Manon

I can imagine that Clouzot took on the task of filming this classic with a lot of trepidation: it's just not his kind of story. A picaresque novel of 1734, with aristocratic ideals in conflict with a sordid story was not going to be well-handled by a director who pioneered the noir form in France. His forte was telling a gritty story with characters stretched to the breaking point (as Montand and Vanel were in Wages of Fear). It required a great deal of updating and tinkering with the basic story before Clouzot could feel comfortable with it.

Cecile Aubry does not impress me with her acting skills; she mainly pouts and sighs her way through the picture. How much more could Danielle Darrieux or Micheline Presle have brought to the film! Michel Auclair was a superb leading man who made many films, this is one of his best (see him also in Maigret et l'affaire Saint-Fiacre). Here he manages to convey desire, murderous rage and exasperation with Manon's whims. Dora Doll and her big toothy grin, as well as Gabrielle Dorziat as the prim madam of Manon's brothel were good, but Serge Reggiani as Manon's brother stole every scene he was in.

My first contact with MANON was at age 11 when it played many weeks at the small PLAZA in Washington, DC. The ads said, "Cecile Aubry's gift to the world --- Her body!" To which my older brother said, "What body? She doesn't have one!" Hmm! My poor brother; what does he know? Anyway, I didn't see MANON in 1949, but 56 years later, thanks to eBay, I caught up on this classic, and without disappointment. This film has the authentic feel of classics like Italy's "Bicycle Thief" and "Paisan" --- having the ravages of World War II right there and everywhere you look in 1949, neither war-torn Europe nor attitudes needed to be re-created. The story is involving from the first moments and never lets up. Manon and her soul-mate Robert meet when he helps save her from the collaborator-head-shave she's sentenced to endure as punishment for her attentions to German soldiers. They will remain together throughout her numerous and shameless infidelities, each of which serves both of them, and never with any loss of love for Robert. Cecile Aubry's femme-innocent was a rare thing to see in 1949. Truly experienced men know that getting and holding a young woman like Manon is a never-ending challenge that no real man would ever quit. While traditional "built like a brick you-know-what" sexpots wait in vain for the phone to ring, the femme-innocents are fighting men off like flies. This film will show the viewer many of the dark sides of the pre- and post- liberation era which history might like to have buried. I'll skip over most of the compelling story and just say that the final scenes, when the couple arrive in Palestine along with the Jewish refugees --- these are scenes that define classic movies. Amen!

With his short CV, Henri-George Clouzot is known only for his international hits, WAGES OF FEAR and DIABOLIQUE, yet every newfound title turns out to be a near masterpiece. This updated take on the infamous Prevost tale (operatic versions include Auber, Massenet & Puccini) is a notch below breathtaking 'finds' like QUAI DES ORFEVRES, LE CORBEAU and his striking film of the Verdi REQUIEM. But on its own terms it's ingenious & effective, perfectly fitting the story into the morally ambiguous climate of post WWII France.

As the heedless young beauty who loves the rich life when she should love her besotted spouse (and vice versa), Cecile Aubry makes an appalling & devastating French sex-kitten, admittedly, an acquired taste. Michel Auclair, in Gerard Philipe mode, is very fine as her tormented husband and Serge Reggiani as Manon's amoral brother is beyond praise. And who but Clouzot would have the chutzpah to merge Manon's exile to a group of Jewish refugees trying to smuggle themselves into Israel.

NOTE: This title is currently unavailable in ANY video format. Is there no justice?!

This is a directional shift for Clouzot. His first three directed films were mystery/suspense films, but here he chose to make an updated version of the novel Manon Lescaut by Antoine François Prévost, updating the setting from the 18th century to the mid-20th and that later portions from Louisiana to Israel. It's more of a literary drama, one that includes scenes for Clouzot to insert his strong command of suspense, but it stands out from the overall perception of his work in retrospect and what he had created so far. It works. It's solidly good, proving that Clouzot was more than a magician of suspense.

A ship carrying Jewish refugees clandestinely to Israel discovers that it has two stowaways on board: Robert Degriuex (Michel Auclair) and Manon (Cecile Aubry). They are on the run because Robert is accused of murder, and the captain (Henri Vilbert) hears their story. It begins at the tail end of WWII when Robert was helping clear a French town of German soldiers when he found Manon about to have her head shaved by the locals for being a collaborator. She insists that it's not true. The two immediately fall in love and run off to Paris together. They get set up with Manon's brother, Leon (Serge Reggiani), who works for a local pimp and gangster. With dreams of making a happy, middle class life, Robert lives it big on his father's money for a time before finally looking for work when he gets cut off. It's here where the divide between Robert's and Manon's visions of life become evident.

Manon wants to live well, no matter the cost. So, she is perfectly willing to prostitute herself out for the cash. That starts with the gangster, which then becomes her working in a high-class brothel in Marseille as Robert makes pennies (or, sous, I guess). He really doesn't like this, and they keep erupting into huge fights about it, coming back together in fits of passion because they love each other.

Now, this feels extremely French, and I buy it. He loves her. She loves him. She wants a better life, and she wants it with him. However, she'll do anything to get it, even if it means hurting him. He'll do anything to keep her, including working himself to the bone to get it. It's a conflict of character, rooted in storytelling, that gives the film its grounding to tell its story. Clouzot's second greatest strength across his first three films (the first being the suspense) was his approach to character, prioritizing character over things like plot to provide the kind of foundation on which to place the suspense. It's what makes his films work. Here, it's almost all character, with the murder that Robert ends up running from being the only real source of concentrated tension and suspense in the whole film.

The couple end up on the Israeli shore with the refugees, and I really wondered what the film was doing. There was almost half an hour left in the film, and it felt like the happy ending was happening. And then, the moralist aspect of the whole thing became increasingly apparent. These two people are not good people. Them finding paradise, like they do for a moment at an oasis in the desert, is not where they should end up, and a roving pack of Bedouins provides that kind of closure.

It's melodrama through and through with solid performances that always edge perhaps a little too closely to over-the-top but never fully get there. Auclair and Aubry are the focus, from beginning to end, and they get their big moments together, playing off each other as they go from sullen to angry and back, alternatively, in scene after scene. It's a portrait of a deeply unhealthy relationship, and one that Clouzot makes surprisingly compelling as information gets discovered and revealed, all leading to the first ending we know about (their escape onto the boat) and then a second ending that feels inevitable and, one might say, just.

So, it's something of an aberration in Clouzot's body of work (we all know he'll be back to pure suspense soon enough), but he demonstrates his general cinematic acumen well with this adaptation of classic (if controversial at its publishing) piece of French literature. It's not the top of the stack of his filmography. It's kind of an unusual entry. But it's a solid piece of melodrama.

I have seen this film a long time ago, perhaps in 1958 at Prague Film School (FAMU). It still haunts me, unlike many, many other entirely forgettable "movies", I would love to have a copy. The film has an essence of what my generation lived, what my children have forgotten, and what we are powerless to remind them of.