Opiniones de usuarios

Thing that this movie is best known and appreciated for is its unique way of storytelling. It's one of the very first movies that features a story that gets mostly told with flashbacks and it keeps switching back between past and present. This storytelling technique was later made more famous and popular by Orson Welles with his masterpiece "Citizen Kane".

But of course a movie requires a bit more than just some good storytelling, though it still remains a very important aspect. But this movie also has a great, quite simplistic movie, with still a lot happening in it, like only the French could make. It's a bit of a sweet love-story, that shows the events leading up to a fatal shooting. Some people will call this movie slow but hey, that was just the way movies were back in its days. But it's not like it's slow pace ever makes the movie a boring or dragging one, or at least not to me. It might had been the case if the movie had been a bit longer but with its running time around 90 minutes, it's simply a short movie to watch.

It's also one beautiful looking movie, that features some great cinematography and especially lighting. Shadows play in important part in the movie its visual look. Amazing thing about its cinematography is that the movie actually had 4 different cinematographers attached to it. No idea what the story is behind this but I guess that each used their own specialty for this movie, or some of them simply got fired or stepped up during production. Anyway, whatever was the case, it really didn't hurt the movie its visual look. Marcel Carné movies often were visually a real pleasure to watch and this movie forms no exception on this.

It's also a movie that quite heavily relies on its actors to tell its story and to deliver its great dialog, that got specially written by poet scenarist and songwriter Jacques Prévert. And this movie luckily had some great actors to work with. At the time Jean Gabin really was one of the best French actors. He really did his best work in the '30's and starred in some other classics such as "Pépé le Moko" and "La grande illusion" during the same decade.

Some great and unique storytelling equals a great and unique movie.

9/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

There is something so lyrical about the tale of the doomed François portrayed by the great Jean Gabin that even in its hardest luck moments you feel you are watching poetry in motion.

In addition, Le Jour se Leve is a character study with all the contradictions that tend to go with pained souls like François' - except that there is a further depth that renders the film quite universal, a depth made of little moments in human relationships and the flaws that gently emerge but only renders the humans involved more endearing.

Still, all that glitters is not gold: the apparently pure Françoise has actually been bedded by M. Valentin (Berry); and the police are more interested in getting their man than in saving him.

The direction is precise and inspired, resorting to the then much used flashback technique but never allowing it to dominate the film.

The photography - well, it is gorgeous and it gives the film its expressionistic ambiance. Finally, Gabin - one of the greatest actors ever in one of his greatest roles. Need one say more?

The ending can be predicted from the moment François kills a visitor in his apartment but that aside it is a film full of cinematographic treasures, acting to gape at, and a quality of direction that is seldom seen these days. A must see for anyone who cares about movies.

We see a man shot; who he is and why we don't know. The murderer has locked himself inside his room. Police are forced to shoot in, trying to get him to surrender. The story then proceeds in flashback.

Marcel Carné directs this famous French film starring Jean Gabin. The two had worked together the previous year on "Le quai des brumes", a film well known then and now. If you are unfamiliar with Gabin, he was to the late 1930's in France what Bogey would be shortly in America, only Bogey with a soupçon of Cagney. More animated than Bogart, but less than Cagney with his agile song-and-dance-man side. A tough guy who's actually a good guy.

Now, a soft-hearted tough guy who's surrounded by police -- that could also describe Bogart's breakthrough film, "High Sierra", from 1941, and perhaps there is some superficial similarity.

However, this story is mostly a tale of love affairs and working class life -- that's really where its interest lies. There's a real sympathy here for the common man, when even a modest house on a rutted street would seem beyond his reach.

This film's original reputation may have been based at least in part on its Gallic openness about sexual matters. It's quite outré by the Anglo-Saxon standards of 1939. Regardless, the justly celebrated "Le jour se lève" has a poetic quality overall, and a memorably ironic final shot of the kind we don't seem to see quite often enough anymore.

