MovieChat Forums > L'armée des ombres (1970) Discussion > Not deserving of its reputation

Not deserving of its reputation

posted 18 years ago by buff-29
33 replies | jump to latest

This movie is well put together and the acting is uniformly fine, but the story is so fanciful that it borders on the silly. When the resistance fighter wants to get a message to a jailed colleague, he gets himself arrested and put in the same cell as his buddy. Oh sure, that'd work. The Gestapo was always nice about that. The big escape scene is ludicrous, with resistance fighters dropping a rope to their comrades (who face a Gestapo machine gun) so they can climb out. A joke, really. But it is packing 'em in at the Film Forum in New York. There is no accounting for it.

[–] josephbleazard 18 years ago

I agree with the original poster. Whilst this is a good movie with great moments, it is not a masterpiece. It is also badly mis-billed when described as unsentimental or realistic. Just because Melville was in the resistance, doesn't mean he would choose to make a picture about them without propagandising it.

The plot basically consists of resistance leaders all running around rescuing or eliminating each other. Are there no more than 6 people in the resistance? Not even the most bigoted american would believe that. Every french character is revealed as essentially decent and devoted to liberty (although the scene with the informant's execution is a brilliant exception and a wonderful piece of cinema). There are ludicrous coincidences in some of the escape scenes and when St luc and Jean-Francois are revealed to be brothers it is simply lachrymose. The source of some pieces of information are never revealed. Worst, every German character is completely dehumanised by the director's failure to let them speak.

A much much better movie about a resistance movement is "The battle of algiers" by Gille Pontecorvo. This is a balanced view of how a resistance functions, and ironically contains many figures from the french resistance now in the roles of opressors.

The monkeys all thought they were alone, all 6 billion of them

[–] dantbyrne 18 years ago

I would agree that this film is far from deserving of its reputation, or at least of some of the wildly enthusiastic reviews posted here.

Some of the above comments appear to suggest that only a French national could appreciate this film. An interesting concept. The history of France under occupation is an extremely well-documented subject in modern history, and it should be noted that it was a non-Frenchman (Paxton) whose academic work began the slow dissolution of mythmaking regarding French Resistance and a re-engagement with the realities of the entirely comprehensible moral confusion of the occupation period. Any reasonably well-informed individual is capable of engaging with what is, in the final analysis, a rather one-dimensional and straightfoward account of the period in Melville's film.

The idea that this is a 'great' postwar French film is not credible. Even a cursory knowledge of the enormous wealth of truly great French cinema would reveal the relative simplicity, plodding narrative and lack of intellectual engagement which chracterises this film. It does pose some basic moral dilemmas, but compared to truly great and challenging pieces of that nation's cinema, this aspect is negligible.

Previous reviewers and posters have mentioned Pontercorvo's 'The Battle of Algiers' and Orphuls' 'The Sorrow and the Pity'. For those who have not yet seen Melville's film, do not be fooled into assuming that it approaches the quality of the two aforementioned productions in any aspect.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sausagefactory2010 17 years ago

Not exactly sure of Lacombe Lucien but that's just my opinion. I would go to say there are some highly enthusiastic reviews here, saying things i didn't notice and thought didn't really capture the mood of the whole film. In my opinion, this is overrated by those who did not properly get it though, I ma say so myself is a good, solid film about humanity.
Though actually I thought Le Samourai was much better, but people hate me because of that...

[–] koomy 17 years ago

This is the third Jean-Pierre Melville film ive seen but also the least satisfying.

The plot was very interesting and not something ive seen in a film before. However the film was too long and meandered a bit - unlike Le Cercle rouge which was long but gripping. The parachute scene showed the limitations of the time but there were two scenes that were outstanding - the first being when they are deciding the fate of a traitor and the other being the final part of the film.

Overall good, but not great (and i think the points raised by the thread starter over the credibility of some of the scenes are valid)

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Stokkolm 14 years ago

The machine gun escape scene is an exemple of "reality is unrealistic" http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealityIsUnrealistic

To quote an example: "To Hell and Back is the true story of Audie Murphy, a WWII combat vet, except it's not. He had to ask the writers to take out some parts that were included in his autobiography, for fear that he would be called a liar". You know, some things that happen in reality are too hard to believe even compared to the things we see in movies. Yet they are real.

You could complain of many things about Army of Shadows, but it's realism it's not one of them.

[–] activista 10 years ago

The machine gun escape actually happened---read other posts about it--so no it wasn't made up. And yes, it's a good but not great film BUT, that dosen't mean that it's not a compelling,thoughtful and very unsentimental,straightforward look at the underground World War II wartime resistance---which it certainly is. I think some people who don't like it rate it lower because it's nothing like your typical rah-rah shoot-'em-up Hollywood war film, or any other war film from anywhere else, for that matter. And it's slow and long on top of that--but so what? It's still good,it kicks a** in certain parts in its own way, and that's all that matters. Plus it took years and years to even get a rep, let alone get seen outside of France, and it's good---that's why it's got said rep.

[–] weirdturnpro 14 years ago

It's not a documentary. If you want a documentary, go watch one. THIS isn't one. You idiot.

[–] deeveed 14 years ago

You know I thought Melville's film on the Resistance is exceptional. No histrionics, just pitiless at the endeavor of standing up to the Nazis and an incisive look at uncompromising individuals who say "no". If you take the moral heart of the film, I don't see how the film can even be criticized with the appellation of being "not deserving."

[–] SamoanJoes 9 years ago

I have never disagreed with a post more.

[–] fsvr54 (43) 4 years ago

I completely disagree, this film is a flat out masterpiece.

Every single, I mean every single board of an "acclaimed" movie has a hater topic. Who cares about your opinion? Honestly

[–] CoSMiGoNoN (77) 3 years ago

Obviously you, or else you wouldn't have taken the time to reply.