La nuit du carrefour

"Night at the Crossroads" has the reputation of Jean Renoir's least-known sound film. Whether this is justified or not, it is not hard to understand why it has fallen by the wayside. Not as openly political as his later films as well as lacking in a coherent plot, it is easy to dismiss this film based on an early Georges Simenon novel as just another pulp detective yarn made as an imitation of the increasingly popular Hollywood gangster films. Indeed, Renoir's own dissatisfaction with the film and the rumours that it was never completed haven't helped its reputation. However, in "Night at the Crossroads", Renoir has made a film so beguilingly atmospheric and infuriatingly irrational, that it simply mustn't be dismissed.

The plot, such as it is, follows the investigation into the murder of a Jewish diamond merchant found in the garage of a house near a small French village. The house itself is located on a crossroad and belongs to a mysterious one-eyed Dane (Georges Koudria) and his flirtatious sister (Winna Winifried). Opposite the house, on the crossroad, is a garage and next to it, the house of the portly Mr Michnnet (Jean Gehret).

Enter Inspector Maigret (Pierre Renoir), Surete's indefatigable investigator taking charge of the case. He takes a temporary residence at the crossroad which he finds to be a less than idyllic place.

Proceeding in odd fits and jumps and seemingly lacking any continuity between its many twists and reveals, the plot is hardly of consequence in this thriller. Rumour has it that certain key scenes either weren't filmed or were lost at some point during the production. I don't believe this to be the case. It seems to me more likely that Jean Renoir was simply more interested in the bizarre cast of characters cohabitating at this dreary French crossroads and the gothic atmosphere of the Simenon novel than its frequently ludicrous plot machinations.

I didn't find the plot that hard to follow, it is simply unfolded in such an off-hand manner that it seems more incidental than is usual in a crime movie. Most key events take place off-screen. Characters are kidnapped and released, lost and found out of sight of the camera or Maigret who seems to spend most of his time wandering between the three houses as bemused by all the oddness found in them as we are. Most of the twists are explained after they occur in the form of throwaway dialogue and all of the deductions from Maigret seem to come out of nowhere. In fact, in some cases, they seem to be more divinations than deductions since he doesn't seem to have any clues whatsoever.

As I said, it is the thick, gloomy, often bizarre atmosphere that is what drives this film and many of the elements at play in "Night at the Crossroads" wouldn't seem out of place in a David Lynch film. Just look at the cast of characters. Besides the straight-laced Maigret, we have his minute, goofy assistant, a constantly grinning, bear-like local inspector, an accordion-playing garage owner, a melancholic, black monocle-wearing Dane, his apparently nymphomaniac sister, and a greatly disliked accountant who always seems to be running somewhere. Furthermore, just like Lynch, Renoir cuts between disparate styles with reckless abandon. Every scene in this film seems to be shot in a different genre ranging freely from gothic horror to slapstick comedy, from torrid romantic melodrama to American gangster flicks. In between all of this, Renoir frequently cuts in complete non-sequitur shots such as the sexy Danish nymph seductively playing with a pet tortoise.

Surprisingly, Renoir mostly manages to hold it all together with the film's sorrowful, bleak atmosphere acting as a kind of cohesive. The film's memorable location, the country crossroad seemingly between nothing and nowhere, drenched in rain and fog, simply oozes it.

The photography by Georges Asselin and Marcel Lucien is simply astounding and although the film occasionally suffers from the ails of early talkies such as odd framing choices and static, talky scenes, the images on display are simply beautiful. Mostly shot at night or in darkness, there are very few light sources evident in the scenes and quite a few of them are diegetic. There are wonderful shots of figures walking through the misty night illuminated only by passing headlights or entire scenes in which the only light source appears to be a desk lamp engulfed in cigarette smoke. Add into the mix the constantly drizzling rain and you get a film set in a murky world in which morality is grey and the line between good and bad is utterly obscured. The climactic chase scene is shot from the POV of the chasing car, in the night, with only that car's headlights lighting the way. The effect is one of total immersion.

This wouldn't be a Renoir film if it didn't offer up the occasional social commentary and here he uses Simenon's set-up quite brilliantly to his ends. By setting each of the tenants of the crossroads on a different rung of the social ladder, he has them in constant conflict, a kind of brewing cold war. The garage workers are, of course, working-class men whom we are first introduced to mockingly reading the society pages of the newspaper. There is an open disliking between them and Monsieur Michonnet, the recently wealthy accountant whom they refer to as "the bourgeoise". However, when the murder takes place, they join forces in pointing the accusatory finger at the Danes, finally united in their xenophobia. The Danes, on the other hand, show little empathy for the Jewish victim seeing how they're antisemitic. Renoir has a lot of fun portraying this cold war along with several other barbed jabs such as the scene of Parisiennes buying the newspapers being framed to show filthy water flowing into the street gutters. A literal depiction of the term "gutter press".

"Night at the Crossroads" is a far more interesting and innovative film than it may seem on the surface. It is certainly no pulp crime story and can hardly be called a detective film at all since the plot plays only a cursory role. Not all of it works. It is sometimes incoherent and distracting, and its oddity is frequently overwhelming, however, once you accept its flaws and allow yourself to enjoy its bizarrity unencumbered with attempts at understanding it, you'll find yourself engulfed in its curiously powerful, drizzly, sorrowful, gothic atmosphere.

