Guardato a vista

Those who watch French films either to improve their knowledge of French cinema or to learn subtle nuances of French language cannot remain indifferent to the charms of the great French actor Lino Ventura. There is some kind of "JE NE SAIS QUOI" type of quality in him which makes him stand apart from the usual group of French actors. Garde à Vue sees him paired against Michel Serrault who is also considered as one of France's important actors.This entire film is their indispensable vehicle to deliberate about justice,law and unusual methods of police procedures.A deft cat and mouse game with limited movement could be considered as this film's apt description.In the midst of these two towering figures,there are also some minor figures who steal the show on their own.Director Claude Miller achieves this effect by casting Guy Marchand as a police inspector and Romy Schneider as the main suspect's wife.The dialogs penned by Michel Audiard have a certain kind of literary aura to them.This is one reason why viewers would be more interested in pricking up their ears in order not to miss any line.Film critic Lalit Rao saw this film during Franco-German mystery and thriller film festival organized by Alliance Française de Bangalore and Goethe Institut in 1992.

Nothing revolutionary here; just impeccably elegant, restrained cinema.

GARDE A VUE is confined almost exclusively to a drab police station, and mostly to one interrogation room, but director Claude Miller (who made the wonderful film THIS SWEET SICKNESS, among others) intercalates spare glimpses of exterior tableaux as minimalist locale scenography. Miller's restraint, especially early on, is breathtaking, and his exquisite handling of the consequently-pivotal interior mise-en-scene makes for captivating viewing.

Lino Ventura is superb as usual, succeeding to legitimize a character that, on paper, is cliche: the laconic, hard-nosed, world-weary homicide detective. Ventura lives the role, making it completely believable, even though the script allows us little access to his inner workings; the film ends at the very moment it appears he will be forced to confront his failure for the first time.

Michel Serrault is equal to the task as the suspected child-killer who shrewdly spars with the single-minded flic. The exchanges between the two are more-often-than-not pregnant with tension and the aura of a constantly metamorphosing playing field for a battle of wits. Serrault's character is by turns deplorably haughty and cunning, and pitiable; then later....

The "message" of GARDE A VUE, if one were to search for one, is a condemnation of police methodology and the kind of pressures that make a cop over-zealous to, if necessary, close cases at the expense of justice. For most of its length though the film shines as nothing more than an exemplar of how to turn a potentially soporific set-bound scenario into a suspenseful drama of the utmost cinematic economy.

Police, investigations, murder, suspicion: we are all so acquainted with them in movies galore. Most of the films nowadays deal with crime which is believed to involve viewers, to provide them with a thrilling atmosphere. However, most of thrill lovers will rather concentrate on latest movies of that sort forgetting about older ones. Yet, it occurs that these people may easily be misled. A film entirely based on suspicion may be very interesting now despite being more than 20 years old...it is GARDE A VUE, a unique movie by Claude Miller.

Is there much of the action? Not really since the events presented in the movie take place in a considerably short time. But the way they are executed is the movie's great plus. Jerome Charles Martinaud (Michel Serrault) is being investigated by Inspector Gallien (Lino Ventura) and Insector Belmont (Guy Marchand). It's a New Year's Eve, a rainy evening and not very accurate for such a meeting. Yet, after the rape and murder of two children, at the dawn of the old year, the door of suspicion must be open at last. In other words, (more quoted from the movie), it must be revealed who an evil wolf really is. To achieve this, one needs lots of effort and also lots of emotions from both parties...

Some people criticize the script for being too wordy. Yet, I would ask them: what should an investigation be like if not many questions and, practically, much talk. This wordiness touches the very roots of the genre. In no way is this boring but throughout the entire film, it makes you, as a viewer, as an observer, involved. Moreover, the film contains well made flashbacks as the stories are being told. Not too much and not too little of them - just enough to make the whole story clearer and more interesting. The most memorable flashbacks, for me, are when Chantal (Romy Schneider), Martinaud's wife, talks about one lovely Christmas... But these flashbacks also contain the views of the places, including the infamous beach. It all wonderfully helped me keep the right pace. And since I saw GARDE A VUE, I always mention this film as one of the "defenders" of French cinema against accusations of mess and chaos.

