Agree, "strange," yet compelling. I asked myself the reason I kept watching given the movie appeared on a television channel (Turner Classics, I believe) in mid-morning. The simple answer, despite anomalies: the work charmed me. Yes, the experience is one of viewing a mélange of themes delectably rendered in mid-20th century black and white photography: the burdens of a small town economy, the socio-economic sexual tensions and alliances, and the placeholder theme of sex-and-ardent romance, emphasizing the "authentic" couple: Gina Lollobrigida's "Marietta," and Marcello Mastroianni's "Enrico." You are right to point out aspects of light opera--the almost anomalous early ensemble singing scenes with the boys). Then, this aspect disappears entirely when you were getting warmed up to it. Strange indeed.
"The Law" was a mid-20th century movie, so it may be easy to understand why one might have the experience of sensing Fellini in the room influencing the piece--with due respect to Jules Dassin, who directed masterfully with regard to pacing, blocking, acting between characters and among them in wonderful ensemble scenes. I believe the main reason the piece felt strange--although not off-putting--was the characters mainly serve to represent allegorical values. You feel you are watching a value being played out, not so much characters living out values: Yves Montand's "Brigante," a bullying kind of local boss who can "never be king" as Pierre Brasseur's Don Cesare points out (he lacks the specific value). Montand disappears into his character's fate of being a "bad" idea, which can only fail when put up against relatively deeper values when he tries twice to seduce the two beauties in the story, two women who are unwilling to compromise to the corruption of "the law" as practiced in their world--in part the world we all live in?
reply
share