Man, I'm still stunned that that bad boy as well as DAY IN THE COUNTRY don't seem to have a release scheduled in r1 yet... CHEINNE has been on my mind quite a bit lately because of the attention to SCARLET STREET (owing to Kino's DVD release... looking at Tooze's screen caps, tho annoyed with the non-progessive issues , I doubt we'll see a better looking edition, and the Kalat commentary-- always a deal-closer for me... will always be grateful for him as well for bringing out Epstein's La CHUTE DE LA MAISON USHER and CHRIST IN CONCRETE).

I haven't played Scarlet Street through yet (have taken possesion of 25 plus discs this week - absurd.) And I'm settling into a Kongfest tonight with dogs being urged to bark at every appearance of the mighty ape.

I just hope Kalat doesn't go off into psychological tangents like the bewildering labelling of Cout Told as "probably homosexual" in Dr Mabuse Der Spieler. This ascertainment presumably because of Told's coiffure. (I thought his character as something of an aristocratic neurasthenic. The gay reading completely baffles me, that's me.)

I'm afraid I find Kalat more than a little irritating, but will give the Scarlet Street track a shot.

I enjoy the man's obsession-- it's always genuine. That's what I like about him. Hyperliterary Criterion style commentaries put me to sleep half the time. I hate hearing commentaries delivered by souls (or in styles) who would be absolutely despised by the filmmaker. Kalat is a bit of a sick fuck, a film FREAK rather than scholar. Cowie style scholars who are talking with an eye towards Sophisticated Regard are a barbiturate brain drench for me... I want to hear a guy who's speaking out of a lifetime obsession with the film at hand and is a bit warped for it. Kalat, who I agree often doesn't speak from the collective unconscious, isn't much more guilty than Quandt in the here-highly-revered PICKPOCKET essay, which required a thousand self-delivered hammer-hits in the head to keep my eyes open for.

Just like the two numbnuts beating each other's brains in on the BOUDU disc with opposing standpoints, commentary is always a half-thankless business. One of the reasons, BOUDU being such an individual & maniacal film, that an "authoritative" commentary was likely avoided. How did you feel about the gay theory in PICKPOCKET, Monsieur Hare?

Numbnuts!!

Crikey!!!

Kalat is OK in his own space, but his "enlivenment" of the Mabuse movies totally gives me the shits. He pants on every scene, as though this was the first time it had been played at correct frame speed. (I once sat through Mabuse der Spieler - in fact the first viewing whenI was 20) and because the motherfuckers played it at 16 fps,it took over three hours to get there. We were all dead and stoned by the end(and it was accompanied by that appalling English composed score they laid on it at the time - unspeakable! Think the very worst of Louis Levy for British Hitchcock done at half speed , and to be fair to louis his scores were always great! Especially the Drummer man from Young and Innocent.... but that''s another story.....)
(Mind I'm talking circa 1969.)
Kalat may be pref. to this, and I appreciate his attempts to transform 20's post Weimar Germany into a hot topic but, petit, he needs to get seriously barebacked. (Or something.)

Yes I'm sure I'll be noodled for calling Rohmer & douchey I mean uh Douchet numbnuts.

But still... the Quandt question/comparison?

Mais quelle Quandts - il y a plusieurs!

now post Kong and the dogs refused to bark - they all dive for cover each time Fay starts screaming. Rats to the dogs!

Interesting op from Jonathan Rosenbaum on inclusion of excerpt not full episode of the 'Cineastes de Notre Temps' ep. JEAN RENOIR LE PATRON: THE DIRECTION OF ACTORS featuring Michel Simon and JR, directed by Jacques Rivette. Ep. was not transmitted originally on French TV, and transcript is not included (as are the other 2 parts of JR LE PATRON) in RENOIR ON RENOIR as much is in the gestures and inflection, rather than the words... Rosenbaum rates the doc as a masterpiece... A missed opportunity for the CC - could they have fitted it complete plus feature and other xtras on a single disc, I wonder?


Full article here


And if anyone from the CC is reading, how about LA CHIENNE and the full docu?

I didn't realize this was so new (on Criterion that is). I just rented it having never seen the film before, unless you count "Down and Out In Beverly Hills" which I have vague memories of.

