Les portes de la nuit

This started out as a ballet choreographed by Roland Petit called Le Rendez-vous, with a libretto by Prevert and music by Kosma. This ballet was one of Petit's finest works and was in fact given a new production in Paris only last month (March 2013). Carne saw the possibilities in the story and had Prevert write the screenplay. No expense was spared, we are told, to recreate the world of Barbes-Rochechouart, with the replica of the Metro station built on set. It is fashionable with some people to dismiss this film because Gabin and Dietrich aren't in it, or for some other reason having to do with politics, but I found it a wonderful experience. My only complaint is with Vilar's character, which was transferred from the ballet apparently, and is very tiresome indeed. His windy philosophizing only diminishes the enjoyment I felt in the story.

The actors do a tremendous job. Saturnin Fabre as the father of Malou and Guy, with his fake expressions of affection for his long-lost daughter--she had spent some years singing in New York--and his reluctance to admit to his collaboration with the Germans gives a strong performance. Raymond Bussieres as the train driver is a wonderful foil for Montand. Serge Reggiani as Guy, the militia member who denounced Bussieres to the Gestapo is creepy and cynical. He would have shot his father if the latter had tried to prevent him from escaping. Pierre Brasseur again shows us why he was one of the greatest actors in France: his businessman with the shady dealings that horrify his wife is very well crafted, given the small number of lines he has.

Finally Montand and Nattier are not replacements for Gabin and Dietrich, they are better because younger and much less prone to give actorish performances. You can see Montand working out how to play a scene. His responses are lively and right. Nattier looks great--every bit as glamorous as Dietrich, and she can sing too. Her scene with Fabre sizzles with anger and disappointment.

This movie is so much better than the limp confections that followed: La Marie du port, Therese Raquin, Le pays d'ou je viens, Les tricheurs and others. Carne was still fairly young and hadn't started to phone the work in.

"Les portes de la nuit" is an important movie ,weren't it only because it's Carné's last genuine unquestionable classic ,the last link on the chain which began with "Jenny" in 1936.All these works but one ("hotel du Nord, classic too anyway)" were written by Jacques Prevert :"drole de drame" "quai des brumes ""le jour se leve" "les visiteurs du soir " and the grandiose "les enfants du paradis" which currently makes the IMDb top 250 where it should be ,as it is in France, well ahead of "Leon" "Amelie" or "les quatre cents coups" if there were ,sometimes ,justice in the universe.

After "les enfants du paradis" -which was voted best French film of all time in a poll in 1979 -anything would ne a letdown.That's why the movie met mixed(and even chilly) critical reception when it was released.After the coming of the nouvelle vague whose young Turks used to hate "old hat" Carné ,one could have thought that "les portes de la nuit would be relegated to purgatory eternally.But young genrations have discovered it and a lot of people appreciate it now (as the IMDb rating shows).Carne's eternal subject :love ,true love against the b.......s ,is here given just one night;one night to meet the most beautiful woman in the world ,but also one night to meet the war profiteers,the cowards ,the vile fathers,all that war destroyed .Carné's "realisme" is given a rough ride anyway ,for some settings are almost ...surrealist,evoking Greek tragedy .Prevert/Kosma's words to "les feuilles mortes" are wistful and deeply moving ;"la vie sépare ceux qui s'aiment tout doucement sans faire de bruit"(life comes between lovers ,gently,without a sound)

"Les portes de la nuit" ,what a wonderful title.the film begins at dusk,in a metro station that was entirely built in the studio.Carne thoroughly dismissed the label "realisme poetique" because none of his film sets was real (the "hotel du nord" ,the chateau in "les visiteurs du soir" ,the boulevard du crime" in "les enfants du paradis,the list is endless).And the movie ends at dawn ,when Paris awakes.

Carné would never achieve such a peak again.He made commendable works afterward ("Therese Raquin" "les tricheurs" )but those works do not "add up".Still,he remains through his 1936-1945 heyday,one of the absolute masters of the French cinema.

Prévert's script has no interest, Yves Montand and Nathalie Nattier play badly, the character of destiny is ridiculous. But the sets, the photography, some superb shots of Paris just after the war (Montmartre, the rotunda, the Bassin de la Villette, Jaurès, at the very beginning of the film), the songs of Kosma and Prévert, a certain atmosphere worth the detour.

