L'étranger

The stranger is very famous novel of the French literature writen by Albert Camus who tells the story of the murder of a man and then the arrest and the trial of his murderer.To adapt this novel for the cinema is a great challenge , at first sight the story seems easy to understand, but later we can hardly understand why Arthur Meursault killed the young Arab , why he doesn't try to defend himself. The film directed by Luchino Visconti is really a good adaptation of that novel and Marcello Mastroianni 's performance is excellent.

Very truthful to the novel of Albert Camus, capturing the book's atheistic and existential mood. All the actors (specially Mastroianni) are very close to what the novel suggests. Yet the film is not a major work of Visconti--it merely adapts an important literary work. One of the best visual sequences in the film is of Mr Mersault sitting on a chair viewing his mother's closed coffin at a distance with another lady sitting closer to the coffin with her nose covered. Throughout the film Visconti underscores the heat and the oppressive humid weather that led to the death of the Arab. A second important sequence involves a kind act of an Arab prisoner who offers Mersault a makeshift pillow and a cigarette in a crowded prison cell. The "bad" Arab can be a "good' one!

The book is better than the film despite all the efforts of Visconti and his talented team, which included three other co-scriptwriters.

Reviewing isn't really my thing. However, it seems that some information about this film, information that was only fully told when the film was restored in 2001, isn't easily accessible in English. So, here's the rundown:

1- during the long gestation of the project (from 1962), Visconti was often tempted to underscore the political side of the novel; this was shot down by the Camus family.

2- the first choice to play Meursalt was Alain Delon, but negotiations fell apart. In came Mastroianni, who offered to make the movie for half his usual pay. There was no way producer De Laurentiis would say no.

3- Visconti had envisioned a flashback structure to the film, with different viewpoints. The Camus widow imposed a writer of her choice (Roblès) to ensure literal faithfulness to the novel.

4- at this point Visconti tried to walk out, but he was bound to make this film by contract, and had to despite losing all enthusiasm. He was to remember it as his worst film.

Now for the vote. It is professionally done, and while Marcello gives a completely different take on Meursalt from the book - close your eyes and imagine young Delon instead - he gives it his best. A sufficient effort, if one does not think of what it could have been.

The tragedy of Lo straniero (The Stranger) is accentuated by the terrific performance of Marcello Mastroianni who looks totally in character of Albert Camus's anti-hero in the popular novel on absurdism, nihilism, and apathy as well as by the linear, straightforward storytelling that is true to the novel and by the haunting score that just helps it conclude itself as a social drama that reflects the sometimes unbiased yet righteous-looking wisdom of the society. TN.

(Watched for free on YouTube.)

Inspired by Albert Camus' seminal work of 1942, one is hardly likely to see a more faithful or indeed reverential adaptation than this.

It is easy to get bogged down in discussions as to whether or not Camus' piece is Existentionalist. He himself denied this and it is probably safer to say that if anything, it represents the philosophy of the Absurd.

The novel is written as a first person narrative by the 'Stranger' of the title although I have always felt the alternative title of 'The Outsider' to be far more appropriate. Arthur Meursault by name, he is the sheikh of apathy and his total indifference is evident in both his manner and such utterings as "It doesn't really matter" or "It makes no difference one way or the other." He cannot bring himself to show any grief at his mother's funeral and reacts impassively to his adoring girlfriend's suggestion of marriage. He is even unable to give a reason for his apparently motiveless shooting of an Arab other than "I think it was the sun." He simply does not behave as society dictates he ought and for his inability to play the game he pays the ultimate penalty.........

I cannot agree with the view that Marcello Mastroianni is miscast in the role. He had previously worked with Visconti in the cruelly underrated 'Le Notte Bianchi' of 1957 and during the intervening years he had become the finished article and excelled for Fellini, Antonioni, Bolognini, Germi and de Sica. Very few actors convey blankness or lassitude quite as well as he which makes his final rant against the religious platitudes of the prison chaplain so dramatically effective. By all accounts he lobbied for the role and turns in a splendid performance.

Visconti is the most 'operatic' of directors which is why he seems an odd choice for this austere, almost Bresson-esque material. He has of course the services of a fine cast, notably a touching Anna Karina as Meursault's lover, Georges Geret as a pimp, Bernard Blier as Meursault's feeble defence lawyer, Georges Wilson as an evangelical examining magistrate and Bruno Cremer as the prison chaplain.

The sun-baked imagery and oppressive heat are wonderfully captured by Visconti's chosen cinematographer Giuseppe Rotunno whilst Piero Piccioni, much favoured by Bolognini, contributes one of his most offbeat scores.

This is not really to do with plot but is all about 'mood'. Both novel and film are pervaded by a sense of 'Ennui', that evocative word that covers so many negative emotions.

The ultimate challenge is to make a film about boredom without its being boring. Has Visconti succeeded? On balance, with minor reservations, I think he has.