That was one of the last French masterpieces of the thirties just before the war.Marcel Carné was accused of pessimism and the movie was quickly forbidden by the military censorship that used to say in 1940:"if we've lost the war,blame it on "Quai des Brumes""(Carné's precedent movie.The director answered:"you do not blame a barometer for the storm"). "Le jour se lève " is,if it's possible,darker than its predecessor. From the very beginning,the hero,a good guy (Gabin) is doomed,his fate is already sealed,because the tragedy has already happened .That's why the movie is a long flashback.The memories are brought back on the screen with an astounding virtuosity by some elements of the set (the teddy bear for instance).Only three main characters outside that of Gabin,the evil one (Berry who was to play the devil in "les visiteurs du soir "1942),the lucid one (Arletty) and the ambiguous one (Jacqueline Laurent).The latter provides

the only flaw of the movie:Laurent acts Françoise as the innocent pure girl,however Carné leaves no doubt about her relations with Berry. A remake was made by Anatole Litvak with Henry Fonda ,Barbara Bel Geddes and Ann Dvorak (who must have been studying Arletty's acting for a long while),called "the long night" with an absurd happy end. Needless to say,it's the French Carné movie that you've got to see!

the main setting of "le Jour Se Leve" is the top floor of a french apartment. the film opens with Jean Gabin character Francois - a factory worker- killing a dog trainer named Valentin who we find out (as the story unravels itself) was "involved" with his girl. Francois then barricades himself from the police, and the reason for the death of Valentin is told in simple sets of flashbacks that Gabin remembers between cigarettes as he decides what his next move will be. the story is simple and delicate in manner and substance but nonetheless the director/writer team Marcel Carne and Jacques Prevert succeed in turning the realistic (and sometimes edgy) conversations, movements and places into poetry. and in response to an earlier review, the simplicity of the flashbacks, is what makes the movie so intriguing. instead of relying on a heavy plot that might challenge audience, Prevert and Carne decide to put great detail into a simple tale about a sentimental man who is torn to ruin by a contemptuous and Machiavellian man.

Le Jour Se Leve (1939)

This French movie is oddly famous as the original, almost lost (destroyed) version of the American, The Long Night (1947), and it almost demands comparison. In all, the American version with Henry Fonda in the lead is more beautifully made, and perhaps more compelling for a lot of very small reasons.

But this French one, which is not only first, has a couple key qualities that make it worth getting absorbed into. For one, it is more seriously realistic, with both a sexual frankness (implied, but not ignored) and a lack of a "Hollywood ending," naturally enough. It is filmed beautifully, and acted really well (the "bad" man in this one is more convincing and lifelike than the Vincent Price incarnation in the later one).

But it is also a slow film, with far too much of the man, played by Jean Gabin, who was also in the 1937 Grand Illusion) staring and pacing. Here is where the photography and editing of the later film sustain us through the solitary moments much better. This version almost feels low budget, at least by American standards, without making the uncomplicated production always a virtue (it doesn't cost more to move the camera closer, or cut out sections of staring into space). I know this is all an aesthetic decision, and the slow, sad realizing of the character summing up his life is really at the center of it all, but see both films and see what you think.

Two things are really astonishing.

First, the almost scene by scene similarity of the second film to the first. Camera angles, dialog, flashbacks (many), even the dog trainer's show, and the teddy bear missing an ear, all of this is just copied and reproduced in the later movie, to an almost ridiculous extreme. (No wonder RKO tried to destroy every single copy of Le Jour Se Leve before making The Long Night. Sad and weird.) That's certainly a bowing down to this first one for good reason.

Second, the dilemma the men face in the two movies is actually a little different at the core, and this is a product of the times they were made. In The Long Night, the man is an ex-soldier suffering from having been through the horrors of World War II, and so the standard American film noir themes are distilled and honed down to this one man (Fonda) in his room. The earlier French film was made just as the war was about to start, and the man (Gabin) is suffering from a more universal problem of being a working class man putting in long hours, cheerfully, with little hope for a future for himself. The dandy-ish counterpart that is his nemesis is unattractive in nature, but has charm and education and abilities beyond this man's noble simplicity, and it seems that society, and women, favor this more false kind of man.

It's because of these themes the French version has a growing reputation. It's really well acted, and a classic dilemma played out with beauty and pathos. That it isn't perfect is something we have to adjust to, remembering it was forward looking for its time.