This French classic film, LES PORTES DE LA NUIT, is known in English as GATES OF THE NIGHT and sometimes as THE DOORS OF THE NIGHT (which is the translation of the title given in the new subtitles). The film has recently been reissued in France in a remastered form on DVD and Blu-Ray by Pathé, along with English subtitles and some extras. It can easily be ordered from French Amazon. This film is a masterpiece of world cinema, but I had never seen it before. It is entirely set in Paris on one night in July 1945. It is written by Jacques Prévert, and is possibly the most surrealistic of all the films he wrote. He intentionally has written a complex interweaving story involving many characters where the veil between this world and the next can be pierced, and where apparent 'coincidence' reigns supreme, in a heightened form, as a kind of divine synchronicity operating as Fate. Just so that we do not fail to understand, Prévert has written into the script a mysterious vagabond (called in the credits 'le clochard', i.e. 'the vagabond') who is a genuine visitor from the other world, disguised as a beggar. This strange innovation in cinema technique has precedents from Greek and Latin antiquity, of which Prévert was certainly well aware, for in those cultures the common people superstitiously believed that the gods sometimes came to earth disguised as vagabonds and came knocking at the door asking for shelter. One always had to give every vagabond his basic necessities of food and a place to sleep, for the gods were spying on us to see if we kept to the laws of hospitality, and if we dared to turn away a vagabond with contempt, a divine wrath might destroy us in retribution. Indeed, the most famous figure in ancient Greek literature who disguised himself as a vagabond was Homer's hero Odysseus (known in Latin as Ulysses), and although not a god, he was later worshipped as a demi-god on his home island of Ithaca, and I was present when some Greek archaeologists were excavating the remains of the ancient Odysseion, which was his shrine there. These visitations by supernatural or semi-supernatural beings haunted the ancient Greeks, and similar ideas were current in a debased form in Ireland with the elves, in England with the fairies and gnomes, and in Norway with the trolls. For most of human history, 'we were being watched' by the invisible powers. As it says in the American Christmas song about Santa Claus: 'he knows when you are sleeping, he knows when you awake, he knows if you are bad or good, so be good for goodness' sake'. And here in this film the eyes of Fate are upon all the characters in the form of a personage of mysterious mien. He is brilliantly played by a man who had never acted in a film before, Jean Vilar. He is the actual star of the film, and his gaze is perfect and what he says is just as perfect. When people demand to know who he is, he says 'Le Destin' (Destiny, Fortune, or Fate). He keeps trying to warn people of their impending fates, but they never listen to him, and he says to himself more than once: 'They are all the same, they never listen.' This story device actually works, and that is because the film is directed by the genius Marcel Carné. He and Prévert made several famous films together, in what has become known as the 'poetic realism' style. They include one of the greatest films of all time, LES ENFANTS DU PARADIS (1945), as well as JENNY (1936), LE QUAI DES BRUMES (1938), LE JOUR SE LEVE (1939), and LES VISITEURS DU SOIR (1942). This film is the most daring of them all, in having a supernatural character. It was also the last collaboration of the two men. One of the stars of this film is Yves Montand, aged 25, in his second credited film. He delivers a truly superb performance, including many lines of dialogue which a lesser actor could not have pulled off, because they bordered on the incredible. The entire cast are brilliant, the shots, framing, mood, atmosphere and editing are sheer perfection. The cinematography of Philippe Agostini is inspired. He worked with Carné once before, on LE JOUR SE LEVE (1939). The haunting music for this film was composed by the Hungarian Joseph Kosma (real name Kozma). It is played on the harmonica by Jean Vilar, and sung by Nathalie Nattier as well. In French, its lyrics were written by Prévert, and the song is entitled 'Les Feuilles Mortes'. But in English, with lyrics by Johnny Mercer, this film became the famous song 'Autumn Leaves', a number one hit song in America, which must have been recorded either with or without a voice a thousand times over the years and still features in muzak everywhere, and even gave its name to a subsequent Hollywood film with Joan Crawford in 1956. Kosma also wrote the music for two other Carné films, as well as several other famous French classics. The story of this film is multiple, but all is entwined. It is impossible in a brief space to summarize it. There are many supernatural elements linking all the characters together in a single night. Some meet their doom, others are left to sorrow perpetually. Tragedy reigns in this close-up view of the human condition. The hopes, the joys, the regrets, the melancholy, the delights, the disappointments, they are all there. And there are children and young people joyously romping around amidst it all. There is young love, there is old love, there is impossible love. This film is complex, just like Life. It is as divine as its mysterious vagabond. And we are the privileged witnesses of it all.

This isn't exactly bad. It is not a spoiler to reveal that the ending is not a good one, as it is written in many synopses already and openly criticized for its dark depiction of France collaboration with the enemy, it's "realism", and the prioritization of realism over feel-good.

The Criterion Collection writes, "A dreamily beautiful vision of a wintry, nocturnal Paris shortly after the city's postwar liberation. It's there that a former member of the French underground Resistance has an encounter with destiny as he meets a long-lost comrade, villains of the war, a prophetic tramp, and a beautiful woman who will draw him into an inexorable tragedy."

It sounds dreamily beautiful, sure. And it does have its charm- a hazy, film-noir intrigue, with a masterfully created ambience that easily lures in the audience. All the more disappointing then, to leave the theater having been initially captivated by what turns out to be a lackluster story with an unfulfilling conclusion!

Allegorical, or maybe better labeled as an anti-fairy tale, there are several different side stories. Fortunately, these are done quite well, with the characters- including family members and old friends thought to be dead, a gypsy, a homeless man identifying as "Destiny", a neighbor with more than a dozen children, a subway vendor with a daughter that sells croissants out of a briefcase, the friend's son that befriends our protagonist and even takes him to his secret hideout where he looks over a cat- being sketched out with such aptitude from Carné that audiences are quickly enamored. Unfortunately, the anecdotal nature means they can go as quickly as they come- like several couples and strangers on the streets that make their entrance in a single scene or shot, never to be heard from again.

So this ends in tragedy. Great, realism should be appreciated as much as fairy tales. But does almost every character need to be drunk, mopey, or visually mentally disturbed? It is almost as if the entire film has been immersed in a "woe-is-me" fog. Then it ends with the fog not exactly lifting, but sorta evaporating because it has done its duty.

Alas, kudos are still due for an atmospherically delicious film noir, and who can dislike the soundtrack, including an introduction to the popular song "Autumn Leaves" (French: Les feuilles mortes)?