Boudu Saved from Drowning (1932) User Reviews

An excellent anarchic comedy by Renoir

[jluis1984 · 8/10 · 8 July 2007]

While filmmaker Jean Renoir is usually considered among the most influential French directors of all time, it is common to find that discussions on his work tend to focus around his late 30s work, particularly in his movies "La Grande Illusion", "La Bête Humaine" and "La Règle Du Jeu". This is not really surprising, as those three are arguably Renoir's best films, however, while probably not as outstanding as those three, the rest of his work is of a consistent quality and of great importance for those interested in French cinema. This is specially true for his earlier movies, where Renoir was still developing his own technique and with it the style that would influence French cinema for generations. The 1932 comedy "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" is a perfect example of this, as while not really one of Renoir's best films, it is an enjoyable movie that is miles ahead most movies of its time.

"Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux", which literally means "Boudu Saved from the Water" is better known in English as ""Boudu saved from Drowning", as it is the tale of a tramp named Boudu (Michel Simon), who disenchanted with life after he loses his dog, decides to jump into the river Seine hoping to die. But Boudu's plan fails as he is saved by a gentle bookseller named Edouard Lestingois (Charles Granval), who after reviving him decides to "adopt" the tramp in his family, with the hope of making a good gentleman out of the bum. However, Boudu proves to be a difficult case, as with his lack of manners and wild anarchism shakes the lives of those living at Lestingois house, causing a mess everywhere becoming the terror of Lestingoi's wife Emma (Marcelle Hainia) and a source of constant frustration for Edouard Lestingois himself.

Based on a play by René Fauchois, "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" was adapted to the screen by Renoir himself and the then-newcomer Albert Valentin, whom certainly took advantage of the different possibilities that cinema offered to expand on the anarchic humor of the play. As one can imagine, the source of most of the movie's comedy lays in the social differences between Boudu and the Lestingoi family, making fun the bourgeois values of French society without mercy and surprisingly, void of any moralist stance. It is a very modern movie in this aspect, as without any pretensions or false sentimentalism (he makes sure of not making Boudu a hero) Renoir makes a poignant social commentary that is as clever as it's funny. The excellent development of his assortment of characters is the icing of the cake in what truly is one of Renoir's best screenplays among his early works.

As written above, in his adaptation of "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" director Jean Renoir looked for a more cinematic approach to the play, avoiding the use of sets almost completely and shooting on location as much as possible. This use of natural landscapes and real locations, together with Renoir's smooth and skillful camera-work create a sense of realism that later would become Renoir's trademark. Giving excellent use to Georges Asselin' cinematography, Renoir uses everyplace he can as a stage for his film, literally taking us along with Boudu in his adventure inside the Lestingois house. This wasn't the first time Renoir worked this way, but "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" was a further development of this style, a technique that would find its higher point in the three masterpieces he made later on that decade. While not one of his classics, many of Renoir's trademarks can already be seen here.

One of the elements that make "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" so enjoyable is definitely the acting, as everyone in the cast is simply excellent. The highlight is of course the legendary Michel Simon, who as Boudu, delivers one of the best and funniest performances in his career. With delightful malice and a good dose of cynicism, Simon makes Boudu a complex character that can go from being the most sympathetic antihero to the most despicable human being in seconds, and always without losing that charm that helps him to carry the film. As the Lestingois couple, Charles Granval and Marcelle Hainia are certainly playing caricatures, however, with extraordinary talent these two actors make the most of their characters, making them more complex and very vivid. Finally, Sévérine Lerczinska makes a terrific scene stealing performance that makes one wonder why did her career on film was so short.

While a harsh critique on the self-righteousness of the French bourgeoisie and the differences between classes (often compared to Chaplin's work), Renoir never intends this to be a moral lesson, as unlike what happens in Chaplin's films, neither Boudu is completely good nor Lestingois is completely bad. Instead of the classic "rich = bad, poor = noble" archetypes, "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" shows a very natural balance between both social classes, making fun of the clash of both without sentimentalism and with subtle malice, as if Renoir was stating that neither are exactly good. Even when "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" and its style of anarchic humor may look dated now, the movie is still very fun to watch. It isn't a masterpiece of cinema, but still holds up today, more than 70 years after its release.

Lighthearted but clever, "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" makes a nice introduction to the work of Jean Renoir as it has many of the elements that would become the basis of his work but under a simpler, friendlier facade. "Boudu Sauvé Des Eaux" may look a bit slow and dated nowadays, but it's still as valid as ever and an excellent example of French comedy of the 30s. A very recommended film. 8/10

Certainly well made Renoir film, but ultimately rather dull

[Flak_Magnet · 7/10 · 10 September 2009]

This is a difficult film to review succinctly. I didn't really enjoy it, but the film is well-made, well acted, and the underlying message is still poignant. At the time, "Boudu Saved from Drowning" was quite controversial, with Michel Simon's portrayal of the antisocial, uncompromised tramp (Boudu) inciting audiences to actual riot. (In fact, the film was apparently pulled from theaters by French police several days into its screening). Essentially, "Boudu Saved from Drowning" is an attack on liberalism, as well as a sort of black satire about societal class differences. Through their interaction with Boudu, a stereotypical Burgeouise family showcase the consequences of liberal idealism, as their efforts to help and reform Boudu all backfire unpredictably. Boudu is an irredeemable, unchangeable, and uncompromised outsider and he is happy as such. In the words of Jean Renoir, "...Micheal Simon was more than a tramp. He was the personification of all tramps." In other words, the lower class. Michel Simon does a great job with the part and the Boudu character is memorable. However, the rest of the characters are unlikeable (e.g. a perverse, overweight philanderer; his unabashed housekeeper mistress, a caustic wife, etc.) and the film's narrative is just, well, stuffy. I'd probably appreciate a film like this much more at 60 than I do at 30. For a film from 1931, "Boudu" does seem pretty fresh and the print looks terrific. Nonetheless, I didn't find "Boudu" very engaging. I can't recommend this one. ---|--- Reviews by Flak Magnet

