Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Taraparain Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

gavin6942 In this classic adaptation of Emile Zola's novel, a tortured train engineer (Jean Gabin) falls in love with a troubled married woman (Simone Simon) who has helped her husband commit a murder.Renoir confessed that at the time when he wrote the screenplay, he had not read Zola's novel in over 25 years: "While I was shooting, I kept modifying the scenario, bringing it closer to Zola ... the dialogue which I gave Simone Simon is almost entirely copied from Zola's text. Since I was working at top speed, I'd re-read a few pages of Zola every night, to make sure I wasn't overlooking anything." Now, I never read the novel at all, and I suspect most who have seen the film have not either. Perhaps this could be a strike against it, but it seems to me that the more obscure the novel, the more liberty you can take. Zola may not be "obscure", but certainly not the big name he once was.The fact this is considered a precursor to film noir make it all the more interesting. Indeed, it has all the grit of a noir, and the murder aspects make it appropriate to be put in the genre. I suppose it could be called this... now I am curious what other films are considered precursors and at what point the genre came into its own.

JoeKulik Jean Renoir's La Bete Humaine (1938) is classic Renoir. It is a very well thought out, and very well executed piece of cinematic storytelling with a very interesting, and compelling storyline, and it has high entertainment value as well, in my opinion.The cinematography is particularly good in this film. The use of various camera positions, and camera angles is very effective, and adds real depth to the film, as well as do the great close up facial shots that so dramatically relate the expressions of the actors at appropriate points in a scene. The extensive footage of "all things railroad" are memorable, including footage in the railroad stations, in the rail yards, of close up footage of the trains sailing down the tracks, and camera positions seemingly right on the very front of the train showing the oncoming tracks rapidly approaching, all this being appropriate, of course, because most of the main characters are train company employees.The acting by the whole cast is really great, but Jean Gabin, and Simone Simone both give particularly strong, and effective performances. Jean Renoir himself gives a rather interesting, and effective performance as Cabuche, a good natured, working stiff who is wrongfully accused of the murder that causes the whole story to spiral into tragedy.This film has some of the characteristics of a classic Shakespearean tragedy, with characters seemingly chained by the stars to their inalterable fates.Viewing this great film will always be memorable for me.

david-sarkies La Bete Humaine is the adaption of a novel written in 1890 and deals with the bestial nature of humanity. The movie itself dragged on and was difficult to follow. The only sensical parts were dealing with three characters, Severin, her husband, and a man that has inherited a disease after many generations of alcoholics. I think the husband's name is Goutrand and the man's name is Latrine.The movie is centred around railroad employees in France. Goutrand works as a station master and Latrine is an engineer. The movie opens describing Latrine's condition: his disease is due to many generations of alcohol abuse. We see soon in the movie that he looses control and enters a murderous fit. He seems to be the human beast of the title. But this is not the only problem because we learn that a millionaire name Grandmorin abused Severin when she was younger. She reveals this to her husband and he becomes very aggressive. Severin is very manipulative for she seems to use Goutrand, her husband, to kill Grandmorin and then tries to manipulate Latrine into killing Goutrand. Thus we see that the beast is not located simply in Latrine but in many other people as well.I had trouble following this movie and thus am not able to delve deeply into it. What I do see in it though is the exploration of the bestial nature of humanity. There does not seem to be a division between those who are good and those who are bad, but we are all bad inside. Severin comments on how Goutrand used to be a really nice man but he no longer is. She believes that he has changed though it is doubtful that he really has. Goutrand is the same person as he always was, it is just that she has come to know him much better and now sees the corruption that stains him.

Cristi_Ciopron The aim of art is to make some ideas, insights, intuitions felt, experienced, in a concrete way. The result is judged here by the achievements, and not by the intentions. Where the achievements are lacking, the intentions are useless. La Bete Humaine is a remarkably crafted film ,and a work of art, for a too long time considered, one can only suppose why, considered otherwise. It is ,I believe, the already third movie that Gabin made with Renoir—one year after La Grande Illusion,and two after Les Bas-Fonds.Today it is remarkable how UN—naturalistic Renoir's film is, how close to the life—view of what has been sometimes termed the poetic realism—the fatalism, the theme of the doomed man, of fate, etc.. The tone, the luminosity, the unseen core are very Renoirian, this is immediately recognizable, and Renoir didn't betray himself here at all; himself, or the art. Notice also the Renoirian sense of space, the striking sense of exploring the space, of unfolding it, as it were; very Renoirian thing, and very impressing and a sure sign of the spatial intelligence that Renoir had to an unequaled degree. Some used to consider the film quite uncharacteristic for Renoir's universe; today it is, on the contrary, sharply obvious that what we are watching is entirely defining maybe not so much for Renoir's themes and approaches, but it certainly is for the attitude and intentions and insight of the so—called poetic realism and its fatalism. The aesthetic values here are very much Renoir's own; his sharpness, his incisiveness , his strength, most of the gifts of this still very underrated director—very underrated and amazingly multifaceted. One more thing: Renoir's best French critics, in the '40s and the '50s, were, it seems, rather reticent about Zolism and the naturalistic inventory and sphere; so it is explainable why the reticence about this quite UN—naturalistic film that had though a too strong Zolist flavor for them. Renoir's best French critics were not the people to like Zolism of any kind. Yet they were wrong in their reticent assessments. The film is about brutal realities, but it is not at all a naturalistic movie; on the other hand, Renoir's mastery is here entire and impressing. In a word, a more—than—interesting film, extremely well made, and offering something else than the distinguished _divertissements that made Renoir's well-deserved fame with his early hardcore admirers. Lantier is one of Gabin's best performances ever. His portrayal is wonderfully modulated and adequate and fine.I wouldn't have supposed or guess that I will enjoy and admire so much this particular Gabin role, yet the things are such; Lantier is one of his very finest. The original novel had this triple chance: of a particularly inspired Renoir; of a Gabin in his manly 30s; and of the French '30s.In other words, it is not a too Zolistic, or a very Zolistic film; it could be conceded that it is a moderately Zolistic approach.(The subject itself being so immensely and intensely Zolistic.)One more word: if Gabin's performance is indeed above all praise, Simone Simon does a very good part as well.