L'idiota

It's a little odd, watching a movie you've been looking forward to in one capacity or another and finding yourself slightly disappointed. It's not that this is bad by any means, but despite a marvelous premise, it's much better in the broad strokes of the plot than in the details that constitute that plot. It lands on the intended emotional beats, but imperfectly in light of how the narrative effectively comes across as seesaws tipping back and forth on a single fulcrum rather than the following of a path - a sense that's particularly odd since there are discernible progressions for characters and the story at large. 'L'idiot' is enjoyable, but less than wholly captivating or essential.

This is quite well made, to be sure. Georges Lampin shows a deft hand in orchestrating shots and scenes as director; I believe the cast give excellent performances, not least Gérard Philipe as the gentle prince and Edwige Feuillère as fiery Nastasia. While the original music of V. De Butzow and Maurice Thiriet mostly sticks to the background, at select moments it rears its head with ponderous dramatic themes that are rich and enticing. Those behind the scenes turned in fine work all around, with super costume design, hair, and makeup, and terrific production design and art direction adjoining lovely filming locations. Though not specifically striking, the cinematography and editing are splendid, and in all other regards the picture is broadly well done.

I'm a little stuck on the writing, however. In the wide strokes there's much to love here in the tale of a kind, innocent, somewhat naive man being considered altogether mad amidst the less virtuous goings-on of the figures and world around him, and the unwitting effect that his goodness will have on others for good and for ill. Indeed, the people around him think too much or too little of how he presents, and make assumptions; drama invariably ensues, swirling foremost around assertive, beleaguered Nastasia. Would that the screenplay were fleshed out more, however, to make the push and pull of others' behavior more meaningful than what feels like a child's game of picking petals off a flower (e.g. "He loves me, he loves me not") and putting into motion whatever dichotomous statement arbitrarily comes up last. The sketch is already there, and it needed only to have been developed into a more complete image. Moreover, for as much as the prince's name comes up as having (unintentionally) caused such havoc, he's not in the feature as much as one might suppose without any foreknowledge, and the connections between him and the characters who have had their outlooks altered come across as a tad flimsy.

I do actually like 'L'idiot,' and I think it's worth watching. Despite strong acting and craftsmanship, however, storytelling that is less than 100% convincing results in division of one's attention. What strengths this film can claim are not so grabbing as to help it to especially stand out, so at length the viewing experience is one that's satisfying and entertaining, but maybe not as much as one might hope from cinema. Do watch this 1946 movie, and perhaps you'll find it a more fulfilling experience than I have. Don't necessarily go out of your way for it, though, and don't expect a revelation.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky possessed an amazing sense of drama, an ability to build his stories to thrilling climaxes and to create unforgettable characters that live and breathe. This makes his novels ideal for the medium of film. In the astonishing absence of a definitive Russian version of 'The Idiot' (I personally find Pyriev's film of 1957 extremely dull) one must look farther afield. Kurosawa's magnificent version came in 1951 preceeded three years earlier by the film under review. Director Georges Lampin and scenarist Charles Spaak have managed to reduce the novel to ninety minutes of screen time. This means that lots of characters have been diminished but we are able to focus on the triangle of the tantalising but unstable Nastasia Filippovna, the brutish, passionate Rogozhin and the saintly, compassionate Prince Myshkin. Their scenes together are electric. Nastasia is one of the author's greatest creations and the divine Edwige Feuilliere gives one of her most astounding performances. Lucien Coedel is mesmerisingly menacing as Rogozhin and Gerard Philippe is totally convincing as a man whose simplicity and goodness are in stark contrast to the cynicism and selfishness around him. Good support from Jean Debucourt, Marguerite Moreno and Natalie Nattier. Superlative score, production design and cinematography with great direction by Lampin whose finest hour this was to be. He returned to Dostoyevsky with a modern dress version of 'Crime et Chatiment' in 1956 and although that film has merit none of his other films alas comes close. Amazing as it may seem Dostoyevsky is not everyones cup of tea but this excellent film serves to remind us of his genius.

I saw this film 1947 . all I remember a few very impressive close- ups. by the time i read the book (twice) the film completely was forgotten. all i have left is the 11x14 german language 4 page film- program.the photography is outstanding. I would like to see this film again,but do not know if a video is available.

Stiffly directed, clumsily edited, weighed down with pointless shots to show off Leon Barsacq's sumptuous sets of 19th century Saint Petersburg, this is still a scorching and hypnotically beautiful romantic melodrama thanks to the sheer magic of its two lead actors. In his first major film role - as the pious Prince Myshkin - Gerard Philippe radiates the most sexualised saintliness you are ever likely to see on screen. As Natasha Filipevna, the doomed courtesan he falls in love with, Edwige Feuillere is at once meltingly sensual and hard-as-nails - a romantic dominatrix in luscious Escoffier gowns, who falls victim to her own finer instincts.

Mind you, I've no idea how this film will play to fans of Dostoevsky. (Personally, I have always loathed his work, finding it an exercise in boring pseudo-spiritual navel-gazing.) Yet for the same crowd of doomed romantics who adored Garbo in Anna Karenina or Omar Sharif and Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago (and may not give a toss for Tolstoy or Pasternak) this is one film to track down at all costs. Admirers of 'deep' Russian fiction will most likely be apoplectic, but don't they all just love to be miserable anyway?

This is still in many ways the finest screen version and effort of squeezing Dostoyevsky's mammoth novel into the frames of a 90 minutes movie, but it is not a failure, on the contrary no one else has been able to make such a beautiful comprimation of the gigantic novel while still maintaining its major content; and it's above all the actors that make this film wholly commendable, especially Gérard Philppe as Mushkin, and there has never been a more convincing Mushkin on the screen. Aglaia and Nastasia Filippovna are also perfect, and the film has been endowed with a wonderful music score, enhancing its beauty and esthetic qualities. It is early in black-and-white but still stylistically perhaps the best effort to put the novel Dostoyevsky himself regarded as his best into a comprehensive screen version.