This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

The Worst Film Ever

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Blistering performances.

Truffaut -how shall I say this?- is grossly overrated. I did my homework: I have now seen 5 of his movies and I am stunned by the attention such an inept filmmaker has commanded over the years in critics' writings. What on earth is there to praise in Truffaut's flaccid movies? They all feel to me like a high school kid fond of cinema made them: immature and clichéd in both content and form. Critics, open your eyes: this a filmmaker who has botched every good plot he was given (Mississipi Siren, Les 2 Anglaises et le Continent, The Bride Wore Black) misused great actors (Catherine Deneuve, Jeanne Moreau) and overused very bad actors (Jean-Pierre Leaud, who, after his miraculous turn as a child in The 400 Blows, was never able to speak or act in a compelling or even noticeable manner. There he is again in Day For Night, flat as a failed soufflé, bland as porridge. And we are supposed to believe he seduces Jacqueline Bisset in this story?! Casting, people, casting!) Day For Night features characters that are cardboard cutouts, actors that have clichés dialogs to emote to, situations that feels forced or trite. It is lightweight material, from which you come out vaguely entertained, and mostly frustrated: what a waste of time, and all this national and international praise for such fluff? Did I learn anything from this movie? Did it make me think, did parts of it resonate in my life or mind, did it make me want to see more or do something better with my life? Was there any real emotion on screen?I saw recently in my local art house theater "A Nos Amours" of Maurice Pialat. Same country, same generation of filmmaker, but oh what a difference of authenticity and competency. Time to throw off the false gods and promote quality: bury Godard, forget Truffaut -watch Pialat, and feel something.

Magic tricks are not as interesting when you know how they are done and this movie, which shows a behind-the-scenes look at how a movie is made, left me feeling that I will now be less susceptible to the illusions movies try to create.Francois Truffaut plays a movie director on the set of a movie titled "Meet Pamela." The story is clearly so autobiographical that I don't know why Truffaut gave himself the fictional name of Ferrand. Ferrand is seen in a state of turmoil having to make a dozen decisions a minute, having to contend with constant interruptions, having to deal with the personal problems of the actors, and so forth, all while trying to direct. Truffaut wants us to see that the pressures on a movie director are *enormous*. Pity the director.The opening scene has Alphonse (Jean-Pierre Léaud) emerging from a subway into a busy street scene. This scene sets you up for what is to come, since it seemed so staged. Indeed, the camera pulls back to see Ferrand directing this scene from "Meet Pamela." Ferrand tries to control all the action, like how fast a woman is walking with her dog, how Alphonse should walk, exactly when a car should arrive on the scene, and so forth. Trying for such tight control results in obvious fakery. Perhaps a more generous analysis would be that Truffaut is purposefully trying for artificiality in order to establish that "Meet Pamela" is a bit of dog.This is no "8 1/2," since the focus is on the mechanics of movie making rather than the psyche of the director. We see fake snow, a candle lighted from its interior, wood in a fireplace lighted by gas, and so on. The most elaborate set made to deceive has the construction of an elevated platform placed so that it can be made to appear that the actors on it are across the street from a remote camera location on an upper floor.The acting is pedestrian for the most part with Jacqueline Bisset being the only one who is making an effort. I am sure that things can get pretty tedious on a movie set with multiple takes being done, but I did not feel that it was necessary to pound that point home to where I experienced the tedium myself as a viewer.I liked the look at the personal relationships among the cast and crew, how that during the filming a community is established. It is the exception that lasting relationships are formed. At the end of filming, the community collapses and everyone goes off in different directions. People come and go in anyone's life, but that phenomenon is exaggerated in the lives of movie people.

more than a film, it is a window. to a clear image about movies and the role of web for entire universe who create is. the delicacy and the force are basic tools for Truffaut in this case. because it is not a pledge for art or revelation of secrets. only portrait of few people and their ordinary work. a classic for the courage to not be lesson or pledge, for mixture between to make a movie and administrate a world, it is a revelation at every new meeting. for the grace of detail exploration. for the performance of Truffaut himself. for Jacqueline Bisset and Valentina Cortese. or, only for the lost Alphonse, the ex - Antoine by Jean-Pierre Leaud. the basic virtue- precise use of nuances. like each refined thing, its importance remains a problem of seduction.

This sparkling comedy drama from French master director Francois Traffaut is the sort of self-loving, semi-mock at The Industry that they - and the critics - all love.But, making a film about making a film can't be as easy as it would seem - how realistic do you make it, how much comedy and mishap do you throw in?I found on this, my third viewing, that little details continue to reveal themselves and works smoother and better as a whole. Jacqueline Bisset looks lovelier than ever, as the lead actress in the movie, titled 'May I Introduce Pamela?', who's a dodgy choice as she hasn't made a film since suffering a nervous breakdown, which makes the London- based insurers twitchy......which puts greater pressure onto Truffaut himself, as relationships/affairs, kittens that won't drink milk, stunts that don't get stunted properly and a death in the cast, which necessitates a whole re-write. You get the picture?This all sounds manic and possibly stupid, but as I said this isn't Hollywood and my second paragraph; Trauffaut keeps a tight rein and it all works in a kind of well-organised Robert Altman picture sort-of-way. Loose enough to seem free and flexible but with enough structure.Many love Day for Night a lot - clever and masterful as it is - and only a seasoned director could dare such, but isn't the sort that I can really get my teeth into. Preferring Trauffaut's gritty and thought- provoking classics, this one is more about entertainment than statement. Which is fine, but I just don't get the same buzz, or anticipation from it.This only refers to the DVD - it's verified as an Amazon purchase - has only French writing on the case. The default languages setting seems to be dubbed English, which actually starts off OK, with at least actors seemingly French, speaking English but soon, lip-sync fails as more of the cast appear. It's also (presumably) dubbed into German & Spanish. To watch it properly, you need French language but you need also to set English subtitles; they don't appear automatically.Subtitles (according to the DVD blurb, in French) are in English, German, Spanish, Swedish, Portuguese, Dutch, Hungarian, Czech, Turkish, Greek & Romanian.