Stavisky...
IMDb RATING
6.5/10
2.7K
YOUR RATING
A swindler's activity indirectly caused a political crisis in France in the last years before World War II.A swindler's activity indirectly caused a political crisis in France in the last years before World War II.A swindler's activity indirectly caused a political crisis in France in the last years before World War II.
- Awards
- 3 wins & 1 nomination total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Irresistible charm and talent helps Serge Alexandre alias Stavisky, small-time swindler, to make friends with even most influential members of French industrial and political elite during the early 30s.
The film began as a commission by Jean-Paul Belmondo to the screenwriter Jorge Semprún to develop a scenario about Stavisky. Resnais, who had previously worked with Semprún on "La Guerre est finie", expressed his interest in the project (after a gap of six years since his previous film); he recalled seeing as a child the waxwork figure of Stavisky in the Musée Grevin, and immediately saw the potential of Belmondo to portray him as a mysterious, charming and elegant fraudster.
It seems like most historical French films either take place during World War II (focusing on the occupation) or are in some way related to Algeria. This one really has neither, because it is set between the two world wars, with some interesting supporting characters (Leon Trotsky!). I had never heard of Stavisky, but now I'd be curious to know more (despite having no real passion for French history).
The film began as a commission by Jean-Paul Belmondo to the screenwriter Jorge Semprún to develop a scenario about Stavisky. Resnais, who had previously worked with Semprún on "La Guerre est finie", expressed his interest in the project (after a gap of six years since his previous film); he recalled seeing as a child the waxwork figure of Stavisky in the Musée Grevin, and immediately saw the potential of Belmondo to portray him as a mysterious, charming and elegant fraudster.
It seems like most historical French films either take place during World War II (focusing on the occupation) or are in some way related to Algeria. This one really has neither, because it is set between the two world wars, with some interesting supporting characters (Leon Trotsky!). I had never heard of Stavisky, but now I'd be curious to know more (despite having no real passion for French history).
Unusually for Alain Resnais he has opted for the superficial here and by his own admission has gone for 'theatricality'. It cannot fail to look good with Sacha Vierny behind the camera and Jacques Saulnier as designer but beneath the glitz, the glamour and Stephen Sondheim's trite score, we are left with a vapid and empty exercise. Should 'style over substance' appeal then this is definitely your tasse de thé.
The director was reluctant to entitle this piece 'The Stavisky Affair' as this would presumably have obliged him to show the far-reaching consequences, both political and economic, that resulted from Stavisky's massive stock swindle. He has however chosen to insert a bizarre sub-plot involving the exiled Leon Trotsky which contributes nothing whatsoever dramatically and merely serves to advertise Monsieur Resnais' leftist credentials.
Stavisky himself was a sociopathic, narcissistic con-man, the type that proliferates in the murky world of Finance, but is here played by Jean-Paul Belmondo, always mindful of his image, as a gentleman thief. He is very, very good in the role but Jorge Semprún's script renders him little more than a cipher. The same might apply to the other insubstantial and shadowy characters, played by Francois Périer, Michel Lonsdale, a beautifully costumed Anny Duperey and a singularly creepy Claude Rich.
The most fully drawn character is Baron Jean Raoul, not least because he is portrayed by the splendid Charles Boyer who simply saunters away with the film. This represesents a dawn in the careers of Gérard Depardieu and Nils Arestrup but alas a sunset in that of Monsieur Boyer. The passing of this immaculate, consummate artiste marked the end of an era.
The director was reluctant to entitle this piece 'The Stavisky Affair' as this would presumably have obliged him to show the far-reaching consequences, both political and economic, that resulted from Stavisky's massive stock swindle. He has however chosen to insert a bizarre sub-plot involving the exiled Leon Trotsky which contributes nothing whatsoever dramatically and merely serves to advertise Monsieur Resnais' leftist credentials.
Stavisky himself was a sociopathic, narcissistic con-man, the type that proliferates in the murky world of Finance, but is here played by Jean-Paul Belmondo, always mindful of his image, as a gentleman thief. He is very, very good in the role but Jorge Semprún's script renders him little more than a cipher. The same might apply to the other insubstantial and shadowy characters, played by Francois Périer, Michel Lonsdale, a beautifully costumed Anny Duperey and a singularly creepy Claude Rich.
