Not something I'd recommend for entertainment.
I've seen this film about five times over the last twenty-five years. As narrative, this film is quite boring. I can never become involved with or care much for its characters. It is a depressing picture of a twelve-year-old boy who is trapped by parents and teachers, by public school, and by reform school. An American film about this subject in 1959--the year of this film--would either have tried to squeeze a tear from the audience's eye or would have tried to arouse the audience to action, and would have been presented to the audience as a sensational expose of juvenile delinquency. This film just presents its story in a straightforward, objective, slice-of-life manner. I think that's why it's so depressing.
Since I know Truffaut is a fan of Hitchcock, I thought some of the narrative line might have grown out of an episode Hitchcock often related--how his father had him locked up in jail overnight as a youth to teach him a lesson.
I feel this film is worth more as an historical item than as entertainment. For this reason, it should be taught in film courses and will have a certain impact on young, first-time viewers. Historically, it's important (1) as a film that helped form the French New Wave; (2) because Truffaut went on to become an important film director and this film is autobiographical; (3) as the first of the Antoine Doinel series, Doinel being a cinematic semi-autobiographical figure for Truffaut. Actually, I have been bored to varying degrees by all the Doinel films and find Jean-Pierre Leaud, who plays Doniel in "The 400 Blows" as well as the other films in the series, to be a nincompoop.
The technique in this film is very like the Italian neo-realist films, especially a film like "Open City." It's shot in low-contrast black and white, it's shot in actual locations around Paris; it presents a slice of life.
Despite all I've written above, I've seen many Truffaut films that I've liked very much (Shoot the Piano Player, Jules and Jim, The Soft Skin, The Bride Wore Black, Mississippi Mermaid (complete version), The Woman Next Door, among others) but not the Antoine Doniel films.
Since I know Truffaut is a fan of Hitchcock, I thought some of the narrative line might have grown out of an episode Hitchcock often related--how his father had him locked up in jail overnight as a youth to teach him a lesson.
I feel this film is worth more as an historical item than as entertainment. For this reason, it should be taught in film courses and will have a certain impact on young, first-time viewers. Historically, it's important (1) as a film that helped form the French New Wave; (2) because Truffaut went on to become an important film director and this film is autobiographical; (3) as the first of the Antoine Doinel series, Doinel being a cinematic semi-autobiographical figure for Truffaut. Actually, I have been bored to varying degrees by all the Doinel films and find Jean-Pierre Leaud, who plays Doniel in "The 400 Blows" as well as the other films in the series, to be a nincompoop.
The technique in this film is very like the Italian neo-realist films, especially a film like "Open City." It's shot in low-contrast black and white, it's shot in actual locations around Paris; it presents a slice of life.
Despite all I've written above, I've seen many Truffaut films that I've liked very much (Shoot the Piano Player, Jules and Jim, The Soft Skin, The Bride Wore Black, Mississippi Mermaid (complete version), The Woman Next Door, among others) but not the Antoine Doniel films.
- fordraff
- Dec 22, 2000