MovieChat Forums > Bob le flambeur Discussion > A Little Disappointing

A Little Disappointing

posted 16 years ago by ProfessorFate
5 replies | jump to latest

========SPOILERS========

I'd heard much praise for this film, about what a crime classic it was, but after finally seeing it I'd say there are dozens of crime films that are better.

I like the atmosphere created by the cinematography and the realistic feel of the film. The first 2/3rds of the film are pretty interesting, right up until when Paolo kills Marc. I understand they filmed it on a very tight budget, but that was one of the lamest shooting scenes I've ever seen. The film sort of unravels after that, and the final shoot-out at the casino is even worse than Marc's murder. There are plenty of films from the 40's and 30's that are much more realistic in their shooting scenes than this one.

It was interesting to watch the interview on the Criterion DVD with Daniel Cauchy, the actor who played Paolo. He mentioned that he'd spoken to many Hollywood filmakers who thought very highly of the film, including Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford, but he himself was always puzzled that so many people thought it was a classic.

Probably the best reason to see the film - Isabelle Corey, who is very sexy and natural in her role.

"Push the button, Max!"

[–] JohnnyStaccato 16 years ago

Melville has stated in an interview that he took a more laconic, off-beat approach than usual with this particular film, because at the time the "heist film" as a sub-genre of the crime film/film noir was over-crowded with movies--for example "Rififi" and "The Killing"--so he wanted to differentiate it somehow. It's ultimately a witty oddity of a film, though of course not to the degree of an outright parody, like the Italian "Big Deal on Madonna Street."

The baroque violence of the final scene is definitely intended in the vein classical film noir style. I personally don't believe realism is something one should look for when watching Melville as one of the "transcendentalist" French filmmakers (kind of like Bresson), the mood/tone created by the film is perhaps more important than the actual plot. Those aforementioned heist films mostly explored temporal aspects of the story, while "Bob Le Flambeur" works because of the "cool" mood (it's kind of hard to articulate mood) it creates as it relates to the irony of Bob's fate as a criminal who loses everything of real value (e.g. Paolo) with the heist, yet in the end maintains his nonchalant disposition.

What films would you consider better, and why? I mean to gauge where this film fails in your opinion? The crime film is my favorite genre and one thing I've come to understand is violence is definitely not everything. I don't know if you feel the same way.

[–] ProfessorFate 16 years ago

What films would you consider better, and why?

I just saw "The Killing" for the first time and loved it. I've long been a fan of "The Asphalt Jungle" and I think it's a much better heist movie. If you want atmospheric French crime films I'd take "Diva" over "Bob".

edited to add: I just saw "Rififi" and loved it as well.

"Push the button, Max!"

[–] JohnnyStaccato 16 years ago

Well, I believe my question of "why" remains...?

[–] TheArgentinian (6457) 3 years ago

I just watched Rififi, Touchez pas au grisbi and Bob on back to back nights and this one is the weakest one. Maybe I need to watch it again but I didn't find it nearly engaging as the other two.

[–] Jes' Sayin' (5974) 2 years ago

Agreed. It isn't even really a heist film. No actual heist occurs.