Surprisingly good, the compositions (particularly deep focus compositions, even when the lens couldn't quite capture every plane in focus) and even the soundtrack (rich, "natural" soundtracks in the outside scenes, like Boudu's rescue) are more impressive considering the film's origins - early 30's Paris.

I wished there was a commentary, but the extras more than make up for it. I wish Simon and Renoir had spent more time talking about the film, but it was really nice to see them looking back and laughing in their old age. The tour of Paris was surprisingly informative, at least for someone who's dying to see Paris but has yet to go. The way history, social class, and landmarks are tied in, and even the city's layout and how that was seen or 'cheated' in the film...all of it and the presentation was excellent.

Well, thanks, but have a peek at the post above yours.

I don't recall the transfer of the documentary clips looking particularly good. At 84 minutes, the movie itself probably took up the equivalent of one whole layer, so in the interest of picture quality, I think a second disc would've been needed.

Boudu is one of the best single disc Criterion i own. The transfer is better than MOC's, but the real treat of this edition are the EXTRAS. Kudos to the archivists for bringing such important footage! I'd rather watch the Rohmer-Douchet conversation for the 20th time than go to my next film class. Such articulate thoughts, especially those delivered by Douchet.

Don't you think this edition was somehow overlooked in 2005?

I think you mean better than the R2 Optimum release. The Criterion was certainly not overlooked by me...one of my favourites that year and one of the best covers ever.

I wasn't actually that intrigued by this one when it was first announced and originally skipped it but I picked it up on an impulse when I found it used sometime last year and was quite delighted by the film. Also, it was definitely one of their more solid "lower-tiered" one in terms of extras and such. It was one of the rare releases where I watched the film and then immediately went through all the supplements in one sitting. I usually do it over a course of time. While the conversation was quite good, I have to also admit I got bigger kick out of the interactive map, which was a neat feature (I'm a sucker for that kind of stuff, though, maps and timelines.)

Saw it just recently and felt the same way. Not exactely Le Bête Humaine, but quite entertaining, well worth the admission price, and the interactive map is definitely a great extra.

I never would have traded this film away if it weren't for the fact that I got Notorious for it. From some of the comments in this thread, I think I'll need to see La bete Humaine sometime soon as well.

Interesting. Boudu is far and away my favorite Renoir (and one of my favorite films, period), but I thought La Bête humaine risibly hokey. It's like Renoir's version of The Hands of Orlac or something. Boudu is magisterial in its shambolic, rough-hewn manner, and its theme of anarchic non-conformity and total repudiation of bourgeois values is, for me, much more powerful than some crazy story about a guy who has murderous epileptic fits (not to mention more universal and true than the Front Populaire claptrap of Monsieur Lange and Les Bas-fonds).

I'm with Matt. I also find that Boudu has a kind of documentary feel at times (mostly probably because of the on location shooting), which is pretty exciting, given, in part, that we're talking about early 30's Paris.

I feel like La Bete Humaine needs to be three times longer to really get where I feel like it is going. It feels to me like a very truncated version of itself.

In contrast, Boudu gets where it is going in about 3 minutes and then just goes enjoyably bonkers thereafter...

My first impression seeing Boudu was it was a romp, Simon was amazing, and the documentary feel, as it's been called, or maybe the use of real city shots by Renoir was impressive. But once I looked at the “moralâ€

Ahh.. thank heavens; I thought I was the only one who thought that LANGE was fairy unspectacular and, to be honest, trite and almost rushed. The subject matter and the performers (aside from the great Mazamette) just drag the yawns right out of me and I rarely can finish it. Always nice to see Kirsanoffs wife (though better in Gremillion's La PETITE LISE & Kirsanoff himself) however.

A do like BETE HUMAINE though. Despite it's shiny veneer and polish theres a hell of a lot of skill and beauty there in the filmmaking, and it's a deceptively flat surface. I find a hell of a lot of sincere feeling and subplot growling there just under the surface.. it just requires a little more deliberate empathy with these characters. The film is wrapped up so perfectly and the surface is so tight it's hard to get down into any sense of intended sympathy with any of the characters-- because they're all fucked and shitty in one way or another. And then you look at all of them in the long, sad, view and it hits you like mood on a dark cloudy summer day. And you sympathize with all of them, and the film just opens way way up.

The key to Bete Humaine ( if you need one) is Fernand Ledoux. His last frantic scurrying under the floor to get the dough together before he find's his beautful wife's corpse, and his last great scene, weeping.

