the most uninteresting character of the script,being in China when "it " happened" ,so why give such an important part to her?Only talented Nicole Garcia tries to save something from the wreckage ,sadly unsupported by the rest of the cast.

Yves Boisset or André Cayatte were often unfairly despised by the "true connoisseurs" of the French cinema;those men are /were able to give that kind of story substance ;they are sorely missed here.

In this story, there is no many room for actors to show all their skills. So, on the point of the performance of the actors, the film is rather dull. What is thrilling in this story, is the fact that the community of the neighborhood stays united while everybody lies about having heard the yelling of the woman savagely assassinated and nobody took the initiative of calling the police. That is, it seems that the lie cement the relationships between the members of the community. When truth comes to light, and the members of the neighborhood have to confess to the police that they heard, indeed, the yelling of the victim, each member gets aware of his own cowardice and the cowardice of each of the other members. So, the relationships between the members are severely shaken. And because of this trauma, the community takes Pierre Morvan as a scapegoat and start to abhor him. Also his wife, who during the hole story affirms to support him in any circumstance, his wife quits. The moral of the story seems to be that a lie is stronger than the truth to cement the relationship of a group of people.

This movie is based on a notorious rape-murder case which happened in 1964. Kitty Genovese was stabbed and raped in New York. Two weeks later the "New York Times" published an article titled "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police." Following lengthy investigation, it appears that the headline was incorrect, as nobody witness the whole brutal attack from beginning to the end, because it took place in the course of half hour and in different locations.

However, the case sent social psychologists wild, in search for explanations. The conclusion was that contrary to common expectations, larger numbers of bystanders decrease the likelihood that someone will step forward and help a victim.

Anyway, I suppose that the movie was set in Le Havre to keep the "city by the sea" background, even if in another continent. But I find it sloppy and disrespectful towards the audience to have used as a plot device horrible murder, which is a classic feature of social psychology textbooks.

In the harbor city of Le Havre, France, a woman is stabbed during the night, just below the windows of her neighborhood. Pierre (Yvan Attal) has witnessed the murder, and heard the wails of the women crying for help. So have the neighbors, certainly. But at the end, nobody called the police. Nevertheless, sorrows are too heavy for Pierre, who feels the need to tell everything to his wife (Sophie Quinton), and to the police. During the investigation, it appears that 38 people witnessed the murdering, and none reacted...

I was really appealed by the premises of this plot. That is also why I was really disappointed with the resulting film. Let me enumerate the main caveats I was annoyed with :

• scripts and acting. The dialogs often sound awkward, unnatural and sometimes I was wondering if I was looking at theater rather than cinema. The acting is not good (especially with the main roles), but I am not sure if actors or director have to be blamed.

• Le Havre. This city and its harbor is constantly in the picture, but the director does not really use it. Is it metaphor of dehumanization of modern urban life? Is it because the city center was rebuilt with bare concrete after 1945? The effect is wasted.

• the end. The scenario introduces many story elements which could have be explored and resolved into a powerful conclusion. Contrarily, the actual movie end is coming out of nowhere, unimpressive, and I felt, stupid.