I love this film! I did a short essay on it a while back for a class, it was as enlightening as your comments 😉 And now it struck me that you are, in some ways, just like Bertrand Tavernier! You both share an incredible love and passion for films! Great video my friend, bonne journée!
Great analysis, daisuke, so well articulated. I would say though that this as another whiff by Criterion as to supplements. Only 28 minutes and two essays deleted from the booklet. I am continually perplexed in how Criterion packs lots of extras in less significant movies and neglects a film like this. Commercial reasons I suppose. At least they are giving us this great new restoration, I’m thankful for that. I’ll add a couple of ideas to the discussion if it’s ok. I’m always fascinated by Clouzot’s depiction of sexual desire, (un) romantic love as a battleground, a sado-masochist perversion, a form of madness. All of which culminates in his later Manon but you see manifestations of that here too. There is also a feeling I have that Clouzot’s dark vision has a comic dimension. His suspense tightens and then when released we can experience an exhilaration and maybe a chuckle at the artfulness of it. But also his misanthropy, his pitiless view of human beings and their experiences, is taken to extremes few other directors approached. I feel something comic in that which has been amplified by interviews with Clouzot where he seems to chuckle himself at the darkness of his vision. Take care, my friend.
THANK YOU MY DEAR FRIEND FOR THIS WONDERFUL COMMENT! You speak about the film much much better than I do. I like this aspect of sex and sexual desire you mention. And yes, there is certainly a comic dimension. I agree.
I think the other reason I like his movies. Is because I relate to his point of view on humanity and temperament. In my research Clouzot was viewed by many of his collaborators as a pessimist, short-tempered, and almost always angry.Brigitte Bardot described Clouzot as "a negative being, forever at odds with himself and the world around him".His outlook on life is reflected in his own films that focus on the darker side of humanity. This describes me to a T I’m guessing he knew a lot of backstabbers. Im also kind of moved. To me some one who hates humanity that much must also love it or I guess I’m projecting. I first saw this movie with my dad as an 11-year-old. I remember us being struck by the shadows. I forgot about it until recently.
I’ve not actually seen any of Henri-Georges Clouzot’s films, but this sounds interesting. Thank you for the video Daisuke, I hope you’re doing well. Have a great day and please care!
What happens when a bunch of letters are sent to anonymous citizens that give a bunch of unflattering and damaging information about a particular individual? How does this play a role when it comes to how the public views the individual in question along with perception of their reputation? And how does this movie play a role in real life when it comes to its themes as well as any true events? These are some things to think about as one watches Henri-Georges Clouzot's early and challenging masterpiece Le Corbeau (The Raven) which is a film that is all about the idea of dangerous information as well as the impact that it has on society as a whole with real world implications. The movie starts off with a doctor named Remy Germain working in an unnamed French village who is doing his typical practice when a bunch of anonymous letters get sent to random people. These particular letters accuse the doctor of having an affair with a woman named Laura who is the wife of another individual named Doctor Michel Vorzet who is a psychiatrist. The letters end up getting worse when he is then accused of doing illegal abortions and these accusations start spreading like wildfire. This is the work of an unknown individual simply going by "The Raven" who clearly has an issue with the doctor which leads to an investigation regarding what is going on with these libelous letters. A few different themes are present in this movie that touch on some serious subjects. The first one is the idea of libel itself. Any one individual can say anything about anyone and it can be damaging to the person who is being attacked. This is something that is all too real in today's society when one takes into account social media which transcends something even greater than letters and can ruin someone's reputation. In the context of this movie for the time frame of the 1940s, one can only base this off of the letters (aka poison pen) themselves which give events that may or may not be true which makes it hard for the individual involved to sway opinion when it comes to defending their innocence. Even after it is proven that it wasn't the case there are some people who will still believe the original accusation which leads to an permanently damaging situation that one may never recover from. Another theme is the idea of formulating opinions of the individual in question which can lead to a sense of paranoia. This goes hand in had with how one views the accused individual either by taking their side and not believing the accusations in question or join in and believe these things and become part of the angry mob. This is a theme that was most evident in another Criterion release called Panique which involved some damaging information about a particular individual that is untrue and spread far and wide to make for a dangerous situation where the person being attacked has to defend themselves from the angry mob which