This morning I set foot on the coffee table and a movie on DVD. He was a French thriller from the seventies that a friend had happened to me and recommended: "
Police Python 357", the recently deceased
Alain Corneau, starring actor and singer Yves Montand
.
acknowledge at first I was a bit boring. Frequently looked the DVD counter, waiting for what began to interest me. They spent a lot of things, but I just imported a lot. For those who have not seen and do not think so, I summarize the argument slightly. (Since there are spoilers here - by the way, one has to warn of a dangerous espoilers seventies?)
Montand is a tough cop in the city of Orleans. His boss, Commissioner Ganay, is married to a paralyzed woman, played by Simone Signoret
. Montand meets an Italian (Stefania Sandrelli
) something mysterious with it rewinds. Their relationship is quite turbulent. This was the part where I was watching the DVD counter. I was bored. The girl was unbearable. A couple of surprises come when, we learn that the Italian is also a lover of the protagonist's head and say that this is topically French, the wife of the head, the paralytic, knows all about this relationship with her husband and seems to approve absolutely. Suddenly, when we were in minute 30 (to the delight of the script writers of manuals), the lover wants to break with the commissioner Ganay to be only with the protagonist. Ganay, surprisingly, he takes it pretty well. As well, reproaches her lover his passivity and lack of passion. Provokes So the guy just kill her. 30 min. Ganay
flees the scene of the crime. Soon after, shocked, comes home. Simone Signoret, paralyzed wife asks him what happened. Ganay answers with brief explanations: I've beaten, with an ashtray. What have you done with him? I've thrown in the river ... The commissioner is sunk. Women, as usual, lying in bed, seems quiet. She tells her husband, imperative tone, to take a cushion. Ganay looking for a moment the room. His wife complains: no, the pad is in a dresser drawer. Ganay find it eventually. The wife tells you to stop beside her in bed, and support head on it. Ganay obeys. Placed next to it and go to talk about what to do thereafter. She keeps a cool head, he goes slowly reassuring: no, not going to surrender. The film follows. Lasts 120 minutes with another great turning point in minute 90 (yes, everything seems to magically fit into the scheme of screenwriting manuals) I recommend you to see (by the way, I feel great remake meat). However, of which I wanted to talk about is the sequence of Ganay and his wife, which I have described.
My question is ... What does it look damn pad there?
Yes, that's my question. A guy comes home after being charged with her lover. Not sure whether delivered or not. It is a dramatic moment. Why the hell put Corneau and Boulanger, his co-writer for a moment in which the woman tells her husband to take out a pad comfortable? Was an occurrence of the filming? Maybe, but ... why not eliminate Corneau in the assembly? Do not break the tension of the scene that moment of everyday? Could not lie down without cushion husband? Could not be the cushion and on the bed to avoid boring and anticlimactic that second in which the murderer he seeks, with some awkwardness?
These pauses or digressions can break the rhythm or bore the viewer, but also achieve it creates what you see. Often the writers
eliminate everything that is not important or essential to the plot. However, at times, be so strict, awarded to every sentence they utter and every action that people perform a strict order is in some way, to eliminate a certain possibility of identification and realism.
In reality, in life, when one returns home and begins to tell his wife that is to commit a murder, we all know from experience at home is seen, is the birthday of the child and that is full of screaming dwarf, or a woman complains that it spoils the quilt (are crushed feathers) or, after the crime, you forgot to pass through the supermarket (at this time have already closed). In life no longer pitch changes happen, unwarranted digressions, jokes, grotesque in dire situations, endless discussions, dialogues inconsistent and many times killed. When writing stories because we know that we usually remove the stories are not life but ... the stories are about life. The question as always ... how many lives we let into our stories? In your movie, look for the murderer that damn pad?
0 comments:
Post a Comment