But those already mentioned aspects may not necessarily appeal to many viewers since they might not like such movies and still won't find the content and its execution satisfactory. Yet, GARDE A VUE is worth seeing also for such people. Why? For the sake of performances. But here don't expect me to praise foremost Romy Schneider. GARDE A VUE is not Romy Schneider vehicle. She does a terrific job as a mother who is deeply in despair for a lost child. She credibly portrays a person who is calm, concrete, who does not refuse an offered cup of tea but who does not want to play with words. Her part which includes a profound talk of life and duty is brilliant, more credible than the overly melancholic role of Elsa in LA PASSANTE DE SANS SOUCI. It is still acted. However, Romy Schneider does not have much time on screen. Practically, she appears for the first time after 45 minutes from the credits; she, as a wife and a different viewpoint, comes symbolically with the New Year, at midnight. Her role is a purely supporting one. Who really rocks is Lino Ventura. He IS the middle aged Inspector Antoine Gallien who wants to find out the truth, who is aware that his questions are "missiles" towards the other interlocutor but does not hesitate. He is an inspector who, having been married three times, is perfectly acknowledged of women's psyche. He is the one who does not regard his job as a game to play but a real service. Finally, he is a person who does not find it abnormal to sit there on New Year's Eve. Michel Serrault also does a fine job expressing fear, particularly in the final scenes of the movie. But thumbs up for Mr Ventura. Brilliant!

As far as memorable moments are concerned, this is not the sort of film in which this aspect is easily analyzed. The entire film is memorable, has to be seen more than once and has to be felt with its atmosphere and, which I have not mentioned before, gorgeous music. For me, the talk of Chantal and Inspector Gallien is the most brilliant flawless moment. You are there with the two characters, you experience their states of mind if you go deeper into what you see.

GARDE A VUE is a very interesting film, a must see for thrill lovers and connoisseurs of artistic performances. New Year has turned and...is it now easier to open the door? You'll find out when you decide to see the memorably directed movie by Claude Miller. 8/10

Inspector Antoine Gallien (Lino Ventura) is a no non-sense and practical man who only believes in facts and evidence, and is assigned on the New Year 's Eve to question a wealthy tuxedo-wearing attorney named Jerôme Martinaud (Michel Serrault), suspected for the rape and murder of two little girls. There's no real evidence against him except that he was near the locations where the victims were found. So, because he was at the wrong places, at the wrong moments, he naturally falls "under suspicion" (a wink to the US remake's title).

"Garde à Vue" has only four main characters, the two leads plus Gallien's colorful assistant Marcel Belmont (Guy Marchand) and Martinaud's cold and sophisticated wife (Romy Schneider in her next to last role). And through a short running-time of eighty something minutes and a very austere setting such as the commissariat of a French small town, the whole movie consists on a long questioning session where Gallien tries to establish Martinaud's alibi, if he ever has one. Needless to say that both actors are perfect: Ventura plays the determined and competent cop with a bluffing realism, and Serrault's nervousness and confusion, powerful convey the idea of a man who's not acting natural. It takes some super-human acting strength to naturally play a non-natural character. As the session progresses, it becomes obvious that Martinaud can't afford an alibi, yet it's also obvious that Gallien doesn't want to be misguided by this obviousness.

And in fact, even the film seems to be governed by a sort of deliberately misguiding impression, as if it was manipulating us like Martinaud seems to manipulate his audience. Indeed, "Garde à Vue" strikes by an astonishing minimalism: It's a film of a few words, a few scenes, a few actors, but each of these elements is perfect and doesn't ask for more. Directed by Claude Miller and written by one of the greatest French screenwriters, Michel Audiard, "Garde à Vue" is a film that meticulously concentrates all the elements of greatness that make the best cop/thrillers and elevate it to another dimension. More than a cop/thriller, "Garde à Vue" is a remarkable character study where the flaws of its main character are highlighted by a confrontation with a totally opposite personality. We look at Martinaud from Gallien's perspective, then from his wife's, and we try to find out by ourselves not if he's guilty or not guilty but what kind of man, he really is.

