This story takes place in France in the 1930s and details the last couple of years in the life of Serge Alexandre Stavisky, a con man whose shenanigans had financial and political repercussions at the highest levels of French government and international financial markets. Stavisky makes Bernie Maddoff look like a piker. His reach was broad: producing fake bonds, fencing jewels, laundering money, bribing officials, and so on. Stavisky would have flourished on Wall Street in the 2000s and he would not even have to have suffered the embarrassing indignity of being prosecuted.
Jean Paul Belmondo is perfectly cast as Stavisky--you get the feeling that if Belmondo had not chosen to be an actor, by using his good looks and charm he could have gone the way of Stavisky. Most con men are good actors after all. Charles Boyer is on hand, in this his penultimate movie, to play Baron Raoul, a member of the French upper class who was taken in by Stavisky. Boyer projects the refined grace of Raoul without breaking a sweat. I found the details lacking as to exactly how Stavisky rose from being the son of a Jewish dentist to the heights he achieved, maybe that is the subject for another movie. Part of his success was surely getting the confidence of Raoul. The essence of a con man seems to be just that, getting the confidence of his targets. The stunningly attractive Anny Deperey plays Stavisky's wife Arlette. She is not called on to do much more than add a touch of beauty and elegance, and she does that quite well. Her wardrobe must have run up the bill.
I was struck by how much effort was put into getting the period details right. This movie should have gotten some award for art direction, every scene is meticulously filmed. Resnais has the artist's eye for the use of color--always pleasing, never pretentious. The presentation is not linear, there are flashbacks as well as flash forwards. Some scenes overlap each other a bit.
The script is not without merit, containing little jewels like, "Old age is the most unexpected thing that ever happens to a man."
I found it challenging to sort out who all of the characters were and what relationships they had with each other. I could have benefited from a dramatis personae that had a brief description of each character. Also, the significance of some of the historical and theatrical references was not apparent to me. For example, I found it interesting to find out that Trotsky was granted asylum in France and lived there for several years in the 1930s, but the relevance of that for this movie escaped me, since Trotsky and Stavisky never met.
This is a quality movie. It puzzles me why it has not gotten more recognition.
Jean Paul Belmondo is perfectly cast as Stavisky--you get the feeling that if Belmondo had not chosen to be an actor, by using his good looks and charm he could have gone the way of Stavisky. Most con men are good actors after all. Charles Boyer is on hand, in this his penultimate movie, to play Baron Raoul, a member of the French upper class who was taken in by Stavisky. Boyer projects the refined grace of Raoul without breaking a sweat. I found the details lacking as to exactly how Stavisky rose from being the son of a Jewish dentist to the heights he achieved, maybe that is the subject for another movie. Part of his success was surely getting the confidence of Raoul. The essence of a con man seems to be just that, getting the confidence of his targets. The stunningly attractive Anny Deperey plays Stavisky's wife Arlette. She is not called on to do much more than add a touch of beauty and elegance, and she does that quite well. Her wardrobe must have run up the bill.
I was struck by how much effort was put into getting the period details right. This movie should have gotten some award for art direction, every scene is meticulously filmed. Resnais has the artist's eye for the use of color--always pleasing, never pretentious. The presentation is not linear, there are flashbacks as well as flash forwards. Some scenes overlap each other a bit.
The script is not without merit, containing little jewels like, "Old age is the most unexpected thing that ever happens to a man."
I found it challenging to sort out who all of the characters were and what relationships they had with each other. I could have benefited from a dramatis personae that had a brief description of each character. Also, the significance of some of the historical and theatrical references was not apparent to me. For example, I found it interesting to find out that Trotsky was granted asylum in France and lived there for several years in the 1930s, but the relevance of that for this movie escaped me, since Trotsky and Stavisky never met.
This is a quality movie. It puzzles me why it has not gotten more recognition.