Il est des films comme Les diaboliques ou La nuit du chasseur (tous deux de 1955) qui vous marquent durablement lorsque vous les visionnez (trop) jeune.  Je suis certain, par exemple, de me souvenir encore longtemps de Paul Meurisse dans sa baignoire (ceux qui ont vu le film savent de quoi je parle). Clouzot prend ici un malin plaisir à nous inquiéter.

L’action se déroule dans une pension pour garçons sur laquelle règne d’une main de fer le directeur Delassalle (Paul Meurisse). Autoritaire et violent, il n’hésite pas à brutaliser sa femme (Vera Clouzot) et sa “très officielle” maîtresse (Simone Signoret), institutrice de l’établissement. Quand trop de brimades et de violences se sont accumulées, les deux femmes décident d’en finir et de l’assassiner froidement en prétextant des vacances. Le plan est parfaitement exécuté et ce malgré les angoisses de Christine, la femme cardiaque du directeur. Inquiétudes pourtant parfaitement justifiées lorsque le corps, plongé dans la piscine de l’établissement après avoir été transporté dans une malle, disparaît. D’autant qu’un vieil inspecteur s’intéresse à cette étrange affaire de disparition.

Premier véritable film français d’épouvante, Les diaboliques, inspiré d’un roman de Boileau-Narcejac,  est remarquable par la tension et le suspense qu’il dégage. La distribution (quel plaisir de voir Vanel, Meurisse, Signoret et Serrault dans un même film !) est remarquable malgré le fait que j’ai toujours eu un peu de mal avec la composition de Vera Clouzot. Quant à la fin, ne comptez pas sur moi pour vous la raconter, je ne suis pas si diabolique (voir ici).

Title: Les diaboliques
Year: 1955
Director: Henri-Georges Clouzot
Writer: Jérôme Géronimi, Henri-Georges Clouzot, Frédéric Grendel & René Masson, based on a novel by Pierre Boileau & Thomas Narcejac
Starring: Simone Signoret, Véra Clouzot, Paul Meurisse
Music: Georges Van Parys
Distinctions: currently #146 on IMDb’s Top 250
Synopsis: a woman’s husband’s mistress helps her kill her husband
Length: 116 minutes
How I saw it: on video (rented from Netflix), yesterday
Subjective Rating: 4/10
Objective Rating: 3/10 (gets points for concept, story and dialog)

Very little actual suspense.  It had almost no visual interest, bad sound quality, and no music except over the credits (which normally I’m okay with, but this movie badly needed something to create suspense). And the “twist” ending is predictable. If there had been suspense throughout the film as there should have been, it might not have been so obvious that there would be a twist. Or if the movie wasn’t agonizingly slow, you might not have to sit there with nothing better to do than figure out how it’s going to end.

Anrī Žorža Kluzo 1955.gada šedevrs, kas ir kļuvis par uzmācīgu fantomu citam mūsdienu klasiķim – Fransuā Ozonam. Ozona “8 sievietēs”, “Kriminālajaos Laveros”, “Baseinā” tas viss spīd cauri, tikai viņam nekad neuzņemt savējos elles izdzimumus – Kluzo filmā spriedze kā vienmēr ir līdz baltkvēlei, un, lai arī fabula jau nemaz tik grūti nav atkožama (tāpēc vajag tomēr lasīt Agatu Kristi, draugi), tirpas skrien ne pa jokam. Ozons nervozi pīpē stūrītī. Detektīvtrilleru klasika ar Linča cienīgiem momentiem (vai arī, precīzāk, otrādāk). Masthev.

in 2007 martcore says
superafigkino

I collect supporting actors, character actors. I revere them. I “cast” them. I watch feature films just to see their ten minutes of brilliance.  Part of this comes from my Dad.  

Like anyone who has even remotely participated in our family’s gene pool, he at one point got the acting bug. Unfortunately,  his screen career was limited to about 15 seconds as an extra in the 1949 film “Bad Boy,” when – sentenced along with Audie Murphy to a juvenile delinquency facility — he can be seen on camera rising up in anger and threatening the judge. (By the way, he was great!)

As I grew up, each re-run of “Bad Boy” would be an opportunity for a real family celebration. We would gather around the television, wait for the scene, watch his brief grimace, and cheer. And that is when I started watching these actors. 

I don’t know why I feel funny using the term “character actor.”  It has always  seemed  to demean the brilliance I would see in their performances, suggesting limitations rather than versatility. I know that some people use the term as high praise. I finally settled on “actor.”   

My favorite recent example – out of hundreds — is the absolutely brilliant Ned Eisenberg. In the first fifteen minutes of Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center, Eisenberg – playing one of the Port  Authority police officers heading toward the towers – arrives on the scene and simply looks up.  But his reaction, so full of complexity and bewilderment and fear, and lasting no more than a brief moment, haunts the rest of the film.  His character knows that he has been instantly thrust into the worst day of his life. And we know this because of one subtle, nuanced and masterfully delivered glance.  

But I am a huge fan of these masters of their craft and wanted to share some absolutely random names. They could just as easily be followed by hundreds of others. Some occasionally made their way into starring roles, but their greatest moments were often glances, smirks, grimaces, or blank stares into the distance.

Thelma Ritter, Edward Arnold, Dabbs Greer, Robert Loggia, Ruby Dee, Andrew Robinson, Ward Bond, Robert Walker, Morris Ankrum, Charley Grapewin, Alfre Woodard, Ned Eisenberg, Paul Meurisse, Jane Withers, John Doman, Amanda Randolph, Margaret Dumont, Miriam Colon, Guy Kibbee, Barnard Hughes, Harry Dean Stanton, William Daniels, Bruno Kirby, H.B. Warner.       

Who would you include? Full-blown, leading-role movie stars are ineligible.