Dog bites man

[Spondonman · 8/10 · 19 March 2005]

Boudu is an odd and inconsequential film, it's a tour de force from Michel Simon, and has some clever touches from Renoir (those long lenses!), but leaves me with the impression of someone learning his trade. He had been making films for about seven years and the Great classics were still to come!

*** Basically tramp loses dog, attempts suicide but is saved by liberal minded bookseller, becomes ungrateful dog to philandering bookseller whom he also cuckolds. Many humorous vignettes later he swims free of any ownership issues, depicted with some of the most gloriously atmospheric black & white nitrate photography from 1932 I've seen. ***

If it sounds like it doesn't add up to much, it does, the film has stayed in my imagination since I first saw it in the '80's. Simon's memorable performance as the unconventional Boudu is so riveting that the Parts certainly add up to more than the Whole. Fortunately I have no intention of seeing any of the pointless remakes so my impression will remain intact.

He rose from the gutter

[dbdumonteil · 4 May 2005]

..sorry from the river.but it's important to bear in mind that Boudu is a metamorphosis of Legrand,the hero of Renoir's precedent work "la chienne" ,who became a tramp at the end of that movie.And like Nana in Renoir's eponymous silent movie adapted from Zola,he rose from the waters ("sauvé des eaux" is the exact meaning of the name "Mosis")to shake the well meaning bourgeoisie.A bourgeoisie where a piano is in the house because you must have one even if you do not play the piano. Almost thirty years before Luis Bunuel ("Viridiana" 1961) ,Renoir denounces the bourgeois charity ,which is a great weight off our guilty minds.Boudu is revolutionary,like Moliere's "Tartuffe" ,he squeezes Lestingois dry,but he knows from the start he will not be part of them .He refuses conventions,marriage is the worst of them all.These final sequences ,where Renoir made the best use of "blue Danube" I know (with Kubrik's "2001",but in a diametrically opposite way),are the key of the movie.Boudu looks like,at the end of the movie, like some distant cousin of Charlie Chaplin ,but a Chaplin who would have discovered cynicism.

Needless to say,"Boudu" would not be "Boudu" without Michel Simon's extraordinary presence.Such an actor does not exist anymore in French contemporary cinema.And his filmography is full of treasures.To think that he also worked with Duvivier,Carné,Clair,Decoin and so many more..

Remakes "down and out in Beverly Hills" with Nick Nolte and Bette Middler. "Boudu" ,by Gérard Jugnot,this very year. Are they necessary?

A comedy? More a social commentary.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 7/10 · 11 August 2008]

It's a movie with some more subtle humor but nevertheless it's not really a movie that could ever make me laugh, which was mostly because due to Michel Simon his very over the top portrayal of the tramp Boudu. You know, the kind of performance in which he plays his character constantly in a drunk way in an attempt to make him look funny. Also his look is far from convincing, with his fake looking beard and big wig. Hello afro! It just isn't the best or most likable character imaginable. When it comes down to French comedy from the early days of cinema ('20' and '30's) this really isn't the best the genre has to offer. For instance you're way better off watching a René Clair movie.

The movie can be seen as a social commentary to the French bourgeoisie and difference between classes. It's this element mostly that makes the movie an interesting watch. No denying that Jean Renoir was a great director who knew how to set up a story and scenes. He also always gets his point across, without having to force too much. Like always, he also in this movie uses some interesting sequences that have deeper meanings to it and the movie is filled with some metaphors.

As you could expect from a Jean Renoir movie, it's also technically a good one. The movie features some interesting camera-shots, which must have also been really original and revolutionary for its time. The editing isn't always too great however.

Not Renoir's best but it's an enjoyable enough little movie.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Hanging loose

[RNQ · 9/10 · 28 May 2006]

Actually it's hard to overpraise any of Jean Renoir's movies. They all have, but this one particularly, a wonderful openness, and thereby freedom for characters to make fresh choices. Propped in a door frame, cleaning his shoes, whatever Boudu does seems unplanned, Renoir saying "Why not?" to anything Michel Simon invented in the liberty of his hair and costumes. Freer maybe than the more carefully scripted inventions of Chaplin and Keaton; right up there with Jean Vigo's "Zero de conduite." Renoir could do crowds; he could do both boating on a stream and a country wedding. He could do human beings, which gives us humanity. Art needs this bouduisme, and long may Boudu live, preferably on a good DVD.

pretty good but not great

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 24 March 2006]

I really enjoy watching old Michel Simon films. When I find one of his films, I always QUICKLY grab it and watch it as soon as possible. That's because even if the film isn't that great, his performance is always very interesting and quite unusual. My favorite film of his is Drôle de drame (1937), but he did several others that are among my favorites.

Well, once again Simon's performance makes this film worth watching. While in this case his acting is NOT subtle or perhaps as high quality as he's done in other films (it's a bit over-the-top), it's fun to just turn off your mind and watch the silliness. This film will not change your life and is a pretty insignificant film but still good to watch nonetheless. I think, for me, the reason I didn't enjoy the film more is that the character of Boudu is a pretty awful person and I just couldn't buy that he was such a sexual dynamo that he was able to make these women forget how crude, selfish and disgusting he was just by turning on the old libido!

