criterionforum.org

Nana looks superb. =D> Not a lot of scratches, clear image, and white subtitles. I'm really falling for the acting.

I've watched the first 6 films (only "The Elusive Corporal" left"), and this really is a great deal. I LOVED "La Marseillaise", which ranks with Renoir's best. "Nana" and "The Little Match Girl" are great as well, and only "The Doctor's Horrible Experiment" was a letdown...there really isn't much suspense, the revelation near the end is no surprise at all (since it's essentially the Jekyll and Hyde story), and I have NO IDEA why the Renoir framing device was used. The character of Opale is fantastic to watch, and the transfer of the film is great, however.

The quality varies from film to film, with "The Little Match Girl" looking the worst (but still presentable). It's been great to go through these, and I'm looking forward to the final film in the set.

jorencain wrote:only "The Doctor's Horrible Experiment" was a letdown...there really isn't much suspense, the revelation near the end is no surprise at all (since it's essentially the Jekyll and Hyde story), and I have NO IDEA why the Renoir framing device was used. The character of Opale is fantastic to watch, and the transfer of the film is great, however.

With all due respect, I disagree with your assessment of LE TESTAMENT DU DOCTEUR CORDELIER (1959) as I found it to be an awesome rendition of the "Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde" story with Renoir's "flat" handling superbly abetting a marvelous tour-de-force turn from Jean Louis Barrault and an excellent Joseph Kosma score; all in all, the second best cinematic adaptation - after the 1931 Rouben Mamoulian/Fredric March version, of course, and just ahead of Walerian Borowczyk's delirious DR. JEKYLL ET LES FEMMES (1981).

By the way, did anyone watch the supplements on the third disc and, if so, how long is the documentary which also features Martin Scorsese? I've only watched CORDELIER so far but I have received so many goodies of late - W.C. Fields Vol. 2, the Mario Bava Collection, the Literary Classics Collection, LES MISERABLES, etc. - that I've decided to alternate the movies as much as possible.

mario gauci wrote: the second best cinematic adaptation - after the 1931 Rouben Mamoulian/Fredric March version, of course, and just ahead of Walerian Borowczyk's delirious DR. JEKYLL ET LES FEMMES (1981).

Interesting, is there a DVD release of this?

edit: Just watched LE TESTAMENT DU DOCTEUR CORDELIER and agree it's a fantastic take on the story of which I've been tracking down different versions since seeing the Mamoulian film. I enjoyed Renoir's different handling of the moral dilemma-- instead of tossing the experiment off to science and a great discovery to mankind (like the previous films), the doctor simply wants to purge himself of his own cruelty/sexual deviance and put it into another personality that doesn't know guilt, and that he feels not responsible for. It is rather anti-dramatic, especially the ending, but the handling of the material and the performances are outstanding.

Greathinker wrote:

mario gauci wrote: the second best cinematic adaptation - after the 1931 Rouben Mamoulian/Fredric March version, of course, and just ahead of Walerian Borowczyk's delirious DR. JEKYLL ET LES FEMMES (1981).

Interesting, is there a DVD release of this?

No…I actually got hold of this film four years ago through a Euro-Cult authority from London. It was a copy of the Belgian VHS (although I subsequently got it transferred onto a DVD-R) which only had the English-dubbed version of the film – which is just as well since the story is naturally set in Victorian England. As a bonus, you get to hear Patrick Magee's distinctive voice; his unhinged performance here is something to behold! Anyway, here's my full take on it in case anyone's
interested.

mario gauci wrote:By the way, did anyone watch the supplements on the third disc and, if so, how long is the documentary which also features Martin Scorsese?

There is a 10 minute (or so) introduction, and then 3-5 minutes are devoted to each film.

Greathinker wrote:Just watched LE TESTAMENT DU DOCTEUR CORDELIER and agree it's a fantastic take on the story of which I've been tracking down different versions since seeing the Mamoulian film. I enjoyed Renoir's different handling of the moral dilemma-- instead of tossing the experiment off to science and a great discovery to mankind (like the previous films), the doctor simply wants to purge himself of his own cruelty/sexual deviance and put it into another personality that doesn't know guilt, and that he feels not responsible for. It is rather anti-dramatic, especially the ending, but the handling of the material and the performances are outstanding.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us on CORDELIER and, to reciprocate, here are mine in a more thorough form.

