L'homme de la tour Eiffel

I have seen this piece of rag-tag cinematic pulp over and over again. I often wonder why it was ever made. It is rather boring. Even the fine cast members can't save it. Franchot Tone comes off like a spoiled brat in need of a flogging. Laughton, generally stellar in his roles, is not the least convincing as Maigret. Hate to say it, but PBS would do a far more spectacular job some decades later. Burgess Meredith seems to be doing a precursor to a role he would years later play on a "Twilight Zone" episode, where he finally has time to read all the books in the world, but smashes his glasses. This flick is a cop-magazine version of "The Outlaw". Who knows what, or why , or wherefore ? It's mildly entertaining, but much more a curio than anything else.

Alarmingly shot in a process called Ansco Color (now decayed into a jaundiced sepia), The Man on the Eiffel Tower marks the first of two movies directed by Burgess Meredith. Unlike his co-star Charles Laughton, however, whose sole directorial effort Night of the Hunter showed style and assurance, Meredith lacks the rudimentary skills that would turn an actor into an auteur. Faced with a complex plot drawn from a Georges Simenon story, he failed to construct a coherent narrative skeleton; when different plot elements happen to mesh together they do so abruptly, jarringly. Instead, Meredith relies on a jumble of amateurish but flashy effects that illuminate nothing but themselves. It's a pretentious mess of a movie that should have been fun.

A rich American (Robert Hutton), torn between wife and mistress, hatches a scheme to kill off his wealthy aunt. He engages sociopath Franchot Tone to do the job, who in the process frames itinerant knife-sharpener Meredith for the murder. Hunting down the killer is Laughton as Inspector Maigret, taunted every step of the way by Tone.

The three veterans from ‘30s Hollywood had all seen better days (only Laughton would see them again). Tone looks seriously unwell (perhaps a touch of Ansco) and acts it. With a crop of carroty hair in need of harvesting, Meredith dithers around as if preoccupied with figuring out the next day's shooting schedule. And while Laughton delves deep into his larder of ham, he never fleshes out a memorable character for Maigret.

That leaves, as in Charpentier's opera Louise, the last character: The City of Paris (for so it's listed, ominously, in the credits). Like sightseers on a tour bus, we're trundled from Les Deux Magots to Place Pigalle to the erector-set edifice of the title itself. The movie's many and baffling chases – along the banks of the Seine, across rooftops, through mansions with no shortage of doors – lead nowhere but offer the glossy pleasures of a French travelogue. But the final scenes, filmed high in the dizzying geometry the Eiffel Tower, finally display some bravura. Pity they come too late, and after too much ill-directed footage, to matter.

I found this film a real mixed bag. Firstly there is the jaunting use of colour. It has been well documented that the negative is long lost and only two 35mm film prints of varying quality are known to have survived (the DVD is made from the best elements combined from both these prints). The film print is still quite scratched and dark in places and could probably do with a proper digital restoration but at least it is watchable, if not as easy on the eye as technicolor is.

I'm not going to go into plot details as others have already done that but I did find the film starts off quite well before the plot starts to sag quite badly in the middle and gets overly complicated, although it does pick up again towards the end when Maigret's plan starts to come together leading to the action packed finale. Also, despite receiving a major credit, Wilfrid Hyde White is in the film for one scene only so its more of a cameo than anything else.

I found the dialogue to be hugely artificial at times making it sound like bad acting rather than decent actors trying to say some rather wooden lines. Yet Maigret himself is quite wonderfully acted by Charles Laughton who plays the role just right. Whereas some of the other characters seem very contrived, Maigret has a wonderful sense of humanity and believability as a middle aged, rather rotund detective who is actually smarter than he lets on. In fact Laughton's interpretation is not a million miles away from Michael Gambon's portrayal for television 40 years later. His sense of calm and intelligence, patiently waiting for his arrogant suspect to make a mistake, is reminiscent of Peter Ustinov's unruffled Hercule Poirot.

A final word should go to the production values. Shot on the streets of Paris this film is an interesting view of how post war Paris looked, showing both the beauty of the city and the damage from the war that had finished 4 years earlier. Burgess Meredith was asked to take over directing the film three days into filming and to be fair he does a decent job, keeping the camera moving when it needs to and ensuring the audience know this is not filmed on a backlot in Hollywood. The sound is also beautifully clear too, a hard job when you consider the amount of location work involved.

All in all this film falls short of being a genuine classic due to a muddled and flabby script, bad dialogue (in places) and some overacting by some of the supporting cast. However its still has a lot going for it and is well worth a watch for Laughtons performance alone.

Dedicated film buffs will find only three elements of interest in this

otherwise disappointing production.

1. It was shot in Anscocolor, a process originally developed in Germany

designed to compete with Technicolor which it did with some success into

the 1950's. It's use here is unintentionally amusing because in the VHS

version it has been so badly degraded that rather than full color most

of the scenes appear as sepia-toned with the exception of Burgess

Meredith's hair which is an incongruous flaming red!

Anscocolor was used successfully in a number of films during this same

era such as The Student Prince, Brigadoon, Take the High Ground (with

Richard Widmark) and The Long, Long Trailer starring Lucille Ball and

Desi Arnaz.

2. The atmosphere of post-war Paris is used to good effect and is

historically interesting, but still meager compensation for a dull,

plodding narrative.

3. While Burgess Meredith is listed as the director there were actually

two others. Irving Allen, who later went on to become a noted producer, was replaced

at the insistence of Charles Laughton who then directed the scenes in

which Meredith appeared.

If you are fan of Georges Simenon's detective novels, you will also be

annoyed by Laughton's uninspired portrayal of the iconic Inspector

Maigret.....

The exciting finale is by far the best part of this movie, which is an adaptation of one of Georges Simenon's crime stories featuring Inspector Maigret. Most of the movie is rather uneven, although it does have some interesting moments. Except for Maigret, who is played by Charles Laughton, most of the characters never really come to life, which keeps the story from being as involving as it could have been.

The Parisian cinematography helps sustain it through some of its murkier stretches, and it is likely that it might have been more impressive visually in its original state. Most or all of the prints on home video or television airings now have most of the color washed out of them, giving it a drab appearance that probably does not do justice to the original camera work.

The story has some interesting features in itself, with a murder plot involving several persons in one capacity or other, and Maigret engaged in a battle of wits with the killer, leading up to the finale on the Eiffel Tower. This lengthy sequence features some well-chosen views, and at times they create a dizzying feeling of suspense. Director Burgess Meredith's technique is unexceptional in the rest of the movie, but in this sequence it works quite well, and of course it had to overcome the technical challenges involved without the aid of computer imagery.

Most of the movie is really of interest only for some scenery, the curiosity value, and perhaps for the cast, but the exciting finale makes up for a lot of its weaknesses. If nothing else, the finale is worth watching for its own sake.