So my verdict is that this is a good film that you can watch only if you suspend disbelief. Oh, and I forgot to mention, director Renoir did a great job on the film. For a 1931 French film, the sound and camera work are superb--something you DON'T see in many other films from this country until the later 1930s--he was truly ahead of his time.

Very enjoyable; Michel Simon is inspired as Boudu.

[HenryHextonEsq · 9/10 · 3 September 2000]

I'm sure this film would have raised many an eyebrow at the time, perhaps due to the distinctly modern depiction of marriage and relationships. Jean Renoir directs and writes with a sure, light touch, poking subtle fun at bourgeois values through Granval and Hainia's characters. Charles Granval is wonderful as the laid back liberal Bookseller, with no real skills of character judgement, while Marcelle Hainia is delightful as the wife not quite as prim and "respectable" as she seems at first. The major portrayal is of Boudu, though. Michel Simon shows a remarkable comic touch, up to the likes of Tati almost (what an interesting pairing Tati and Simon would have made...). His vagabond, Boudu is both a seedy and wonderfully endearing creation, with moments of casual, blunt pathos and eccentricity interspersed expertly by Renoir. In many ways, the work of Chaplin seems an influence on the film, with the lowly tramp portrayed as no worse than the bourgeosie. There is none of Chaplin's much remarked-upon sentimentality though, with Boudu coming never less than a little flawed. It's interesting to view how he changes throughout the film, from suicidal to anarchic to a man of principled decision- the final choice he has to make in the wonderful end sequence.

As the first Renoir I've seen, it bodes well for future renoir viewings as "Boudu" generally isn't seen as one of his masterpieces.

"Boudu Saved From Drowning" is a delight. It's pace is leisurely, relaxed, but never seems slow. It's a better film than the 1934 Vigo effort "L'Atalante" starring Simon, as it has excellent characters and an effective, humour and plot. Wonderful it is, be assured. Rating:- **** 1/2 (out of *****).

"Even so, we have a piano because we are respectable people"

[ackstasis · 6/10 · 7 July 2011]

Everybody seems to be sleeping around in a Renoir film. 'Boudu Saved From Drowning (1932)' features Charles Granval as Monsieur Lestingois, an upright middle-class gentleman who generously devotes himself to helping others... but who is also sleeping with the maid. Lestingois saves the life of Boudu (Michel Simon), a wandering tramp who jumps into the Seine, and offers the man shelter in his home. Boudu is vulgar and messy, but his benefactor selflessly persists, even though his ungrateful guest spends most of his time making sleazy advances towards the maid and forcibly seducing Mrs Lestingois. Renoir's comedic cynicism is in full swing here. The previous year had seen Chaplin release 'City Lights (1931),' his penultimate outing as the Little Tramp, and Boudu is certainly intended to be the polar opposite of Chaplin's kindly, lovelorn vagrant. A late twist of fortune (reminiscent of the tacked-on studio ending to Murnau's 'The Last Laugh (1923)') is amusingly abandoned in the final moments, as Boudu shuns the opulence of middle-class life for the unpretentious simplicity of the road. Renoir's camera, accompanied by the merry strains of the Blue Danube waltz, contemplatively regards Boudu's discarded top hat as it drifts downstream – just like its former owner, happy to drift towards an unknown fate.

One of Renoir's best

[Quinoa1984 · 10/10 · 3 November 2005]

One of the aspects to the films that I have seen of Jean Renoir so far (this, Rules of the Game, Grand Illusion, and La Bete Humaine) is that some of the more humorous or theatrical moments are given a total bed of humanity to fall back on. And, in some ways the film works on a kind of double edged sword that is surprising for a film coming from this era. It sometimes has some really hard edged, social-satire type moments involving the homeless man in a more upscale setting wreaking minor havoc. But it's also at the core full of humanity, and even the bourgeois are not necessarily 'bad' characters in the film (at one point, the man of the house sings a random song to himself, little moments like that).

Boudu, played with utter sublime "old-school" comic timing by Michael Simon, is a homeless man with a black dog. When the dog goes missing, he just sulks around for a while, taking that fateful plunge into the water. When some upper-class types, the Lestingois, come to his rescue and give him their place to stay, things start to slowly go awry. From here Renoir laces some comedy of class, some bits of romantic interludes, and little flights of fancy that give the picture's 80 minute running time a perfect fit. This is also a really well-woven together film as well, meaning all of the little touches (a band playing out in the streets, the occasional daring with the lens/camera, the little quirks all in Simon's performance as well as some others) are put into this seemingly broad story of a fish out of water, if you'll forgive the expression. It may seem not as fluid as some of Renoir's latest films, but it really isn't at times; Renoir is really working with a new form here by way of the advent of sound, and yet his presence is in every frame, setting it apart from other tales of this sort. And such wonderful music as well. This is the one Renoir film, ironically at the shortest length of those I've seen, that I can't wait the most to see again.