I have received my set now, and have started with the three short silents yesterday (having seen "Nana" before). I was really blown away by "The little match girl", a totally concentrated and lyrical film. The sequence when the girl 'escapes' into the fantasy world just before her death struck me particularly, and curiously, I was very slightly reminded of Bernard's "Chess player" here because of the automatons coming to life, but of course the effect is quite different. Truly beautiful, and almost worth the whole price of the set alone. "Sur un air de Charleston" I also liked very much, a hilarious little take on western preconceptions of so-called 'savage' people. It also shows the ability of Renoir to do a 'fantasy' film, a good reminder that a lot of his work is less 'realist' than one might think. I was irritated that there wasn't any music on it, but I put a cd with Satie's "Sports and Divertissements" on instead, and it worked surprisingly well...

I don't quite share the praise that Scorsese gives "La fille de l'eau", though. It's quite acceptable as a debut film, of course, but I think it seriously lacks that focus and intensity that make the two other films so memorable. Too many things and styles at once, an unnecessarily complicated plot, too. That dream sequence is great, but the rest is pretty average fodder, not just if you compare it to later Renoir work. Also, I'm not so sure of Catherine Hessling as an actress. I like her overtheatrical performance in "Nana", where it fits, but otherwise I think she isn't overly convincing (in "The little match girl" she has got little to do, as it's such an introvert film, and there I also find her quite good). I'm glad to have "La fille de l'eau", though, despite the PAL/NTSC-conversion being quite a mess (I really wonder why only this film suffers from these problems, the rest looks glorious). Definitely a must-have set for Renoir fans and silent film lovers.

DVD Talk review. I can't wait for my copy to arrive - I keep excitedly watching the first part of the Omnibus documentary from The Rules Of The Game disc!

colinr0380 wrote:DVD Talk review. I can't wait for my copy to arrive - I keep excitedly watching the first part of the Omnibus documentary from The Rules Of The Game disc!

Good review, but far too dismissive of most of the films IMHO. I find it curious that he picks "Le caporal épinglé" as the best of the films presented here. I haven't seen "La Marseillaise" yet, but with a view to the other films I would say that "Caporal" is the only one that let me down a bit (while I hugely enjoyed the others, with a slight minus for "Fille d'eau"). "Caporal" for me isn't much more than just a replaying of themes like the prison camp escape or the pastoral that Renoir had done in a much more exciting way in the 30s. As Scorsese says, an 'old man's film' (and he doesn't mean that pejoratively in any way). It has its funny moments, but still I find it lacks Renoir's usual visual inventiveness for the most part. Only the last 20 min. I thought it was fully convincing. Would be interested to hear what the others think of that film!
Hope that doesn't sound too harsh, it was just sparked by the review and how it rated "Caporal" compared to the other films.

davidhare wrote: Virtually all his French post war movies are meditations or reimaginings of earlier material to some degree or another and I definitely came to the conclusion some time ago his greatest and most creatively inspired period was the 30s.

I agree, but still there are differences in the degree of the reimagining. The three 'Stage&Spectacle films" all hark back as far as "Nana", but the eye-popping use of colour give them an interest of their own, adding something that wasn't there in the 30s films, although they don't reach their quality all things considered. That's the difference to "Caporal", which adds almost nothing to 'Grand Illusion'.

I liked "Cordelier" a lot, too. The spontaneity and its improvisational quality you mention almost makes the film a nouvelle vague predecessor. Certainly the strongest of his post-"River" work, though I can't help but love "Carosse d'Or".

davidhare wrote:Nana is absolutely terrific and isnt the restoration a knockout!

It's completely glorious in any conceivable aspect! And that even includes Hessling! I really wonder why the film was such a commercial failure when it was first released. Did the French consider it too daring? There are aspects of the femme fatale and masochism in "Nana" which the French should have known from their literature, of course, but which to my knowledge were seldom portrayed in French films of the time (whereas the Germans went for 'sex' in their silents more whole-heartedly...)

Does anyone know if there are plans to release a second set with the other Studio Canal titles?