can lead to dangerous consequences in some instances. The mob is just as guilty as the accuser in these instances. This of course leads to who The Raven actually is. As one watches the movie, it eventually becomes evident who is writing these dangerous letters in the first place, but the motivation is all too real for any individual who wants to hurt a single person whether they feel they were wronged in any way, shape of form. The way this plays out is where one comes to grips with the fact that it might involve someone who is close to them and just looking to throw them under the bus. This type of narrative is the perfect type for what can be considered film noir and is a n excellent example of a little known section of French cinema that is French Noir and one of the first in the country that deals with real issues. This leads to real world events where it has real life connotations. The script was inspired by something that happened in 1917 with someone signing poison pen letters under the "eye of the tiger". Nothing much came of that case but it was a heavy inspiration for the script which was written by Clouzot and Louis Chavance. But this may have also had a real world incident years later involving the abduction and murder of a 4 year old boy named Grégory Villemin which did involve some twisted and sick individual using the same calling card as The Raven who did the same thing, possibly taking inspiration from the character in the movie itself. Unlike the movie, this case was never solved and is a real life example of how someone can use such a crude method in this grave instance. And there's even been comparisons to how this related to life in Vichy France back when the Germans had taken over the country. Some looked at the film as a critique of French culture when it came to life under that regime. It could also be considered a criticism of the French citizens as well. The film was made during Occupation and could have been subconsciously thought of by Clouzot as an allegory for the current situation. But that would be more in tune with another film done a bit earlier called Les Visiteurs du Soir from Marcel Carne. Looking past sociopolitical possibilities, the main purpose of this movie was to show issues with morals from both the people and the accuser causing harm above all else. Le Corbeau is a a telling film that is a gripping story that focuses on the dangers of spreading rumors and misinformation that lead to terrible repercussions for everyone involved. At the time it caused a stir with the French media as well as the form of government at the time. But it may have a greater sense of purpose now compared to what it had at the time by showcasing how bad misinformation can be. This is especially true given recent events and how some people conduct themselves on social media platforms. Accountability is a precious thing when it comes to being respectful of others and being honest and truthful. Spreading lies is poison and makes those who do it no different than The Raven themselves especially when it comes to being responsible for any consequences that follow.
bonsoir mon cher ami, as a french citizen but not so french as my parents are immigrants from BOSNIA HERZEGOVINA, I just admire the deep metaphore and modernity of this film in fact a CORBEAU is a raven but in popular language ls an anonymous person who reveals shameful secrets writing infamous mails. symbol of the darkside of humanity, it is the illustrations of the collaboration with nazis. the french society is very political. I can propose you to see the film URANUS from Claude BERRI 1990, on the same subjet. I look forward seeing you again,
My dear dear friend thank you so much as always! And thank you for sharing a little about yourself. I really really appreciate this my dear friend. Yes, this film carries with it so many metaphors that are significant in terms of history as well as the present I think, as you suggest as well.
I’ve never been a fan of French cinema sure there’s a few movies I like. Generally speaking I don’t find French culture interesting at all. I love Italian culture. That said I love Le Corbeau and Henri-Gorge Cluzot is my favorite French director. Some people say that his overrated yet still good Les Diaboliques from 1955. Is the film to out Hitchcock Hitchcock. I’d say no Le Corbueau is the film that out did Hitchcock. It’s the only film of that era that is as good as Fritz Langs M from 1931. I think Henri-Gorge Cluzot should be mentioned in the same breath as Akira Kurosawa ( My favorite director) of course their filmography is nothing alike. But their movies just don’t age for me. they really use the medium of film. To its full potential. John Luc Godard. disregarded him. To that I say Henri-Georges Clouzot left a bigger mark on cinema that Godard and he was a real filmmaker. We’re outside of Breathless Godard’s filmography is nonsense. One last thing I understand this movie cause controversy because it was produced by a German studio controlled by the Nazis. I understand why French people are upset by this, but I feel the morals story and it doesn’t comply with any rhetoric the Nazis have I don’t think.
I love this film! I did a short essay on it a while back for a class, it was as enlightening as your comments 😉 And now it struck me that you are, in some ways, just like Bertrand Tavernier! You both share an incredible love and passion for films! Great video my friend, bonne journée!
Thank you so much for this lovely lovely comment. You are so very kind. Cheers my dear friend.