Boudu Saved from Drowning

[jboothmillard · 6/10 · 22 May 2012]

From director Jean Renoir (Partie De Campagne/A Day in the Country, La Règle Du Jeu/The Rules of the Game), this was another film, in the French language, that I would would never have known about unless in the 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die book. Basically Boudu (Michel Simon) is the tramp who thinks he has nothing to live for and attempts suicide by drowning in the river Seine, but he is rescued by gentle and good bookseller Monsieur Édouard Lestingois (Charles Granval). Boudu seems unhappy to have been saved, but Édouard wants to help him as much as possible, starting with letting him stay in the family house, and slowly they try to reform him into proper middle class society. As time goes by, and the tramp becomes more presentable, with shaving and better clothes, he does not show good courtesy, he takes advantage of his newfound better life, and has no good manners while eating and living in the house. The worst of it comes when he starts trying to take advantage of the maid, but much worse is when he makes advances towards Édouard's wife Madame Emma Lestingois (Marcelle Hainia). Boudu has good luck when he wins big on the lottery, and he is given permission to marry the housemaid, after presumably being forgiven for his attempted misdemeanours, but in the end, at the wedding party, they are in a boat that capsizes, and Boudu decides to swim away to become a free spirit again. Also starring Sévérine Lerczinska as Chloë Anne Marie, Jean Dasté as Student, Max Dalban as Godin and Jean Gehret as Vigour. Simon, a character actor, gives a very appealing performance as the lazy, rude, ill-mannered and troubled tramp brought out of his shell, it is an interesting story about people trying to change one that may not usually be given a chance, which obviously creates some quite funny scenarios, a likable comedy. Good!

Worth the rediscovery

[TheLittleSongbird · 8/10 · 16 July 2020]

There is plenty more of Jean Renoir's films to see, but what has been seen of his work has been good to brilliant (my first film of his being the quite fascinating 'Madame Bovary'), only not caring for 'Woman on the Beach'. He was my main reason for seeing 'Boudu Saved from Drowning'. The very neat idea was another selling point as well as my general love for French, and foreign in general, cinema, and the high recommendation given by trusted friends.

'Boudu Saved from Drowning' is not one of Renoir's best out of the films seen so far, and it is not hard to see why some would not care for it if they prefer their lead characters to be likeable. In 'Boudu Saved from Drowning's' case the lead character is pretty much the complete opposite of that. The exceptionally high quality of the production values and the direction cannot really be denied though, regardless of what one's thoughts on everything else is.

Will start with the numerous good, great even, things. 'Boudu Saved from Drowning' is an exceptionally well made film on the visual front. The cinematography is just exquisite and at its best visual poetry, some of the best of its year. There is nothing claustrophobic or over-intimate about it so visually it doesn't look too stagy, the settings are handsome and evocative and the lighting quite atmospheric. The music has great use of the flute and chorus, is beautifully orchestrated and fits the story's tone very well. Renoir's direction is exemplary, always keeping what's going on engaging and not disjointed while showing a visual mastery.

Really liked how 'Boudu Saved from Drowning' was scripted, the humour is essentially satirical and it is scathing but also clever and not too heavy, with the right amount of light-heartedness. The story isn't dull and unlike 'Woman on the Beach' doesn't feel choppy or incomplete, understanding what's going on wasn't an issue for me. The titular character is as unlikeable as they come and is a very juicy role, but the film just about avoids being mean-spirited thanks to some amusing comic timing and energy. Michel Simon is larger than life great and the rest of the cast do well.

Despite their character writing being very thinly sketched and dominated by Boudu, so 'Boudu Saved from Drowning' is thin when it comes to characterisation.

Although it's not a dull film and is cohesive, the film could have been a little longer to allow the drama later on to flow a little more naturally.

In summary, very good. 8/10

Movie Odyssey Review #071: Boudu Saved from Drowning

[Cyke · 7/10 · 22 January 2007]

071: Boudu Saved from Drowning (1932) - released in France 11/11/1932; viewed 6/30/06.

The San Francisco Opera House opens. 'Buck Rogers in the 25th Century' airs on radio for the first time. Franklin D. Roosevelt defeats Herbert Hoover in a landslide victory.

BIRTHS: Roy Scheider.

DOUG: A tramp named Boudu decides to commit suicide, but is rescued by a rich, gentle bookseller who takes him in. There, Boudu makes a mess of everything in the house with his lazy, salacious, man-child ways, injecting this bourgeois household with some much-needed id. This little film was suggested in an issue of Premiere Magazine with a list of 50 Hidden Gems on DVD. I figured we might as well check this one out; our journey through 1932 could use some foreign color, after all. The DVD has a very nice intro from Renoir himself, praising the style and performance of his star, Michel Simon, his leading man from 'La Chienne.' The film reunites Renoir with Simon, who was perfect at playing total losers. This film goes rather nicely with 'La Chienne.' Boudu could be the same guy. He often seems to be slightly retarded. A memorable scene has him polishing his shoes at the behest of Emma, the bookkeeper's wife (who apparently assumes that any sensible human being knows how to polish his shoes). Boudu ignores the brush and rag and simply applies the polish with his bare hands, getting the stuff on EVERYTHING. What makes it all funny is the way the family reacts to his antics; Edouard gets so frustrated with Boudu that he declares that the next time he sees a man drowning, he'll only rescue him if he's "one of us," (upper class). This coming from a man who owns a piano that no one in the house knows how to play simply because "we are respectable people." Boudu is more or less the same character at the end as at the beginning, with the small exception that he's no longer suicidal. This film also contains some of the first exterior location shooting, improvisational acting, and just a touch of deep focus photography.

