Le Plaisir

Stunning, STUNNING tracking shots with superb art direction to aid them. I thoroughly enjoyed (Maybe even loved) this film, though I couldn't help but feel the last segment was nearly as strong as the first two.

A very nice piece of fluff - little dramatic weight here, but it's nevertheless a lot of fun. Three stories (the middle story much longer than the bookends) all related in some way to the film's title (Pleasure) and its rewards and consequences. As you'd expect from Ophuls, it's a gorgeous film to look at - beautifully lit, masterfully shot, et cetera.

Three good, bittersweet stories adapted from Guy de Maupassant, directed by Max Ophüls with such majesty I couldn't possibly praise him enough. From the astoundingly fluid cinematography, and Oscar-nominated art direction, to the realistic and grabbing dramaturgy, this is a cinematic accomplishment that should not be missed.

As with all of Ophuls' key works, it's easy to appreciate the technical wizardry on display if nothing else. His camera moves are never extraneous and always serve the story. It's just a shame that the tales he is telling are not always as interesting as the telling, even if his triptych structure works overall. The main story involving whores in the countryside initiallly seems slight, but it's pure Ophuls, expressing the transient, bittersweet nature of life's pleasures with a delicate touch.

As with other Ophuls, it's easier for me to admire this on a formal level than actually connect to it emotionally at all (i found myself much more invested in some parts than others, namely the first and last segments, whereas i found stretches of the longer middle part sort of boring). Still, the technical perfection of it pretty much makes up for any possible deficiency elsewhere. If there's a more beautiful quasi-sex comedy from 1952 i sure haven't seen it.

max ophüls' direction didn't seem to be quite as technically magnificent here - everything else is as you'd expect from him. the sort of director people would describe as 'tasteful', which is obviously far away from what i care about.

A simple film that is made very likeable due to Ophüls' delightful direction and the warmth of its characters.

An amusing enjoyable film in three parts, examining different aspects of lustful pleasure. While the film's structure in connecting the three stories is rather weak it does work and the stories hold up on their own as interesting short films. They are related and contrasting the depiction of pleasure in each one makes for some interesting viewing. The camera work and visual design of the film is stunning.

I really enjoyed this, although I must confess that the much longer length of the middle section exhausted my interest somewhat and I was far less engaged by the final story. Ophüls' camera just glides through this film ... circling the elaborate dance hall set in the first story and following the prostitutes journey through the countryside in the middle story. I really enjoy his light, very sophisticated and urbane humour.

I'm not Max Ophüls' biggest fan, but his exaggerated, lavish and playful style often get me. He's just too romantic for his own good a lot of the time. I like his more darker side, and we get at least two short stories where that breaks through. The middle and by far the longest one, is him in his usual mood. Happy and carefree, and most important, in-the-moment. Working girls on excursion, having a joyous time and not much more than that. It's a sweet and silly time.

fra_eng; [le plaisir]; drei geschichten über das vergnügen von tanz, liebschaften und tragischer liebe - bewegt erzählt.; (schneller film in erzählweise);

I don't know why, but this just didn't do anything for me narratively. As always, Ophuls use of the camera and camera movements are great. I don't get how the camera is always in the exact right place for every shot composition even when the camera rotates and moves all over the place. It can move 70 degrees right, 40 degrees up, 90 degrees back to the left, and despite the camera being in the same place all of those shots are perfect. The staging, camerawork, and maybe set design, are amazing.

While all three stories are captivating, it is 'Le Masque' that is the stand out and indeed in and of itself a masterpiece. The other two stories that follow are mostly satisfying explorations of pleasure in its various forms. Rating likely to increase with further viewings.

Cynical, degenerate, and pessimistic. (i.e. Maupassant)

83.50

Elegant camerawork capturing rambling thematic prose, the intent of which seems to be to capture the contradictory nature of man’s pursuit of pleasure. Some segments and individual scenes illustrate this more explicitly than others. A great closing line left a better taste in my mouth than I expected given the emotional detachment I felt from all but the middle segment.

Star Rating: ★★★★

Weird how, at minute thirty, this turns from its haunted, mysterious, drunken lyricism into a sort of sunlit farce without any notable stylistic traits. By the time the last quarter comes around you realize that it's actually an anthology of murky moral tales, not the free-flowing Felliniesque dream it starts as.

boring as hell.

#396

339

A delightful adaptation, absorbing and luscious as life itself. The music, narration and dialogue will warm up your heart and sweeten your day. While the last part was the weakest of the three IMO, it didn't diminish the strength of the film. 'Le Plaisir' is one of those enjoyable films where you walk away thinking: "they just don't make 'em like they used to".

Stylish but rather subdued compendium, with no highlights to stay in the memory.

Again, Ophuls proves himself a master at camera movement, with astonishing tracking shots, crane shots, pans and zooms and impeccable lighting and set design. I actually found the bookend stories far more interesting, perhaps because their relatively short length prohibited them from wearing out their welcome. The middle story had some amusing moments but there just wasn't much meat there. As befits the title, the movie is pleasant, just not all that mind-blowing except for the cinematography.

375

# 416