Like another minimalist masterpiece, "12 Angry Men", "Garde à Vue" is an intelligent introspection into the way human personalities from different backgrounds can interact in their quest for facts and truths. How intelligence and the conscience of one's own failure and mediocrity can work as a mask to disguise emotions. And the film is full of them, the questioning starts in a very polite way. Progressively, Martinaud expresses his displeasure to be taken in an interrogation room while everyone celebrates the New Year's Eve. But he's incapable of providing an alibi, and therefore slips into the suspect n°1 category. Belmont believes he's guilty and tries to get the confession the easy way, by slapping Martinaud around when Gallien is absent. But it doesn't work, Martinaud oscillates between a state where he asserts his rights and others where he falls in his miserable condition, convinced that he's only accused by people because they're as mediocre as him and can't stand the idea of a mediocre man succeeding.

And 'mediocre' is an epithet that fits Martinaud, thanks to Serrault's magnificent capability to play ambiguous and double-faced characters. He masterfully embodies this category of men, apparently successful and wealthy but living a totally miserable life, they're by essence misleading persons, because their very lives give the wrong impression. The film embarks us in a succession of facts and sordid details about Martinaud's marital life incarnated by a long corridor between him and his wife, it's not infidelity, not impotence, but it's pure nothingness. Martinaud's sexual tendencies, pointing a more and more accusing finger, are the reasons behind the failure of his marriage, but Gallien still can't see where this is leading. He feels he's being manipulated by emotions, not realizing that these emotions can give serious clues about Martinaud's eventual motives. But he's afraid of having wrong impressions and desperately asks for an alibi and a confession. But how can you ask such a clear question to a man so full of contradictions. In a way, Gallien is manipulated by his own fear of being manipulated.

That's the masterstroke of Michel Audiard, the film doesn't let itself embark by obviousness, there are facts, there are motives, there are proof but human relationships predominate above all these considerations. And even a practical man like Gallien can get the wrong impression, even from facts.. The writing and the editing, swinging back and forth between the interrogation, the crime settings and Martinaud's background create the enthralling feeling of a puzzle whose pieces reassemble. But it's the kind of puzzle that you only know the picture after reassembling them, you can't have a clear idea even when you come close to the heart-pounding conclusion. And the acting and directing contribute to a very realistic feel. The interrogation room is not too threatening, there's not a suffocating atmosphere aggravated by a terrorizing inspector. No, Gallien is relatively calm and tolerates Martinaud's outbursts with an impressive patience. Everything is handled as humanly as possible.

The film won four deserved César (French Oscars) for Best Actor (Serrault), Best Supporting Actor (Marchand), Best Editing and Best Writing. I was surprised to see that Lino Ventura wasn't nominated because his performance made of calm and quiet strength was not only spectacular in its nuance but indispensable not to let the film become caricatural. Never mind, every single element works perfectly and it's one of the greatest French thrillers.

Lino Ventura, M. Serrault and Romy Schneider. What else can you say? And Guy Marchand (from the seedy detective series "Nestor Burma"). The script flows like a clockwork orange, of course aided by Serrault, who could make rocks weep, laugh and commit suicide. Lino Ventura is believable, almost likable, as a tough cop who "doesn't really care who gets nailed" but can't forget the young victims, and won't be distracted from a suspect even if he's got style and wit.

Why does the ending disappoint? Probably a tad melodramatic and manipulative, it doesn't harm an already superb film. It only makes it far from perfect. I agree with IMDb's reviewer "Taylor, from Ottawa" that "night scenes in a steady rain" by Bruno Nuytten create the perfect oppressive if somewhat awkward climate, necessary for this theatrical plot to unfold. Enjoy, if possible on a damp night :)!

PS: The remake "Under suspicion"... Hackman is fine, but can't reach Michel's subtlety and yet how disagreeable he can be; he seems born for this "gifted neurotics" roles. Monica Bellucci is nice, but cannot carry the nostalgia Schneider exudes. W. Chisholm's review on Amazon is right she shows Visconti's training. Adaptations should only be made when improving on the original, don't you think :)?