KEVIN: Another pic from Jean Renoir, and though he hasn't yet captured my heart as a master filmmaker, he's definitely shown himself to be a unique talent. As for Boudu, the lovable wino played by Michel Simon, I wouldn't want this guy traipsing around my house. Watching him eat, the way he pushes food past that ugly beard, makes me never want to eat again. Michel Simon's portrayal of Boudu is probably too perfect. The way he talks, walks, moves, and eats is frighteningly believable. I don't think I really got the movie though. It's a comedy, but I didn't laugh very much, or even chuckle. The bookseller and his family are hopelessly in over their heads on what to do with Boudu after taking him in. They keep trying to house break him, but their attempts to assimilate him into their civilized, cultured lifestyle just slide off Boudu like axle grease. This is a very strange movie to be sure. Boudu is nearly the same homeless lovable loser he was at the beginning, with the sole exception that he's no longer suicidal when the end titles come up. Boudu doesn't seem to care that he's gone on any kind of journey or met new people or has some nice new clothes. Maybe that's part of his charm.

Last film: Night After Night (1932). Next film: I am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932).

Boudu the scumbag

[digital_groove · 4/10 · 27 February 2013]

I have watched this film a couple of times throughout the years. While being very familiar with most of the films of Renoir, this is one that always received a lot of praise, that I despised. In terms of film craftsmanship, it's very well made. This is a reason why Renoir has a lasting legacy and his name prevails many decades since the film's completion. The style and technique used, could easily fool many people that this was produced in the 50s. But, as we all know, style does not make movies great.

Boudu is a detestable character. Where this film strongly misfires is when it fails to properly have us identify or empathize with Boudu himself. Boudu in a nutshell, is a homeless person who tries to commit suicide. Upon being saved by someone who is genuinely concerned for his well being (unlike the rest of the paper thin bourgeois depicted in the film), he is given free room, board, and given food and clothing. However, Boudu is flat out, a scumbag. He is disrespectful, mean-spirited, is tyrannical the way he tries to destroy the kitchen, destroys clothing, and borderline rapes one of the female servants. You can argue it was later consensual because they got married, but any man that is groping a woman while she slaps his hands away and in the previous scene RAN AWAY from him, displays very borderline sexual behavior.

Then in the end of the film, after marrying this woman he conveniently fell in love with (exposition anyone?) he fakes a drowning and after discarding his Pygmalion clothing, puts on his traditional trampish clothing and continues on with life.

What a great guy! So, let us review what a likable and great character Boudu is. Destroy property of others? Check. Groping and molesting females against their will? Check. Borderline raping a woman? Check. Marrying a woman only to fake death to continue on with your selfish ways? Check. The list could go on and on. This is why I never found this movie to be enjoyable or a "classic" (which has be hailed so by simply because of being in the Criterion Collection imo). After watching this film, it's a poor send up of the upper class values of France, and really, who would want to entertain Boudu in their household? He'd probably wipe his dirty body on your blanket, break some of your dishes, spit in your floor, and possibly rape your wife. Charming fellow!

Boudu Saved from Drowning

[Michael_Elliott · 13 March 2008]

Boudu Saved from Drowning (1932)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

A wealthy man saves a homeless guy from drowning and then takes him into his home where the bum soon starts to seduce his wife and mistress. As Jim stated earlier I too prefer the remake Down and Out in Beverly Hills. I think the biggest problem with this film is that the homeless guy is such a jerk it's hard to really care about him and he does the dumbest things that just seem so over the top that I couldn't laugh at him either. Halfway through the movie I was wishing the rich guy had let him drown so that the movie would have already been over.

Great Concept, Perfect Humor Setup

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 10 May 2016]

Boudu (Michel Simon), a tramp, jumps into the Seine. He is rescued by Mr. Lestingois, a gentle and good bookseller, who gives shelter to him. Mrs. Lestingois and the maid Anne-Marie (Mr. Lestingois' mistress) are far from delighted, for Boudu is lazy, dirty and salacious...

Pauline Kael called it, "not only a lovely fable about a bourgeois attempt to reform an early hippy...but a photographic record of an earlier France." The film was remade in 1986 for an American audience as "Down and Out in Beverly Hills", directed by Paul Mazursky.

Now, I don't know that Boudu is a hippie. That might be an insult to him, and it is certainly an insult to hippies. But there's plenty of comic potential in wealthy people trying to reform the slobs of the world. This theme is addressed in other films, such as "Trading Places", and the comedy writes itself.

When You Ain't Got Nothing, You Got Nothing to Lose!

[Hitchcoc · 8/10 · 12 January 2010]

Some lightweight, Chaplainesque stuff from Jean Renoir. This is the story of a tramp who tries to kill himself and is rescued by a lazy, unmotivated bookseller. Apparently, the rescuer now feels an obligation to provide a home for this hopeless man. Instead of showing gratitude, Boudu takes advantage of everyone, projecting his coarse being in every direction. He seduces the man's wife, spits on the floor, floods the house; you name it. He also gets a dose of civilization and finds it a two edged sword. Michel Simon is awesome in the role, bumbling through life. It's hard to imagine him having enough angst to commit suicide (maybe he was just taking a bath or going for a swim anyway). This popped up as a treat on Turner Classic Movies and I was immediately hooked. I've seen most of the "big" films of Renoir. This little piece is a classic as well. See it if you can.

A Poetic Hymn to Cheerful Vulgarity

[ElMaruecan82 · 7/10 · 16 May 2017]

In 1931, "City Lights" defied the talkies and proved that the world didn't needs words when you had stories, faces and an iconic tramp. Yet another tramp has emerged the same year and became one of the most emblematic and popular figures of French cinema: his name was Boudu and he was played by the incomparable Michel Simon.

