Melville had the actors and the boredom to justify arthouse status.
Does it make it thrilling? No! Just interesting to watch as.an exercise in innovation. It mixes the clair obscur of a Fritz Lang with the nouvelle vague possibilities.it plays with the false realism and the true voyeurism of the times.
Without Melville, a probable slowing down of the new noir, with Melville an evident definition of the obvious anti-hero.
The remake has been shot down by critics, unjustified ans subservient, although it's all the same, in a more modern context, with less manicheiïst players. In the end they both suffer the same.
So without it, cinema would be much more boring than it is, with it, you've seen it a hundred times. The problem of creators.
Does it make it thrilling? No! Just interesting to watch as.an exercise in innovation. It mixes the clair obscur of a Fritz Lang with the nouvelle vague possibilities.it plays with the false realism and the true voyeurism of the times.
Without Melville, a probable slowing down of the new noir, with Melville an evident definition of the obvious anti-hero.
The remake has been shot down by critics, unjustified ans subservient, although it's all the same, in a more modern context, with less manicheiïst players. In the end they both suffer the same.
So without it, cinema would be much more boring than it is, with it, you've seen it a hundred times. The problem of creators.