Great analysis, daisuke, so well articulated. I would say though that this as another whiff by Criterion as to supplements. Only 28 minutes and two essays deleted from the booklet. I am continually perplexed in how Criterion packs lots of extras in less significant movies and neglects a film like this. Commercial reasons I suppose. At least they are giving us this great new restoration, I’m thankful for that.
I’ll add a couple of ideas to the discussion if it’s ok. I’m always fascinated by Clouzot’s depiction of sexual desire, (un) romantic love as a battleground, a sado-masochist perversion, a form of madness. All of which culminates in his later Manon but you see manifestations of that here too.
There is also a feeling I have that Clouzot’s dark vision has a comic dimension. His suspense tightens and then when released we can experience an exhilaration and maybe a chuckle at the artfulness of it. But also his misanthropy, his pitiless view of human beings and their experiences, is taken to extremes few other directors approached. I feel something comic in that which has been amplified by interviews with Clouzot where he seems to chuckle himself at the darkness of his vision.
Take care, my friend.
I wanted to add that the Continental Films logo shown at beginning is almost identical to the Criterion logo!!
THANK YOU MY DEAR FRIEND FOR THIS WONDERFUL COMMENT! You speak about the film much much better than I do. I like this aspect of sex and sexual desire you mention. And yes, there is certainly a comic dimension. I agree.
I think the other reason I like his movies. Is because I relate to his point of view on humanity and temperament. In my research Clouzot was viewed by many of his collaborators as a pessimist, short-tempered, and almost always angry.Brigitte Bardot described Clouzot as "a negative being, forever at odds with himself and the world around him".His outlook on life is reflected in his own films that focus on the darker side of humanity. This describes me to a T I’m guessing he knew a lot of backstabbers. Im also kind of moved. To me some one who hates humanity that much must also love it or I guess I’m projecting. I first saw this movie with my dad as an 11-year-old. I remember us being struck by the shadows. I forgot about it until recently.
I’ve not actually seen any of Henri-Georges Clouzot’s films, but this sounds interesting. Thank you for the video Daisuke, I hope you’re doing well. Have a great day and please care!
Thank you very much and I can certainly recommend this film.
What happens when a bunch of letters are sent to anonymous citizens that give a bunch of unflattering and damaging information about a particular individual? How does this play a role when it comes to how the public views the individual in question along with perception of their reputation? And how does this movie play a role in real life when it comes to its themes as well as any true events? These are some things to think about as one watches Henri-Georges Clouzot's early and challenging masterpiece Le Corbeau (The Raven) which is a film that is all about the idea of dangerous information as well as the impact that it has on society as a whole with real world implications.
The movie starts off with a doctor named Remy Germain working in an unnamed French village who is doing his typical practice when a bunch of anonymous letters get sent to random people. These particular letters accuse the doctor of having an affair with a woman named Laura who is the wife of another individual named Doctor Michel Vorzet who is a psychiatrist. The letters end up getting worse when he is then accused of doing illegal abortions and these accusations start spreading like wildfire. This is the work of an unknown individual simply going by "The Raven" who clearly has an issue with the doctor which leads to an investigation regarding what is going on with these libelous letters.
A few different themes are present in this movie that touch on some serious subjects. The first one is the idea of libel itself. Any one individual can say anything about anyone and it can be damaging to the person who is being attacked. This is something that is all too real in today's society when one takes into account social media which transcends something even greater than letters and can ruin someone's reputation. In the context of this movie for the time frame of the 1940s, one can only base this off of the letters (aka poison pen) themselves which give events that may or may not be true which makes it hard for the individual involved to sway opinion when it comes to defending their innocence. Even after it is proven that it wasn't the case there are some people who will still believe the original accusation which leads to an permanently damaging situation that one may never recover from.
Another theme is the idea of formulating opinions of the individual in question which can lead to a sense of paranoia. This goes hand in had with how one views the accused individual either by taking their side and not believing the accusations in question or join in and believe these things and become part of the angry mob. This is a theme that was most evident in another Criterion release called Panique which involved some damaging information about a particular individual that is untrue and spread far and wide to make for a dangerous situation where the person being attacked has to defend themselves from the angry mob which can lead to dangerous consequences in some instances. The mob is just as guilty as the accuser in these instances.