Michel Simon was, like they say in French, a 'gueule', the word, usually referring to an animal's mouth, means a mug, an ugly or intimidating one, nothing really pleasant to look at anyway. But in French Cinema, the word has become a 'term of endearment' describing a face exuding a natural charisma whether. So if Norma Desmonds said, "we had faces," a French nostalgic movie lover would say, "we had some 'gueules' and he would be damn right And Michel Simon was the ultimate 'face'.. But while Desmond insisted on faces as a compensation for the lack of speaking, what a waste it would have had to never hear Simon talking. His voice was as unique as his face because it always reflected his ambiguous mix of vulnerability and confidence, immortalized in "Port of Shadows" with that quote: "better to have my face than no face at all". So, with such a bizarre looks and an expansive physique, Simon was born to play ambiguous men, either tragic or comic, but never comical in terms of belly laughs and never tragic in the heroic sense, he wasn't a Gabin and Fernandel, he was perhaps their missing link.

Simon wasn't born to define a genre, which is why he was the most complete and emblematic actor of his generation. A larger-than-life man who was hiding behind his teddy-bear appearance a big heart, just looking at his reunion with Renoir and you could see the tenderness fusing between these two men.And how couldn't they? Together, they wrote some of the first pages of French cinema and struck big with "La Chienne" in 1931 and one year later, in a more lighthearted tone, they made the story of "Boudu Saved from Drowning", a title that came to usual language and became a synonym of rebirth, although things don't go as planned as Boudu, much to the viewers' delight.

Boudu is as gruff, vulgar and crass as his name suggests but he's got a poetic soul, he's got style and character. He's a proud hobo spotting a shaggy-hippie-like beard, he's an anarchist, he's not scared of cops, he doesn't like getting a paper bill he didn't ask for and he likes to sing colorful songs, he would be an interesting mix between the Tramp, Quint and an Easy Rider, a monument of rebellious unpredictability. And this is the perfect note to play him because if Boudu was more inclined to pathos, and was eager to prove his gratitude to the man who saved him from drowning, there would be no story. But Boudu is that he's an ungrateful prick and that's why we love him.

When Boudu, desperate to find his black dog, jumps from Point des Arts and plunges his large body into the Seine, he's saved by a librarian named Lestinguois (Charles Grandval), a middle-aged liberal, with a devoted wife (Marcelle Hainia) and a naive and lusty servant he's having an affair with. But he's an intellectual and a humanist who walks the walk (and swims the swim) and after saving Boudu, he's developing a liking and keeps him at home, thinking there would be no point in saving him to let him go try another suicide attempt.The relationship between the men is interesting, Boudu recognizes his value as a good man and uses his patience as a shield to be more insolent and hostile toward his wife without it backfiring.

And it works, he knows because he's a bum, things will be forgiven more easily. Boudu is like a free electron that doesn't have the book smarts (hell, he spits on Balzac's book) but knows human nature more profoundly than any other humanist. The film is a splendidly executed confrontation between two schools of thought and behavior where Boudu's rude and dirty manners and dirty habits indirectly highlights the ugly hypocrisy of his host's attitude with his wife. Of course, it's less a social statement that Renoir is making than a little comedy showing that just because you're poor, you can keep your pride and behave like one, and maybe teach one thing or two to the rich one.

Once we understand, that it's Boudu who actually makes the rules in the house and manages to get what he wants, we're transported by the innocent poetry of the film and the idea that sometimes, it's the Boudus of the world that are happy, people who embrace the inner unpredictability of life and take risks. Boudu goes as far as trying to seduce the so cold and reluctant wife, but the outcome reveals a truth about that hidden lust for depravity and vulgarity, something that feels so modern by our own standards, let alone the 30's. Boudu is free, he's a man who doesn't think of the consequences and only for that, things turn out better than what the wise men build on patience and respectability. The best edifices are those built without the fear that they can collapse at any time.

The film wanders between life and fantasy and tries to find the right note to end it, and it does find it, because it is obvious Boudu shouldn't be saved in order to die either, but he must be happy… not as we mean happiness but within his own vision of happiness, that's how we can be happy for him, the fact that we are, at the end, happy for him is a proof, that Renoir and Simon knew his audience and how to surprise them, and how to warm them.

Michel Simon shines in this Renoir comedy classic!

[framptonhollis · 8/10 · 30 July 2017]

Ever since I first saw L'Atalante, Michel Simon has remained one of my all time favorite actors. His ability to play quirky and hilarious characters with a dose of emotional depth is practically unmatched in French cinema history. A lifetime friend with director Jean Renoir, Simon starred in a few of his films, including On purge bébé, La Chienne, and, most famously, Boudu Saved From Drowning.

Before I continue gawking at Michel Simon's legendary performance, I would also like to comment on the film's other masterful elements. While the leading performance alone overshadows everything about the movie, every factor of the film is still done to near perfection. As always, Jean Renoir's cinematic eye is breathtaking. He is never afraid to allow his camera to glide in on the action and occasionally shoot everyday events and objects with grand visual splendor. The early sequence in which Boudu plunges into the Seine river, and proceeds to be rescued, is shot with an epic flavor. These shots are beautiful and big to an unexpected extent.

The script is also pitch perfect, and the plot is a perfect set up for good comedy, despite its seemingly dark overtones. Somehow, Renoir is able to make the suicidal homeless man's more melancholic moments funny by infusing some strong social satire and occasionally dark comedy in the likable mix.

Now, onto Michel Simon's performance!

