Henri-Georges Clouzot's Inferno

What a fascinating documentary-slash-art piece-slash-masterclass in cinematic experimentation this is.

The mistakes H-G Clouzot made throughout the (incomplete) production of L'Enfer were massive and (mostly) avoidable, and yet this film makes a strong case that what he was trying to do, had he succeeded, would have profoundly affected how psychology in film would have been portrayed in everything moving forward. I don't think I'm overstating that.

The mid-60s were an era of huge experimentation in film. New technologies and the relaxation of the top-down studio system, both in Hollywood and in Europe, opened up avenues (and budgets) for filmmakers to try wild new ideas and concepts. For those who had it in them to take big swings -- Fellini, Tati, Visconti, and dozens of smaller filmmakers with equally huge artistic ambitions, if fewer resources -- it was time to really go for it, and I respect the hell out of Henri-Georges Clouzot to take the blank check he received to make this film, and stretch it as far as he could, until it broke him.

The footage that survives, even with most of it not having matching audio, is often startling. The tricks he tries with light, color switching, distorted views, double exposures, forced perspective, and every other trick in (or out of) the book would have turned this simple little story of a jealous husband & his free-spirit wife at a lakeside resort into a thriller for the ages, just on look alone.

Here, they rebuild the script and footage from scratch as best they can, with Bérénice Bejo and Jacques Gamblin on a modern soundstage, reading the script to fill in blank spots, and the original crew stepping in to explain Clouzot's thought process as best they could.

It all adds up to an utterly fascinating story about ambition, hubris, and a director with a huge blank check in his back pocket, going as far as he possibly could with his ideas. If you're going to fail, fail big.

Also: Jee-eezus, is Romy Schneider ever beautiful.

What a fascinating documentary-slash-art piece-slash-masterclass in cinematic experimentation this is.

The mistakes H-G Clouzot made throughout the (incomplete) production of L'Enfer were massive and (mostly) avoidable, and yet this film makes a strong case that what he was trying to do, had he succeeded, would have profoundly affected how psychology in film would have been portrayed in everything moving forward. I don't think I'm overstating that.

The mid-60s were an era of huge experimentation in film. New technologies and the relaxation of the top-down studio system, both in Hollywood and in Europe, opened up avenues (and budgets) for filmmakers to try wild new ideas and concepts. For those who had it in them to take big swings -- Fellini, Tati, Visconti, and dozens of smaller filmmakers with equally huge artistic ambitions, if fewer resources -- it was time to really go for it, and I respect the hell out of Henri-Georges Clouzot to take the blank check he received to make this film, and stretch it as far as he could, until it broke him.

The footage that survives, even with most of it not having matching audio, is often startling. The tricks he tries with light, color switching, distorted views, double exposures, forced perspective, and every other trick in (or out of) the book would have turned this simple little story of a jealous husband & his free-spirit wife at a lakeside resort into a thriller for the ages, just on look alone.

Here, they rebuild the script and footage from scratch as best they can, with Bérénice Bejo and Jacques Gamblin on a modern soundstage, reading the script to fill in blank spots, and the original crew stepping in to explain Clouzot's thought process as best they could.

It all adds up to an utterly fascinating story about ambition, hubris, and a director with a huge blank check in his back pocket, going as far as he possibly could with his ideas. If you're going to fail, fail big.

Also: Jee-eezus, is Romy Schneider ever beautiful.

Obviously not ideal by any means, but still a blessing that this exists.

All the footage shot by Clouzot is stunning, even the test reels are more visually dynamic and satisfying than most finished films.

As tragic as it is that Clouzot never finished the film, it's maybe equally unfortunate that the footage wound up in the hands of Bromberg and not a more competent filmmaker. Bromberg's film is arresting only when he steps back from contextualizing the few existing scenes of Clouzot's failed film and allows the images to speak for themselves. The brief sections that do that are lush and hypnotic reminders of how soaringly beautiful film can be.

Unfortunately Bromberg is more intent on making a rote behind-the-scenes documentary on the production process than in sharing the incredible visuals he was granted access to. The interviews throughout are informative, but not particularly engaging and feel like they should have been relegated to a bonus feature on the bluray release rather than the focus of the movie. But even as an account of the film's history, it's a noticeably inadequate documentary, skipping tons of context and follow-up, most outrageously by not even mentioning the fact that a version of L'Enfer did ultimately get made decades later by Claude Chabrol.

Far worse are the scenes where two actors dramatize the unfilmed dialogue from the script. Beyond being a wholly unnecessary and boneheaded inclusion, these clumsily staged and lit sections bring the entire documentary to a screeching halt with their artlessness whenever they crop up.

Hopefully some day the entirety of Clouzot's footage will be released publicly for any enterprising director who wishes to to take a crack at constructing their own film out of it. In the hands of a filmmaker with more vision and skill this material could easily produce a masterpiece. In the meantime we have this flawed artifact to hint at what might have been.

Obviously not ideal by any means, but still a blessing that this exists.

All the footage shot by Clouzot is stunning, even the test reels are more visually dynamic and satisfying than most finished films.

As tragic as it is that Clouzot never finished the film, it's maybe equally unfortunate that the footage wound up in the hands of Bromberg and not a more competent filmmaker. Bromberg's film is arresting only when he steps back from contextualizing the few existing scenes of Clouzot's failed film and allows the images to speak for themselves. The brief sections that do that are lush and hypnotic reminders of how soaringly beautiful film can be.

Unfortunately Bromberg is more intent on making a rote behind-the-scenes documentary on the production process than in sharing the incredible visuals he was granted access to. The interviews throughout are informative, but not particularly engaging and feel like they should have been relegated to a bonus feature on the bluray release rather than the focus of the movie. But even as an account of the film's history, it's a noticeably inadequate documentary, skipping tons of context and follow-up, most outrageously by not even mentioning the fact that a version of L'Enfer did ultimately get made decades later by Claude Chabrol.

Far worse are the scenes where two actors dramatize the unfilmed dialogue from the script. Beyond being a wholly unnecessary and boneheaded inclusion, these clumsily staged and lit sections bring the entire documentary to a screeching halt with their artlessness whenever they crop up.

Hopefully some day the entirety of Clouzot's footage will be released publicly for any enterprising director who wishes to to take a crack at constructing their own film out of it. In the hands of a filmmaker with more vision and skill this material could easily produce a masterpiece. In the meantime we have this flawed artifact to hint at what might have been.

I could watch French people talk about classic cinema for hours!

I could watch French people talk about classic cinema for hours!

Als Bericht über die Gründe des Scheiterns etwas zu oberflächlich und vage. Als Einblick in das, was der Film hätte sein sollen bzw. können ergiebiger und unendlich viel Bedauern weckend, was da nicht entstanden ist.

Als Bericht über die Gründe des Scheiterns etwas zu oberflächlich und vage. Als Einblick in das, was der Film hätte sein sollen bzw. können ergiebiger und unendlich viel Bedauern weckend, was da nicht entstanden ist.

My review: http://blueprintreview.co.uk/2018/02/henri-georges-clouzots-inferno/

My review: http://blueprintreview.co.uk/2018/02/henri-georges-clouzots-inferno/