You haven't seen romance portrayed onscreen in all of its fragility and splendour until you have watched this film. It concerns Joanna (Audrey Hepburn) and Mark (Albert Finney) and shows the developments in their relationship across 10 years of marriage. The scenes are overlapping and interlocking, and jump in a non-linear fashion. At the most unexpected of moments we are exposed to exhilarating highs and are then, just as quickly, thrust into the most despairing of lows as the couple go on their literal and metaphorical journeys around France. Amusing and amusingly tedious supporting characters are at times interwoven into the proceedings, but this film is all about Mark and Joanna, their connection, and the suffering and joy that that connection brings.
As is often the case with the greatest films, the plot here is not central to the narrative. The significance of the events in the film is demonstrated through the way in which each character is touched by them. Joanna and Mark catching sunburn, smuggling food into an exclusive hotel, witnessing an argument in a French bistro and sleeping overnight in a concrete drainage pipe are possible highlights just because of the meaning they are imbued with in the context of Joanna and Mark's relationship. However, one of the truly special aspects of this movie is the fact that each moment of each scene has the potential to resonate. Each scene is revealing the essence of each character's connection to the other. In fact, one could easily argue the central character in this film is neither Joanna nor Mark, rather it's the relationship that exists between the two.
Stylistically, the film draws on French New Wave cinema by using editing as a central aesthetic feature. However, the results of this are more effective than in any French New Wave film I've seen and certainly than in any classic French New Wave influenced Hollywood feature of the '60s (including the likes of Bonnie & Clyde, The Wild Bunch, Easy Rider, and so on). The reason for this is that the editing is not just an aesthetic, it's a fundamental story-telling device. The cutting allows for key developments in the narrative and heightens the impact of crucial scenes. The greatest example of this is after Joanna and Mark's first argument. Joanna is running away from Mark screaming "Nooooo", the physical distance between the two becoming greater and greater, but, just at the right moment, Mark is able to produce the words that Joanna has been longing to hear, to which her response is "Yeeeeeees": then, cut. The physical distance has immediately disappeared, Joanna is now back in Mark's arms. One not paying full attention could easily write this off as an eye-catching visual trick, missing the entire point of the scene. What we witness on the screen is exactly how that moment would have felt to Joanna and Mark: the immediate dissipation of the distance, the power of the right words to instantaneously set their relationship back on course. We are witnessing the events in the way that Joanna and Mark felt them.
Aside from containing film editing which perhaps surpasses all films that have come before or since, the movie also has pitch-perfect casting in what has to be Audrey Hepburn's greatest performance, matched by an utterly brilliant Albert Finney. The chemistry between these two actors is heart-breaking. Never has Hepburn shown such bitterness and insecurity to go along with the charm, playfulness and elegance her screen persona is much more commonly known for. Ironically, the fact that Hepburn is able to channel the darker elements of her persona actually makes the lighter aspects more magical in their contrast. While Finney's rugged, boyish charm is also dissected and exposed at times showing his pettiness and petulance and even moments verging on the domineering. Neither actor is afraid to go as far as the character requires and the bravery and raw technical brilliance of Hepburn and Finney's performances are a marvel to behold.
Now to the writing: precocious talent Frederic Raphael delivers a script which manages to be laugh-out-loud funny on occasion and tear-jerkingly tender on others. There is a slickness to his dialogue which never becomes too self-admiring, relying on inflection, emphasis and repetition in order to eke out both comedic and dramatic potential. In a film in which the plot is a secondary consideration, the writing (alongside the acting, and the film's visual prowess) is able to take centre stage.
If one were to think that all of the film's merits had been covered thus far, one would be incorrect as I have not yet even mentioned Henry Mancini's score. It is simply exquisite. It is at times seductive, nostalgic, sombre and even quirky and it contributes excellently to establishing the shifting, immersive atmosphere of the film. Mancini regards it as his greatest work and who am I to disagree?
Final commendations must go to the man standing at the helm for pulling all of this together. Stanley Donen is often remembered for his musicals, most particularly Singin' in the Rain, but this film is, in my view, his greatest work. This makes it rather difficult to understand why the film does not garner more attention in wider critical circles. Personally, I've now recently watched the film on three separate occasions and I am simply awe-struck by its originality, honesty, energy and cinematic mastery every time I view it. It is a clear influence on all of the more off-beat, intelligent romantic comedies that have come in its wake, starting from pretty much every film Woody Allen made in the genre released from Annie Hall onwards and also including Linklater's wonderful "Before" trilogy (Sunset, Sunrise and Midnight). The influence of this film's use of editing and overlapping narratives can also be seen in films such as Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Inception and, taken to an even greater extreme, this year's release: Everything, Everywhere All at Once. This film is so impactful because of its sheer ability to use artifice to establish a deep and pure authenticity. For this reason alone, it is easily among the greatest films I have ever seen.