The crew behind the scenes turned in fine work, including production design and art direction not least, but also effects. The cinematography reflects keen eyes, and the editing is adept. Jean Gabin naturally stands out, not just as the protagonist but also with his international renown, but the cast give fine performances at large. Marcel Carné's direction is terrific, broadly speaking, and the writing team of Jacques Prévert and Jacques Viot penned a compelling story.

All this is well and good, and the picture is all that it needs to be to entertain, and certainly to stand above other titles that have been less carefully crafted. There's just one problem: the heightened emotions and charged dynamics that should define characters and their relationships, and drive the story, too often fail to fully come across in my opinion. We see Francois become more tense and undone as both the flashbacks and the active narrative progress; a small late scene between Clara and Francoise might be the top highlight of the entire feature for me. Otherwise, whether it's a question of the scenes as written or a wrinkle in Carné's direction, those taut feelings that define characters and the fundamental advancement of the plot just don't truly manifest. On paper Valentin is a mess of ugly behavior and attitudes, Clara and Francois share sparks, Francois and Francoise are in love, and Francois is increasingly incensed at and by Valentin. In practice, I'm not inclined to think these notions were meaningfully conveyed. As a viewer, I don't Feel It.

It speaks well to how well this is otherwise made that it's still as solid and enjoyable as it is. Only, as the full weight of the drama isn't present, the film isn't nearly as impactful as it could have been. Obviously this is pretty highly regarded, and other folks have gotten more from it than I have; I'm glad for them. I do like 'Le jour se lève,' but I just don't think it's anything special or remarkable. It's worth watching, for sure - maybe not something one needs to go out of their way to see, however.

A fantastic film, which plays with the emotions of the spectator while stunningly portraying the feelings of a pent-up man whose end echoes his pent-up life in the city. The film is beautifully shot in black and white and is a perfect example of French realism, with a modernist time disorientation tossed in for good measure. I found the performances by Jean Gabin and a showgirl with whom he gets involved (played by Arletty)to be strong, portrayed with a kind of hopeless, clutching pathos. Worth it simply for the beautifully constructed final shot.

Told in flashbacks, the story slowly enfolds to explain the death that started the movie. A very touching love story. The guy is just trying to find a little love in his daily struggle to work a dead end job and make ends meet. There is miscommunication between some couples. Characters are unsure about what it is they really want out of life. Events lead tragically to a death. Trapped in his room by the police, the crowd responds with varying degrees of sympathy and confusion. Was the death inevitable? Those are the questions. In the end, you understand how the situation could have ended differently. You will enjoy this movie.

Carne's murder romance seems a little dated now, its rigid structure and frail artifice too polite for the hysteria necessary for film noir. Carne's tendency to reduce to types is at its most stilted here, leaving one with little room to breathe. There is still much that is majestic and dreamlike - the extraordinary sets, their imposing facades as repressive to Francois as the human world he can't understand; Carne's elegant way with composition and camera movement, especially when he allows himself to see people, not allegories; the unparalleled acting, emotion from another age, yet yearningly, recognisably human.

No-nonsense factory worker Jean Gabin (François) falls in love with flower-girl Jacqueline Laurent (Françoise). However, she is seeing dog-trainer and master story-teller Jules Barry (Valentin). The story focuses on the rivalry between these 2 and their dialogue between one another is compelling and drives the film along. Arletty (Clara) also plays a good role as Barry's ex-assistant who has broken free from him and formed a liaison with Gabin. This is a French film, so guess what, don't expect a happy ending!

There are some cruel conversations and very frank dialogue exchanges between the characters. And some interesting lies that are thrown out there! It's an entertaining film but let down for me by a gloomy ending. The actors do well - Barry is excellent in his role whilst Laurent is a bit of a weirdo. Not sure if she is a simpleton innocent or a master manipulator. Characters tell lies and Gabin can't align with this way of being. Arletty and the others can. Maybe this is the moral of the story - if you can't cope with a little deception, then maybe this life isn't for you.

So, get lying, everyone. Go forth and tell some crackers. I have now retired from the rat race (my aim was always to get out once I could) and I think I will now tell people that I am a Legal Arbitrator if I am asked. All that means is that I am listed on a Power of Attorney document for my dad. It sounds like a top profession, though - ha ha.