The most fully drawn character is Baron Jean Raoul, not least because he is portrayed by the splendid Charles Boyer who simply saunters away with the film. This represesents a dawn in the careers of Gérard Depardieu and Nils Arestrup but alas a sunset in that of Monsieur Boyer. The passing of this immaculate, consummate artiste marked the end of an era.
Belmondo plays a swindler in early thirties France... His greatest creation is a new identity for himself. Completely amoral/immoral, he plays all ends against the middle.... in fact he is a Jew in France in order to swindle... and his existence is contrasted with (the Jewish) Trotsky who comes to France for political asylum... and a young Jewish actress in France to escape the Nazis.
In the end, everyone is betrayed, but the complicated story makes it extremely difficult to follow.
While it was going on, however, it was beautiful to watch and listen to.
In the end, everyone is betrayed, but the complicated story makes it extremely difficult to follow.
While it was going on, however, it was beautiful to watch and listen to.
"Whew..." If you liked "Enchanted April" or "Harold and Maude" "To Kill a Mocking Bird"...."Stavisky" rates amount them, as an old time Impressionistic work of film Art.
Stephen Sondheim, liked the movie, enough, to write the music for the picture. Rarely, does Sondheim write for film. "Reds" and one other perhaps.
The soundtrack is available with the Lincoln Center's concert performance of "Follies". I am so grateful they have kept this music alive for us.
Takes place in the 20's, mysterious gangsters, French, Monte Carlo, and a charming love story. Casting is perfect. Cinephotography is hazy like an impressionistic painting, texture, faded color, but warm in tone. The Art Direction is breathtaking, with vintage clothes, automobiles, airplanes, white roses, fragrances, smooth satin movements,with that the "haunting music" which enriches each shot. BRAVO
Stephen Sondheim, liked the movie, enough, to write the music for the picture. Rarely, does Sondheim write for film. "Reds" and one other perhaps.
The soundtrack is available with the Lincoln Center's concert performance of "Follies". I am so grateful they have kept this music alive for us.
Takes place in the 20's, mysterious gangsters, French, Monte Carlo, and a charming love story. Casting is perfect. Cinephotography is hazy like an impressionistic painting, texture, faded color, but warm in tone. The Art Direction is breathtaking, with vintage clothes, automobiles, airplanes, white roses, fragrances, smooth satin movements,with that the "haunting music" which enriches each shot. BRAVO
For the first hour or more you keep stumbling - the movie s surface looks like a period romp, helped by Sondheim s elegantly quizzical score, but the narrative is fragmented and frustratingly hard to follow. But as it takes shape (with Resnais pulling a Vertigo by tipping us off on Stavisky s fall about two thirds of the way in) you realize the subtlety of his design - his earlier formal and temporal experiments are incorporated almost seamlessly here into a lush cinematic package. Resnais spends little time on the usual raw material of the genre: the fragility of Stavisky s position becomes apparent almost immediately, and Resnais shows how the myth of the gentleman thief always had to be a sham - emotionally, sociologically and politically. Power is always contingent on the cooperation of others, and thus always endangered. As endangered, indeed, as our confidence in our sense of time and space - in the closing stretch Resnais moves superbly between events before and after Stavisky s death: the man (a spectre; a figure of several manufactured identities) recedes as the overall design takes precedence. The final image though is purely elegiac and nostalgic; perhaps for the art as well as for the man.
Did you know
- TriviaOn February 7, 1934, the French Ministry of the Interior and the Paris Police Prefecture banned the showing of newsreel footage of the previous day's mêlée by right-wing royalists, war veterans and members of the anti-semitic, nationalist, anti-republican Action Francaise movement, who rioted to bring down the Daladier government over the Stavisky affair. The riots left 17 dead and 116 wounded. One Parisian cinema, Reginald Ford's Cineac Theatre, defied the censorship to show footage of the riots by the reactionary forces, which had been caught on-camera by French and foreign newsreel photographers.
- GoofsTrotsky is shown as being a good-looking man in his twenties. In fact, he was twice that age.
- Quotes
Serge Alexandre Stavisky: Tomorrow morning, I'll hold a press conference. I'm going to blow the whole mess wide open!
- ConnectionsFeatured in Vivement dimanche: Jean-Paul Belmondo 2 (2013)
- How long is Stavisky?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $13,793
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $4,734
- Oct 7, 2018
- Gross worldwide
- $13,793
- Runtime
- 2h(120 min)
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.66 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content