As is often the case with the greatest films, the plot here is not central to the narrative. The significance of the events in the film is demonstrated through the way in which each character is touched by them. Joanna and Mark catching sunburn, smuggling food into an exclusive hotel, witnessing an argument in a French bistro and sleeping overnight in a concrete drainage pipe are possible highlights just because of the meaning they are imbued with in the context of Joanna and Mark's relationship. However, one of the truly special aspects of this movie is the fact that each moment of each scene has the potential to resonate. Each scene is revealing the essence of each character's connection to the other. In fact, one could easily argue the central character in this film is neither Joanna nor Mark, rather it's the relationship that exists between the two.
Stylistically, the film draws on French New Wave cinema by using editing as a central aesthetic feature. However, the results of this are more effective than in any French New Wave film I've seen and certainly than in any classic French New Wave influenced Hollywood feature of the '60s (including the likes of Bonnie & Clyde, The Wild Bunch, Easy Rider, and so on). The reason for this is that the editing is not just an aesthetic, it's a fundamental story-telling device. The cutting allows for key developments in the narrative and heightens the impact of crucial scenes. The greatest example of this is after Joanna and Mark's first argument. Joanna is running away from Mark screaming "Nooooo", the physical distance between the two becoming greater and greater, but, just at the right moment, Mark is able to produce the words that Joanna has been longing to hear, to which her response is "Yeeeeeees": then, cut. The physical distance has immediately disappeared, Joanna is now back in Mark's arms. One not paying full attention could easily write this off as an eye-catching visual trick, missing the entire point of the scene. What we witness on the screen is exactly how that moment would have felt to Joanna and Mark: the immediate dissipation of the distance, the power of the right words to instantaneously set their relationship back on course. We are witnessing the events in the way that Joanna and Mark felt them.
Aside from containing film editing which perhaps surpasses all films that have come before or since, the movie also has pitch-perfect casting in what has to be Audrey Hepburn's greatest performance, matched by an utterly brilliant Albert Finney. The chemistry between these two actors is heart-breaking. Never has Hepburn shown such bitterness and insecurity to go along with the charm, playfulness and elegance her screen persona is much more commonly known for. Ironically, the fact that Hepburn is able to channel the darker elements of her persona actually makes the lighter aspects more magical in their contrast. While Finney's rugged, boyish charm is also dissected and exposed at times showing his pettiness and petulance and even moments verging on the domineering. Neither actor is afraid to go as far as the character requires and the bravery and raw technical brilliance of Hepburn and Finney's performances are a marvel to behold.
Now to the writing: precocious talent Frederic Raphael delivers a script which manages to be laugh-out-loud funny on occasion and tear-jerkingly tender on others. There is a slickness to his dialogue which never becomes too self-admiring, relying on inflection, emphasis and repetition in order to eke out both comedic and dramatic potential. In a film in which the plot is a secondary consideration, the writing (alongside the acting, and the film's visual prowess) is able to take centre stage.
If one were to think that all of the film's merits had been covered thus far, one would be incorrect as I have not yet even mentioned Henry Mancini's score. It is simply exquisite. It is at times seductive, nostalgic, sombre and even quirky and it contributes excellently to establishing the shifting, immersive atmosphere of the film. Mancini regards it as his greatest work and who am I to disagree?
Final commendations must go to the man standing at the helm for pulling all of this together. Stanley Donen is often remembered for his musicals, most particularly Singin' in the Rain, but this film is, in my view, his greatest work. This makes it rather difficult to understand why the film does not garner more attention in wider critical circles. Personally, I've now recently watched the film on three separate occasions and I am simply awe-struck by its originality, honesty, energy and cinematic mastery every time I view it. It is a clear influence on all of the more off-beat, intelligent romantic comedies that have come in its wake, starting from pretty much every film Woody Allen made in the genre released from Annie Hall onwards and also including Linklater's wonderful "Before" trilogy (Sunset, Sunrise and Midnight). The influence of this film's use of editing and overlapping narratives can also be seen in films such as Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Inception and, taken to an even greater extreme, this year's release: Everything, Everywhere All at Once. This film is so impactful because of its sheer ability to use artifice to establish a deep and pure authenticity. For this reason alone, it is easily among the greatest films I have ever seen.