Yet another Renoir "masterpiece" that I'll never get in my wannabe precocious years. Why I think this movie is not anything great: 1) A film has to be engaging. This clearly isn't. 2) A film with as much reputation has to have some good directing qualities. Instead, the directing, like the cinematography, is uninspiring. 3) What's up with the ending? That was almost Terrence Malick territory.
widely considered one of the greatest films of all time, this one falls a bit flat for me. i understand the commentary renoir was attempting, but the cinematography and acting were bland and the editing was distracting. it deserves a decent score for the fact that high society types might find the satire engaging and because the film is so well respected, and it certainly wasnt a bad film by any means, but this is one of the "greats" that fails to move me. the decade has certainly produced better films.
Considéré par plusieurs comme le magnum opus de Jean Renoir, ce film à la fois drôle et tragique adopte un ton cynique et une approche humoristique pince-sans-rire qui ne manquent pas d'amuser le spectateur. Les comédiens sont pour la plupart pittoresques, la palme allant à Renoir lui-même dont le personnage hautement expressif est plus Français que nature. En contre-partie, le talent d'actrice semble faire défaut à l'interprète principale dont chacune des apparitions suscitent l'ennui.
On retrouve chez Jean Renoir la marque indéniable de l'oeil artistique de son père. Visuellement, La Règle du jeu est orchestré avec beaucoup d'ingéniosité et de savoir-faire. Le contraste entre les décors somptueux et les cuisines chaotiques contribue au regard même que porte le réalisateur sur la bourgeoisie à deux visages de son époque. Malgré tout, entre les scènes presque "slapstick" à l'ancienne et celles plus dramatiques se glissent parfois quelques minutes de blabla surabondant qui cassent un peu le rythme de croisière. Mais ne nous le cachons pas, tous les génies sont un peu ennuyeux.
I don't normally watch a movie without it seeming at least somewhat interesting to me, but this movie has been ranked as high as number one by some well respected critics. The expectations surely weren't met in my opinion, but instead were squashed because it became more and more apparent that I just was not the demographic audience for a French satiric movie about high society. Starting out in an airfield, we meet aviator Andre Jurieux as he comes in for a triumphant landing after flying across the Atlantic Ocean. As he gets out of the plane, he is greeted by hordes of reporters and spectators, but instead of a joyous occasion he is saddened to see that Christine, the woman he loves, is not there. Instead, Christine is at home, listening to the event over the radio, as she feels unsure of her past relationship with Andre, considering she's already married. Andre, with the help of his friend Octave, ends up getting invited to a high societal hunting party where he will meet Christine, and try to sort things out. Once at the party, their feelings, alongside the other guests, get entangled as passions are played out and secrets are revealed. The first half or so of this movie has a pretty easy, straight forward plot, but as the party scenes take over, I felt more and more unsure, with it's lack of coherency. What could have been a strong romantic story, seemed to go off on different tangents showing all the other guests doing pointless and silly things, which started to have me wonder what the point of this movie was. There are a few subplots that are going on all at once, such as a story dealing with a poacher and a hunter's wife getting a little too intimate for the hunter's comfort. All in all, this was just a pretty boring movie for my taste, because I just can't relate and really understand what the director is trying to say, except that there is a lot of confusion in French societies. It didn't really start to salvage itself until the end, when a tragic climax shows the repercussions of all the character's behaviors. I suppose there's some decent acting and maybe some clever symbolism with the rabbit hunting scenes (are the rabbits like people?), but I fail to see how the critics praise this so highly.
Yet another of the "Classics" that doesn't move me as much as some cinemaphiles might tell me it should, but at least with this one, I think I know why. This tale of the shenanigans going on amongst a group of French high society in the days before World War II is entertaining, very interesting, and even funny at times, in a soap-opera sort of way, and I enjoyed it on that level. Through research, I learn that the film is taken by some as an allegory for what Renoir found as France's decadance and frivolity in those times, which, of course, has absolutely no meaning to me, seeing the film almost 70 years later. Maybe context is everything.
Jean Renoir's The Rules of the Game (La Règle du jeu) is generally acclaimed as Renoir's greatest film and perhaps the greatest film in the history of French cinema. The film begins with an aviator who has flown from America to Paris by himself (this of course was a great feat at this time) and is a hero. He is in love with a married woman. Basically the entire film is some love stories and all kinds of people in love with people they should be. The film is a satire on upper-class French society. Overall, I loathed every moment of this film. Never once did I find myself even remotely interested in what was going on.
As I am not an expert on French cinema from this era, I have little to say in regards to the actors in this film. They're all fairly dramatic but it's hard to rate how well I thought they did as I do not speak French and had to use subtitles.
Not only did the film bore me, but unlike 8½ which was stylistically impressive, there was little in this film that impressed me in terms of aesthetic value. The film makes use of deep focus which allows everything from the foreground to the background to be in focus. Unless you look for this it's not really all that noticeable although this film is generally listed among the classic examples of films making use of deep focus. This is hardly a pioneering technique as films such as 1922's Nosferatu were shot in this depth of focus. The only sequence that I found all that impressive was a hunting scene where a bunch of rabbits got shot. While this was rather impressive, I quickly grew tired of watching rabbits die.