Although he is not a household name, Michel Simon deserves to be hailed as one of cinema's most legendary comedians. In Boudu Saved From a Drowning, he is able to make the way his character eats a comedic highlight. I was nearly rolling on the floor with roaring laughter throughout my rewatching of Boudu simply because of how unbelievably funny this performance is. Even before the punchline, Simon has you giggling, often with intense anticipation. Simon is able to make his character all the more unpredictable and goofy with even the most subtle movements and facial expressions. Michel Simon is simply a natural at producing genuine laughter, and I love him with all of my heart for it!

Drowning

[planetguy · 8/10 · 17 September 2010]

No one, including the critics on the Criterion supplements, remarks on the fact that Boudou is saved from drowning. But more than that, from suicide. The obvious clashes between, free-spirits and bourgeoisie, Apollo & Dionysus, order and chaos, are there of course. But doesn't Boudou's attempt at suicide..in the title after all..deserve some notice. The fact that he seems happy at the end, may mean that after viewing the way the other half (or is it the other 90%) lives, he realizes his original life wasn't too bad after all. Meaning a clear winner, or does it? None of the bourgeoisie are so unhappy they think to snuff it.

Even-handed social commentary

[timmy_501 · 8/10 · 19 October 2011]

Boudu Saved From Drowning offers a remarkably even-handed look at class relations. While some characters, such as a group of policeman unwilling to help a bum search for his missing dog but all too willing to jump to the aid of a lovely woman missing a more materially valuable animal, obviously behave negatively, others have good points to match their bad. In fact, sometimes the characters from different social classes are almost too similar. The film centers around Lestingois, a generous member of the middle class who is most happy when avoiding his stuffy wife to hang around with his saucy maid. Lestingois risks his life to rescue Boudu, an uncultured bum who loses his desire to continue living once he is parted from his only companion.

Oddly enough, Lestingois has also lost one of his closest companions as the film begins, yet he hardly seems to care about his missing friend at all. By contrast, Boudu, a man that generally cares little about those around him, is deeply disturbed by his own loss. Still, once Boudu's actions reveal that he's happiest when avoiding Lestingois' wife to woo the maid, it becomes clear that the two aren't so different after all, manners notwithstanding.

The culture clash in Boudu Saved From Drowning is good for a few moments of genuine comedy, though they mostly are provided by situational irony, the same inferior type of humor that gave rise to the "sit-com." As a result, the film isn't quite as funny as it might have been.

Renoir is more than capable of handling the technical aspects here, though his direction is a bit more restrained than it had been in his previous two pictures. Since I prize the innovative techniques on display in his rawer efforts more highly than the staid professionalism he exhibits here, this was a slight problem for me. I suppose there is much to appreciate in Renoir's carefully composed shots, yet I couldn't help but feel that a refusal to innovate is equivalent to taking the easy way out for a director of Renoir's talents. Nevertheless, Boudu Saved From Drowning is a well made film full of clever social commentary and as such is worthwhile viewing for anyone.

Another Immoral, Sparse and Disappointing French Comedy from Jean Renoir.

[SAMTHEBESTEST · 4/10 · 9 March 2021]

Boudu Saved From Drowning (1932) : Brief Review -

Another Immoral, Sparse and Disappointing French Comedy from Jean Renoir. Some of Renoir films have often been cited as great classics by critics and cinema lovers but i don't fancy him. I was highly disappointed when i saw his 'The Rules Of The Game' (1939) because it was such a pathetic comedy with utter nonsense and crippy situations and Boudu Saved From Drowning was no different. If i may say so, Boudu worked like an inspiration to the latter one as the same immoral and cheap humour is used in that film too. However, his POW Escape drama 'La Grande Illusion' (1936) is one of my favourite film of the 30s decade and for me it's his only film that i can recommend to movie buffs. In Boudu we meet a bookseller who saves a tramp from drowning and shelters him, but the tramp's odd behavior starts to wear everyone down. Now read the next lines carefully and try finding one percent sense if can. So, the bookseller has an affair with the housemaid and then the Tramp asks her to kiss him, she delightfully agrees. Later, all of sudden the tramp kisses the bookseller's wife and shockingly she doesn't mind at all, they begin an affair. Next, both of them are caught red handed and the tramp is guided to marry the Housemaid, what the heck? What the hell was going on? It's terrible writing and horrible humour for any sensible person therefore only freaks would have enjoyed it or would enjoy it. The same thing was with Renoir's another film mentioned above, a bunch of sex affairs without any concrete theories or lovable moment as if we were invited for a mad xx* show, not a film. I dont want discuss about acting, direction and technical aspects because the story was a big blunder at first place. How can even like acting and direction when i have to bear the nonsense and torturous writing? Overall, tremendously overrated. A Must Skip!

RATING - 5/10*

By - #samthebestest

Technically it was engaging and impressive in the direction of the camera but otherwise I was really very disappointed with it for what it didn't manage to do

[bob the moo · 20 February 2009]

Grief-stricken from the loss of his dog, tramp Boudu throws himself into the river to end his woes, only to be pulled out by kindly book-shop-owner Edouard Lestingois and given shelter in his home. The Lestingois family take silent pride in the good deed they are doing in rescuing and perhaps reforming this tramp but Boudu himself seems singularly ungrateful and retains his own approach to life even now surrounded by the middle-class ideal.

