Le beau Serge

...This first effort ,made on a shoestring budget ,actually belongs to the old directors school and would not be out of place in ,say ,Duvivier's or Clouzot's brilliant filmographies.It even recalls Italian neorealism sometimes.Anyway,among all the directors of the otherwise a bit overrated new wave,Chabrol is the most accessible,the most palatable, particularly for those ,like me ,who do not give a damn about ,say,Rohmer or Godard.The depiction of the Bourgeoisie which will begin with the follow-up "les cousins"(with Brialy teaming with Blain again) and will become Chabrol's trademark is absent here .Laffont is the only pure new wave actress :Brialy used to work with the "old "guard as well,and Blain 's career really began with Julien Duvivier's unfairly overlooked and sensational "voici le temps des assassins"(1956).

The story is linear,with a lot of characters and a dash of melodrama thrown in -which is by no means new wavesque-.The rural milieu depiction will pave a reliable way for the highly superior "le boucher" (1969).There's also a tendency to dwell on the sordid side of life.Outside the good cast,two scenes in a graveyard are impressive.

In what is considered the first film of the French New Wave, Claude Chabrol gives us a hypnotic vision of opposites in the same style as Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt. Le Beau Serge follows the story of Francois, a young man who returns to his home town after twelve years, who finds that the town is dying. His landlady even tells him that everyone will be gone soon enough. In particular, he finds that a once-promising childhood friend, Serge, is trapped as an alcoholic in a loveless marriage.

The brilliance of the film lies not in its storytelling (it is quite slow at parts) nor its acting (most of the actors were non-professionals) but in its structure. Everything is seen in doubles. Francois and Serge are two sides to the same coin. Each has an elder counterpart. Each has a female relation which seems to switch off at times. Serge has both a wife and a mistress who is at one point Francois girlfriend; at the same time, Serge's wife becomes morally attached to Francois. In addition, scenes are doubled; two scenes in the cemetary, two implied sexual scenes in Glomaud's home, two turns by Francois and Michel at the beginning, the list goes on and on. Furthermore, entire shots are doubled with different couples in each. It is brilliant.

In addition, the film looks as if it were unpolished (which is a basic tenet of the New Wave), but it looks as if it was a director's first attempt. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.

The greatest detraction (apart from the sometimes overacting) is the musical score. It is extremely discordant with regards to the movie. Minimal scenes such as Serge exiting his house are accompanies by percussion that sounds as if it were a harbinger of doom. I don't know if Chabrol wanted this, but it becomes irritating and causes the viewer to laugh at the film.

As an added note, watch for the parallels of Francois and Serge with the town's children. The kids pop up everywhere.

Excellent film, does anyone else see similarities to Cat on a hot tin roof, and a number of southern Gothic references.....I read more than I probably should, sham loveless marriage , first child conceived by perve father, Francois and Serge maybe shared more than society would allow, Village priest, hmmm.Beautifully shot and so poetic, Chabrol's most sincere and honest.. just saying....Strong characters that have a grand noble purpose. Not at all apologetic and a testament to faith and hope in a futile, provincial and incestuous post war Europe. You feel their hunger and desperation. So revealing a film, yet it left so much unanswered. Post war French cinema is timeless and classic.

Born in 1930, this contemporary of Jean-Luc Godard, Francois Truffaut and Eric Rohmer really was, like them, a vital part of the French "New Wave"...if only to have helped usher it in via a neo-realist approach. This is Claude Chabrol's first film and it launched him on a career that spanned 40 years and included mostly thrillers, often inspired by Alfred Hitchcock. Other of his notable works include LES COUSINS (1959), OPHELIA (1962), LE BOUCHER (1969) and MADAME BOVARY (1991) An "enfant terrible" and a genuine eccentric, he approached the making of this first film in a way that would later be identified with the "new wave" movement. He used mostly inexperienced actors, crude editing, lots of location filming and imbued it with a sense of spontaneity. Focusing on content over style allowed him to carve out a distinct piece work that is both compelling and a fine study of human nature. From opening shots of pensive lead actor J.C. Brially* riding a bumpy bus into his childhood town to the powerful closing shot of Gerard Blain shocked into sobering up, this film will have you looking at LE BEAU SERGE with adoration. *(Catch Brially starring in one of the finer French horrror films made; LE DEMON DANS L'ILE)

This film is considered to be the first film of the French New Wave film movement, preceding 400 Blows, Hiroshima Mon Amour and Breathless. I don't think you can put this film in the same category as those films. This film is a straight up conventional narrative about Francois who travels back to his hometown after 12 years, looking for a peaceful, restful place and recuperating from a lung infection, he finds that the people he once knew are all in dire straits. They are poor, provincial and cant seem to get out of their rut in this small town, the town Chabrol grew up in. Watching this film I didn't quite know in which way it was headed. The acting is superb and I really felt like I was in that small town with these people. Francois former friend turned alcoholic Serge turns in a convincing performance of drowning ambitions. This film was meticulously put together and the moving shots were intelligently fluid and effective. Unlike what other reviewers have said, this does not feel like a film from a first-timer. I have only seen Chabrol's last two films, Inspector Bellamy and A Girl Cut in Two and they were masterful in execution and i expected this one to be weaker but i was delightfully surprised. It holds up really well and I even think modern American audiences would enjoy this film about sacrifice and reformation.