Then Gabin killing himself. And the image of Simon's violated body on the bed. How can anyone NOT find this staggering movie - umm - moving?

TO make it more incredible Renoir's quote from Zola at the top with all that nonsense about "the tainted sick blood of the family" etc is merely a deferall from the real subject - the entropy of pre-war France. There's simply no greater movie about this directly as a subject and Renoir got it in one, under the noses of those turds the Hakim Bros, who ended up with a hit on their hands. Of course the next but one picture - la Regle didn't suit anyone cause Renoir remade the end game of a corrupt morbund France as a Mozartian comedy drama too much for all but very few to deal with.

Prior to this he does la Chienne (another "classic") with Simon in a free style performance mode, and then the mircaulously anarchic La Nuit du Carrefour. This, plus Gremillon first two talkies put the avant garde to bed for a decade. Then the Spaakian collabs - Bas Fonds and le Crime de M Lange (on of my own three fave Renoirs) which brings back the anarchic liberty of Nuit, while filling out the forms of a Spaakian Communard/ pre Poetic Realist drama. Plus excursions on the side to Toni - Renoir's 30s picture of immigrant workers/refugees that resonates more loudly today than a plane crash. And all the rest - honestly his entire 30s work is like a Shakespearian rock in all of world cinema. Nobody - NOBODY- ever made a body of work like this in the movies.

Just saw this recently, and I love the interactive map. That is a fantastic extra, much more informative and efficient than a commentary track, in my opinion.

Also, there's a French movie from 2003 called Apres Vous that's basically a remake of Boudu--I haven't seen the film, but I came across it the other day while browsing in a dvd store.

I hate to confess that I only now managed to see the "Boudu" disc, but would subscribe to everything hitherto said in praise of this film. Here again Renoir's ability not to take sides, not to expose Lestingois as completely ridiculous and simply embracing Boudu's anarchic stance instead, is outstanding. As the highly interesting Rohmer conversation points out, Boudu is both attractive AND dangerous, and although one tends to side with him at the end, I for once asked myself whether I would have put up with that character longer than, say, two hours or so. And there is so much going on in the 'deeper structures' of the film, in the satirizing of 'culture', most of which would have been lost on me without the excellent extras (that map!) CC provides.

Serious irritation was provided by the transfer itself, though: there are several instances where I find that the framing is way too tight, and heads are chopped off more than once in a rather annoying way. It seems unlikely that Renoir made it intentionally so, given his general excellency in framing. Not wanting to appear as nitpicking or subverting the general excellency of this disc, and I may be somewhat on the alert given our recent discussion of "Vampyr", but: could this be again a 1.19 film transferred incorrectly as 1.33? Given it was made in 1931, 1.19 seems only too possible. I saw a rounded upper edge of the frame at the very beginning (which would indicate everything is in order), but this was only during the titles.
And it wouldn't be the first Criterion release where something like this happened. There are similar problems with one of the Rene Clair films (can't remember which one at the moment).

Could a new edition of Boudu be forthcoming?

The Criterion Collection wrote:

The lineup for the seventh annual Cannes Classics, a sidebar of the Cannes Film Festival that highlights new restorations of classics and films previously thought lost, has been announced on the festival’s website. The exciting program will present eighteen titles, which include features by such filmmakers as Luis Buñuel (Tristana), Réné Clément (La bataille du rail), Alfred Hitchcock (Psycho), and John Huston (The African Queen) as well as a short by Roberto Rossellini (Il ruscello di Ripasottile). Three films that are part of the Criterion Collection will also be screening: Jean Renoir’s Boudu Saved from Drowning, in a never-before-seen version that includes scenes deleted from the original release; Volker Schlöndorff’s The Tin Drum, in a new director’s cut; and Luchino Visconti’s The Leopard, in a new restoration done in part by Martin Scorsese’s Film Foundation, Pathé, and the Cineteca di Bologna.

Does anybody even know what that means? Have we hitherto been subject to an incomplete-vs-the-original-release-version of BOUDU, or are they simply sticking stuff into the already "authoritative" (nee' Original Release) version?

Paging our All Things Renoir Man, Herr Hare!

well, I just bought Boudu (disc hasn't even arrived yet) so I'll be gutted if a new version appears this year Bad timing I guess but I needed it for a Renoir class at university.