What is most frustrating about this, and 8½ is that they're two of the most highly-regarded foreign films and I have previously enjoyed several foreign films. These two films are like no film I've ever seen. They don't seem to really go anywhere or have any sort of plot. This film isn't quite as extreme and there is a plot that's not terribly difficult to follow but nothing really happens that seems to be at all relevant for the majority of the film. Maybe it's because I don't understand the French upper-class from the late 1930s so I can't understand the satire, but never once did I get the feeling that I was watching a brilliant film. If I didn't know the title, director, or what critics thought of this film, I would have assumed it was a poorly-received film that is mostly ignored today.
Not only was I not impressed by this film, but even after reading up for a short while on the film, I still cannot comprehend a single redeeming quality this film offers. While 8½ left me quite confused after my first viewing, even a little reading left me a bit of a desire to watch it again to try and understand it better. This film did no such thing. According to Sight and Sound magazine's 2002 poll, this film is ranked as the 3rd (critics) or 9th (directors) greatest film from any country of all-time. While I hate to disagree so strongly with most critics, I can't find anything about this film that is even remotely interesting. I wanted so bad to like this and hate to give a "masterpiece" such a low score, but I am unable to justify anything but a failing grade.
it's really interesting comparing the original 1939 cut and the revised cut put together 20 years later. the last 10 minutes are edited so profoundly differently and the effects are drastically and theme-alteringly apart, but the main disgust and cynicism from the rest of the farce remain in tact in both. deplorable, high-society characters who may or may not possess genuine feelings in a comedy not entirely unlike American farces like Dinner at Eight. even the tragic ending is brushed off as blackly comedic. excellent social commentary and by far one of my favorite French films.
Renoir's Le Regle du Jeu (The Rules Of The Game) is rightly considered a masterpiece. It's an excellent look at relationships, and class divide on the eve of the Second World War. I found it started a little slow but this soon changed. I love the complex relationships and emotions of the characters. Look out for director, Jean Renoir, playing a major role.
Fantastic movie. A must see if you have not done so yet. Picks apart the upper classes and caused a ton of controversy. A must see, I don't know how much more I can stress that.
The original upstairs, downstairs examination. The sheer depth of material that Renoir is able to capture in his long takes is mighty impressive. As is the dramatic but still inherently complex emotionally honest lives of the film's many characters.
This could easily be the greatest film ever made. When one looks at the film it is easy to see why it is such a great masterpiece. However, if you look at the time when the movie came out and the uproar that is caused, anything that stirs up that much trouble is worth paying attention to.
Many hold the opinion that this is one of the best movies of all time. For how it deals with such complex human relationships--extremely well I might add--yet manages to be funny, this opinion is clearly something I would not disagree with. Of course, there are elements of it that are dated, but this makes it all the more endearing to me personally. Overall, this film made me feel the different shades of emotion it aimed for. Just a wonderful film.
It's unfortunate that this movie has the reputation of being one of the very greatest ever made, not because it doesn't deserve it--I think it does--but because an imposing reputation can impede simple enjoyment. If something is declared to be great, people approach it seriously, often grudgingly so.
So instead of going on that Rules of the Game is great, I'll say this: it's a very graceful, very funny movie that weaves some very dark observations on human nature into its bright comedic cloth. Also, where other directors and screenwriters seem to huff and puff to show the depths and ambiguities of a single character, Renoir effortlessly shows the audience many different facets of each member of his core ensemble. Watch it, enjoy it, and remember: class is a rare thing, and the terrible thing about the world is that everyone has their reasons.
The more I think about this film, the more I absolutely love it, which is something to say because the sheer shallowness of many of the characters initially turned me off. What I needed to realize was that Renoir was actually satirizing these flippant two-dimensional aristocrats. When I think about it, its story makes me sad, it's existence makes me happy.
'Rules' has to be a candidate for the greatest film ever made. Renoir makes an epic film out of basically one setting, which testifies to the unreal performances in this film. As the pace quickens, so too does the suspense but a charming comedic relief is never too far off either; it is a perfectly balanced film. When read as a critique of the bourgeois during WWII, however, it is a scathing, vicious look at the ignorance of human-beings as a race.
"I have no choice but to dismiss you. It breaks my heart, but I can't expose my guests to your firearms. It may be wrong of them, but they value their lives. "
The beginning is slow, but once it picks up it really gets going. Great cast--individualized yet commonly thread through a series of events. Also note Renoir himself plays a major character. A dramedy with good use of camera movements, which seamlessly weaves the shots together. And I won't go into the slaughtering of rabbits, because that was just so sad. I'd say apart from that, this one is definitely worth a look.
the french citizen kane in terms of filmmaking. those who doubt this statement, or the enormous stature of renoir's greatest film, should be stripped of the privilege of holding opinions for one year
a clever satire that can easily explain the ins and outs of upper class society but without having the need to detract from the intention of presenting relationships in their entire light, a brilliant renoir feature
MCT:August 24, 2008
MCT:May 18, 2008
MCT:November 10, 2008
MCT:November 5, 2008
MCT:October 6, 2008
MCT:September 5, 2008
MCT:June 19, 2008
MCT:May 8, 2008