This of course leads to who The Raven actually is. As one watches the movie, it eventually becomes evident who is writing these dangerous letters in the first place, but the motivation is all too real for any individual who wants to hurt a single person
whether they feel they were wronged in any way, shape of form. The way this plays out is where one comes to grips with the fact that it might involve someone who is close to them and just looking to throw them under the bus. This type of narrative is the perfect type for what can be considered film noir and is a n excellent example of a little known section of French cinema that is French Noir and one of the first in the country that deals with real issues.
This leads to real world events where it has real life connotations. The script was inspired by something that happened in 1917 with someone signing poison pen letters under the "eye of the tiger". Nothing much came of that case but it was a heavy inspiration for the script which was written by Clouzot and Louis Chavance. But this may have also had a real world incident years later involving the abduction and murder of a 4 year old boy named Grégory Villemin which did involve some twisted and sick individual using the same calling card as The Raven who did the same thing, possibly taking inspiration from the character in the movie itself. Unlike the movie, this case was never solved and is a real life example of how someone can use such a crude method in this grave instance.
And there's even been comparisons to how this related to life in Vichy France back when the Germans had taken over the country. Some looked at the film as a critique of French culture when it came to life under that regime. It could also be considered a criticism of the French citizens as well. The film was made during Occupation and could have been subconsciously thought of by Clouzot as an allegory for the current situation. But that would be more in tune with another film done a bit earlier called Les Visiteurs du Soir from Marcel Carne. Looking past sociopolitical possibilities, the main purpose of this movie was to show issues with morals from both the people and the accuser causing harm above all else.
Le Corbeau is a a telling film that is a gripping story that focuses on the dangers of spreading rumors and misinformation that
lead to terrible repercussions for everyone involved. At the time it caused a stir with the French media as well as the form of
government at the time. But it may have a greater sense of purpose now compared to what it had at the time by showcasing how bad misinformation can be. This is especially true given recent events and how some people conduct themselves on social media platforms. Accountability is a precious thing when it comes to being respectful of others and being honest and truthful. Spreading lies is poison and makes those who do it no different than The Raven themselves especially when it comes to being responsible for any consequences that follow.
Thank you so much Stealthborn as always for your really wonderful breakdown and analysis!
bonsoir mon cher ami, as a french citizen but not so french as my parents are immigrants from BOSNIA HERZEGOVINA, I just admire the deep metaphore and modernity of this film in fact a CORBEAU is a raven but in popular language ls an anonymous person who reveals shameful secrets writing infamous mails. symbol of the darkside of humanity, it is the illustrations of the collaboration with nazis. the french society is very political. I can propose you to see the film URANUS from Claude BERRI 1990, on the same subjet. I look forward seeing you again,
My dear dear friend thank you so much as always! And thank you for sharing a little about yourself. I really really appreciate this my dear friend. Yes, this film carries with it so many metaphors that are significant in terms of history as well as the present I think, as you suggest as well.
I feel like your French pronunciation is quite good.
You are very very kind my friend!
Hopefully they re-release Quai Des Orfevres (although they probably wouldn't get away with using the original cover art for that).
Thank you so much for this comment also!!
I’ve never been a fan of French cinema sure there’s a few movies I like. Generally speaking I don’t find French culture interesting at all. I love Italian culture. That said I love Le Corbeau and Henri-Gorge Cluzot is my favorite French director. Some people say that his overrated yet still good Les Diaboliques from 1955. Is the film to out Hitchcock Hitchcock. I’d say no Le Corbueau is the film that out did Hitchcock. It’s the only film of that era that is as good as Fritz Langs M from 1931. I think Henri-Gorge Cluzot should be mentioned in the same breath as Akira Kurosawa ( My favorite director) of course their filmography is nothing alike. But their movies just don’t age for me. they really use the medium of film. To its full potential. John Luc Godard. disregarded him. To that I say Henri-Georges Clouzot left a bigger mark on cinema that Godard and he was a real filmmaker. We’re outside of Breathless Godard’s filmography is nonsense. One last thing I understand this movie cause controversy because it was produced by a German studio controlled by the Nazis. I understand why French people are upset by this, but I feel the morals story and it doesn’t comply with any rhetoric the Nazis have I don’t think.