I am sort of conflicted on this film in regards my take on it. On one hand it is generally regarded as a classic while also being "of its time" in some aspects – so the pressure is on me to join the "intelligent" voice of praise and also put down anything I didn't "get" to being of time and period. But then on the flip of that, the film as a story or commentary just didn't really work for me. I understand the challenge to the idea of Chaplin's genial little tramp but the message from the film is not delivered as well as it could have been and as such it didn't work that well. If the film is meant to be a dig at the pompous middle-class then it missteps by focusing so much Boudu's wild behaviour instead of making more of his inability to accept the trimmings of this ridiculous middle-class world. By not bringing out this middle-class world, Renoir prevents the viewer from doing that.

So the message then seems to suggest that some people prefer to life this wilder life and to try and change them is pointless. By my standards this is a point that I would need more convincing on and it isn't helped by being done in a comedic and farcical way such as it is. Perhaps though I am reading too much into it and it is just meant to be a broad class-clash farce? If it is then it is certainly broad because the lack of strongly formed commentary on either the poor or the middle-classes means that we get lots of aping rather than barbed physical comedy. It certainly has a light air of comedy to it that is amusing but it is rarely really funny or enjoyable.

Where the film is impressive though is in the direction. Renoir takes affectionate and "strolling" approach to his shots of Paris. Not going for full-on tourist stuff so much as he just lets Paris "be" around his film. Better still is his work in and around the house, specifically some of his shots where he films from one side of the house, through rooms and windows into the where the action is – really interesting and effective shots that prevent it feeling like a sound-stage and create the idea that this is all real. The cast are solid enough for the material. Everyone loves Simon so I guess again I am alone on that. For my tastes he is just too broad and obvious in his Boudu – he feels like he is acting in a silent movie because all his actions are big and telegraphed and he is too excessive in all aspects to win me over with rough charm. Gravval, Hainia and others are actually better as they have more grounded characters to deliver and thus have more of interest for me.

I'm open to being criticised on this because I appreciate that most people are falling over themselves to praise this and even those with issues with it seem to follow up with "but" in their reviews. However for me the story and content just didn't work and what it left was a sort of broad farce that didn't have any commentary teeth and wasn't funny or charming enough to get away without them. Technically it was engaging and impressive in the direction of the camera but otherwise I was really very disappointed with it for what it didn't manage to do.

What goes around, come around...

[LobotomousMonk · 8/10 · 19 February 2013]

An earlier reviewer noted that Simon's character in Renoir's La Chienne is a "metamorphosis" partner of Boudu. I cannot verify that per se, but it is interesting to point out that many of the stylistic developments in La Chienne carry over into Boudu. There is amazing depth of field - through windows (like Chienne... or M. Lange), exteriors (the hunt for Boudu's dog is exemplary) and especially in the Lestingois house. Renoir utilizes long pans to help construct the space. Again, Renoir positions the camera in a manner where there are obstructions to a full view created by objects in the space. This technique fosters a sense of realism through the unobtrusive camera. Narrow corridors abound and provide for deep staged setups. Renoir is finally liberating the camera and allowing for some of his later 'signature' mobile framing shots. The long take is also being introduced into the stylistic system... one of the final shots of Boudu floating in the canal as the Blue Danube Waltz plays in the soundtrack reminds us that originality in auteurship is still borne of influence and respect (Kubrick's 2001). Renoir also pays some respect to the French Impressionist filmmaker colleagues of his from years past. His novel use of sound as bridges between scenes is as creative and compelling as the ways in which avant-gardists were bridging with images in the silent era. Renoir also continues with practical applications of sound which began in On Purge. He positions a police officer with back facing the camera creating an ominous sense of authority when provided spoken lines. Although I am not a huge fan of Renoir's Hollywood productions, the drowning sequence in Boudu surely influenced some of the action sequences in a film like This Land is Mine (1943). The drowning sequence in Boudu is composed of a montage of shots, with unique angles and povs. The sound during the sequence is diegetic - traffic and crowds - which adds a suspense built around milieu realism as opposed to theatrical drama. Boudu (played excellently by Simon) is an incorrigible rascal whose physical comedy evokes laughing out loud (Chaplin, Keaton and the like). However, there are deep social relationships at play and it isn't so reducible to a critique of "misguided" bourgeois charity. We must be reminded that as sentimental as Boudu can be, it is also clear that he is mentally ill. I find it preposterous to believe that Renoir would be condemning a socio-economic class for diseases of the mind which discriminate against no one. My thesis for now is that Renoir is an impresario of the film medium above all else and as such sought to provide a pleasurable experience for the spectator. The treatment of Boudu remains lighthearted... enough so to not rouse suspicion of moral implications for the scenario. Again, Renoir is not so ambiguous or ambivalent in his politics as he is committed and determined to rendering a film experience that satisfies the myriad of audiences that might be in attendance. To that end he succeeds marvelously with this film.

a noble savage

[lreynaert · 10/10 · 25 May 2013]

This movie by Jean Renoir is a variation on the theme of the 'noble savage', here in the shoes of a tramp played superbly by a young Michel Simon. The 'noble savage' is obviously totally unsuited for bourgeois life and certainly for monogamy. His sexual drive is not yet 'tamed'. He is only comfortable in the open nature with his comrades, the animals, even if he survives merely through 'donations' by the bourgeois. The 'noble savage' is also a 'good male', a theme dear to Jean Renoir. He treated it wonderfully in his short film 'A Day in the Country' based on the story by Guy de Maupassant. The movie is also an admirable evocation of the atmosphere of a city (Paris) and its crowds in the years before 1940 in Europe. Masterfully directed (perfectly natural acting by its cast) this movie is a masterpiece of real French cinema.