Jean Gabin plays a tragic character here, a blue-collar worker who has inhaled enough lead-based paint dust to give him a permanent cough, and who grew up in an orphanage. He's in love with an angelic woman (Françoise, played by Jacqueline Laurent) but finds himself in a triangle for her affections with an underhanded roué (Jules Berry), a man who trains dogs for stage performances. In case we don't hate the guy enough, we're told that to train the dogs he shaves their paws and burns them with a hot iron. Somehow Françoise opts for the cad (?!), and so Gabin's character starts up a purely physical relationship with Clara (Arletty), a woman who's just ended her professional and personal relationship with the other man. Clara herself seems rather tragic, wanting more from her lover but resigned in knowing that their tryst is fleeting, and that he still loves Françoise.

It's a story almost all told in flashback, so we know where the sexual rivalry leads from the beginning, and a lot of the appeal is in the mood Marcel Carné creates. Slow dissolves reflect the man's weary state of mind, beaten down in a world that seemed rigged against him from the start, and a small apartment surrounded by cops and neighbors, a feeling of being trapped. I can't say I felt like there were a lot of technical innovations necessarily, but it had its moments, like that overhead view outside the apartment looking down at the street while Gabin's character holds Berry's out the window. Meanwhile Gabin is fantastic, balancing tender emotion with bringing the fire during moments of frustration. I also liked Arletty here, who's equal parts sassy ("I can't tell (if you're beautiful) with all that make-up" / "I take it off before I go to bed.") and melancholy. In an obvious difference compared to Hollywood at this time, we also see her briefly nude, taking a shower, and more importantly, she's not doomed despite enjoying sex outside of marriage.

What stopped me from truly loving the film was its story, which was pretty simple even for 92 minutes, and its pacing, which was too slow. Often it felt like scenes dragged on longer than they should have. That was part of creating the foreboding mood, accompanied by a subdued drum beat, but I never felt tension, just a sense of tragedy, which of course comes in classic French film style with "Fin." I would have gladly sacrificed at least some of those pensive moments in the bedroom, waiting for the inevitable end, for more relationship scenes between the principals (Gabin/Laurent especially, but also between Berry and the two women, which we see almost none of). Overall, certainly watchable for Carné's craft, Gabin, and Arletty though.

Visually delicious, but I rate based on the entire package. And the story fell short, let us all be honest.

Gabin is an impressive delight, as always, and the love triangle is interesting enough, but morning we haven't seen before. The extent of Valentine's conniving ways, made that much worse by his absolute shamelessness about them- to the point that he is actually more accurately bragging about them- does compel the audience greatly.

**** Spoilers ****

One thing does trouble me. The fact that, to me, it seemed like François almost accidentally shot Valentin? While summaries and articles telling about this film make it out that it was a premeditated act and he had full intention of killing this man "in order to free the woman he loves", it appears in the film that it is at best an unintentional flinch with little to no forethought, and at worst a heat of the moment impulse. After all, Valentin is the one who unexpectedly showed up in his room with the murder weapon, actually meant for him!

With this, the more accurate interpretation of the story is that a man commits suicide without knowing that everything he wants, his true love, is right within his grasp- rather than deal with the consequences from accidentally (or in the heat of the moment) killing a rival he didn't really mean to.

Rather than a man who bitterly murders a rival lover and proceeds to commit suicide, without knowing that his true love does indeed love him the most.

These two synopses are different enough to cause two different emotional responses in certain audiences.

Fool me twice, shame on me, hey? Everything I felt about Port of Shadows in terms of being disappointed and kind of bored, I felt the same here. It's a shame, because I remember really liking Children of Paradise when I watched it a few years back.

So while it has a cool premise, decent visuals, and an interesting flashback structure, it didn't add up to something more than I could at best begrudgingly admire in parts. But then again, the flashback stuff, in hindsight, didn't add a huge amount to the film, really.

I guess I should be thankful if it helped give birth to film noir, if the Mubi description is to be believed? Said noir feel without a narrator was cool I guess?

But I just found it an absolute chore to get through. Beyond the initial premise the story didn't engage me, and the characters didn't seem compelling to me either.

For its technical proficiency and potential influence on later film noir/crime films, I can't in good conscience give it a lower rating, but given how little I enjoyed watching it, I can't really go high, either.