Touches You

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

This movie begins in The Poet's Café, where a bunch of hoodlum poets hang out. Orpheus is hated by the rest of the poets in the café, because his poetry is so much better than theirs. A fight breaks out among the poets, just the way you and I might get into a fight over some poems we had written. Other poets join in, and it becomes a riot. Orpheus is almost arrested, but the policeman lets him go when he realizes who he is. In fact, he is surprised he didn't recognize Orpheus, since there are lots of pictures of him in his wife's room (Oh brother!).Anyway, Orpheus is a grouch who is mean to his wife, but we are supposed to understand that he is a genius who has his moods, and so that makes it all right. Death (in the form of a hot babe) kills Orpheus's wife, Eurydice, but instead of being grief stricken, Orpheus falls in love with Death. But he can't get rid of his wife that easily. The old ball-and-chain is allowed to follow Orpheus back to the surface as long as he does not look at her. Well, he never seemed to want to look at her when she was alive, so I don't know why he would want to look at her now, but he does. In fact, he cares so little for her that I suspect he looked at her on purpose so he could be free to make it with Death, the hot babe.And it almost works, except that we are then treated to an outrageous narrative rupture, in which Orpheus and Eurydice live happily ever after.

1- A film should convey its meaning mostly not in words but moving pictures, otherwise some other form of expression must be used. If you take out the words from this film, you would be left with careless camera-work and settings (see 1931 film Nosferatu for a much careful camera work and settings- and a much better rising from the coffin scene-19 years earlier). Instead of making a film, Cocteau could publish a book of intellectual sentences decorated with still photography and we would not miss a thing."I am your death" may be an effective sentence by itself, but only in poems. If you use such sentences in a film, you must support it with visual elements in some way. 2- Many positive criticism centers on the symbolism hidden. Somebody symbolizes "poet", other one "death", we see how "poet" prefers art (that is listening to radio) to life, how "poet" is fascinated by "death".... But this is dry symbolism appealing only to the intellect but not meant to be felt. Trying to comprehend the feelings of a "poet" could be good, but instead, we are expected to appreciate his/her drama and "poetic cause". Do watchers feel any emotional contact with the "poet"? I don't think so. That is; film should appeal much much more to senses and emotions than the intellect. 3- Many other positive criticism, on the other hand, mentions innovative camera tricks, etc... You can see all of them in films from much earlier times. For example, rising from bed is done much better in Nosferatu(1931). If careless effects usage was intentional, what was the aim? Some intellectual explanation like "reversal just like from death back to life" might just make me laugh.All in all, we should not make injustice to excellent movies which can alter our emotions by comparing them with self-indulgent appraisal of artistic pain.

The legend of Orpheus and Eurydice updated to 1950 (even though a narrator at the beginning tells us this is timeless). Orpheus (Jean Marais) doesn't care for his pregnant wife Eurydice (Marie Dea). He meets and falls in love with the beautiful princess (Maria Casares) who is actually death. In turn the chauffeur of death (Francois Perier) falls in love with Eurydice.People have said this is beautifully shot with surreal and lyrical images. That is most certainly true. Some of the imagery is astounding with special effects that (while obvious) are quite impressive for 1950. The raising up of the dead sequences are genuinely eerie. But the pace is very slow and I was getting bored quite a bit. There were beautiful moments but, in between, there were these obvious sequences that bought things to a screeching halt. A very attractive cast (especially Marais and Dea) help the movie through those dead spots. I was impressed and liked what I saw but no more than to give it a 7.

Very few films can hold up after nearly 60 years. Yes, in America here we have The Wizard of Oz and Gone With the Wind (big budget epics) etc. but this film should get some mainstream TV viewing as well, although it won't. American viewers don't like subtitles, at least PBS should show it.I've watched some of the classics like "M", "From The Earth to the Moon", "Metropolis" etc. and for the most part they don't hold up. Metropolis does, but that is because of the crazy cool visuals. Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast and Orpheus both hold up very well.They are both so beautiful and magical that you don't care if they are old or done with outdated technology. Cocteau was a genius of the first order and his art still stands the test of time. To watch a movie like Orpheus and stll be shocked at what happens is a testament to his ability to go for the strange, especially from someone like me who has seen plenty of jaded movies which were meant to be shocking but were merely outre'.See Orpheus (and rent Beauty and the Beast while you are at it) and have a Cocteau Fest, you won't reget it.