Carrefour has been considered a precursor to film noir and it can be agreed that the film is all about atmosphere. Renoir uses long sweeping pans to explore the space. There is a consciousness with regards to constructing depth in the mise-en-scene. Interestingly groups of characters are organized and move around in this film slightly differently from Grande Illusion or Regle, and is more similar to Cordelier. If theses differences can be connected to two overall stylistics systems for Renoir's work, with one being more focused on psychology (I realize Renoir spoke vehemently against it), then perhaps Carrefour can be understood as a bit of a hybrid between Renoir's two dominant stylistic systems. In Carrefour, ample closeups and angular shots support this claim while a lack of mobile framing (on interiors certainly) goes further to promote this thesis. Closeups on particular objects (cigarette pack) are ambiguously pov and hint at a transcendental position (not typical of Renoir) and is perhaps explainable through the film being an adaptation of a Simenon book. Again, Renoir finds novel uses for synch sound with alternating sound design and sound used through a sense of privilege. The settings are beautiful and the nighttime scenes become eerie and displaced (the displacement is all the more provocative when piecing together a film that is missing a reel). There is a Renoirian dilemma at play in this Simenon story and Renoir's use of polyvocal systems (Illusion, Carosse) underscore it. Carrefour is not unobtrusively political in its presentation of foreigners (Danes) being blamed for the murder of a Jew. A theme of separation and disconnect permeates those 'reasons' that people have for doing what they do. Pierre Renoir as Maigret performs perfecting in navigating the layers of the drama with subtle intent and sharpened will. The employment of great depth of field (lattice of door frame, staircase through doorway) plays more on this psychological disconnect of motives for action than it does for constructing space unobtrusively. That is to say, the direction is willful and therefore driven by auteur psychology and defined by construction of transcendental subject positions. Convergence is a force that surges forward to counter the themes of separation and disconnect. Class structure comes colliding into a single plane (and for this reviewer) reveals more about what holds everyone together in unity as opposed to toying with issues of servitude/mastery. Eventually, the pace slows and the atmosphere dominates. The foggy night and dim light provide a nice juxtaposition to the possibility of elucidation on the plot of the film. Some have commented that Night at the Crossroads is impossible to make sense of (without the full working print), but perhaps even with a complete print it would defy any logical and straightforward readings.

This is a wonderful early look on film based on a crime novel by Georges Simenon. The novel itself is uncharacteristically atmospheric and deliberately unfocused and this was handled beautifully by Jean Renoir with his fog-enshrouded sets and atmosphere. It is missing a reel, as I understand, but the novel itself has sufficient ambiguity to forgive any omission of that sort. The acting, with its melange of accents is fascinating in its own way. The visuals win the day. It's beautiful to look at, exotic and definitely a one-of-a-kind of its genre and hardly "inept".

Curtis Stotlar

An user says that the movie is inept.He is not completely wrong.But it's not Renoir's fault.You've got to know that one reel was definitively lost and that may account for some plot holes (Winna Winifried's behavior for instance) The plot is not essential .The atmosphere of a humid country where the fog falls every night matters more .There's also a study of xenophobia -although the ending (a bit incomprehensible anyway)- tends to deny it.

They say Simenon did not like the film.If you like French movies based on the Belgian writer's books try Duvivier's "Panique" and Delannoy's "Maigret et l'Affaire Saint-Fiacre" and "Maigret Tend un Piège".

This dreary film was a bad start for Simenon on the screen. Surprisingly, it was directed by Jean Renoir, who could rise to such heights as a great director, but here sank to unparalleled depths of mediocrity and dullness. It was not as if Renoir was new to directing, for he had already directed several films before this one. So there is no excuse. Because the action of the film largely takes place at night (as the title indicates), the film is literally very dark indeed. The lighting is terrible, and as it was such an early sound film, the sound is not much better. But the greatest disappointment of all is Pierre Renoir, older brother of Jean, in his role of Commissaire (Inspector) Jules Maigret. He is dull, dull, and duller. Many will remember him fondly from the later film LES ENFANTS DU PARADIS. But he was no good as a Maigret. He gives the character no personality whatsoever. A golem could have done a better job of it. Those of us who appreciate Jean Gabin and Bruno Cremer as Maigret can only sink into a slough of despond at the sight of this lifeless first screen incarnation of our hero. The Danish actress Winna Winifried, in her first screen appearance, attempts to inject some mystery into the film by her extraordinarily louche and languid performance, a deeply weird portrayal which if better exploited and directed could have worked very well indeed. She ceased work in 1940 with her seventh film, and as far as IMDb is concerned, vanished from the world after that. I wonder if the Danes could tell us more. She must have fled the Nazi invasion of Paris in that year, and who knows what might have become of her after that. She had made four French films and three British ones, none of which seems to be particularly known today, and only one has been reviewed by a single specialist reviewer, except for this one, which has been revived recently. As for the story, it is a rather meandering and feeble one, involving the smuggling of cocaine in automobile tyres. Perhaps that is why the action appears to go round in circles. Jacques Becker (father of Jean Becker), who three years later was to begin his directing career, was Production Manager. A third member of the Renoir family also worked on this film, Claude Renoir, who was focus puller. Three years later, he commenced his career as cinematographer, and only retired in 2010, after 86 films in that job. Truly the Renoir family have made their mark on French culture. Claude Renoir's most spectacular success as a cinematographer was probably, and most appropriately (considering who his grandfather was), the magnificent film about another famous painter, LE MYSTÈRE DE PICASSO (1956), directed by the brilliant Henri-Georges Cluzot. He was also the cinematographer for his brother Jean's magical and evocative film THE RIVER (1951), a classic made all the more memorable by Claude Renoir's fine work in capturing the atmosphere of India on location. It is such a pity that all these talented people could not have done a better job on this particular film, but there is no use pretending that they succeeded, because they did not. I agree with another reviewer who says that this film is 'awkward, amateurish and even inept'.