Le Jour Se Leve (1939) User Reviews

Great and unique storytelling makes great and unique movie.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 9/10 · 2 October 2010]

Thing that this movie is best known and appreciated for is its unique way of storytelling. It's one of the very first movies that features a story that gets mostly told with flashbacks and it keeps switching back between past and present. This storytelling technique was later made more famous and popular by Orson Welles with his masterpiece "Citizen Kane".

But of course a movie requires a bit more than just some good storytelling, though it still remains a very important aspect. But this movie also has a great, quite simplistic movie, with still a lot happening in it, like only the French could make. It's a bit of a sweet love-story, that shows the events leading up to a fatal shooting. Some people will call this movie slow but hey, that was just the way movies were back in its days. But it's not like it's slow pace ever makes the movie a boring or dragging one, or at least not to me. It might had been the case if the movie had been a bit longer but with its running time around 90 minutes, it's simply a short movie to watch.

It's also one beautiful looking movie, that features some great cinematography and especially lighting. Shadows play in important part in the movie its visual look. Amazing thing about its cinematography is that the movie actually had 4 different cinematographers attached to it. No idea what the story is behind this but I guess that each used their own specialty for this movie, or some of them simply got fired or stepped up during production. Anyway, whatever was the case, it really didn't hurt the movie its visual look. Marcel Carné movies often were visually a real pleasure to watch and this movie forms no exception on this.

It's also a movie that quite heavily relies on its actors to tell its story and to deliver its great dialog, that got specially written by poet scenarist and songwriter Jacques Prévert. And this movie luckily had some great actors to work with. At the time Jean Gabin really was one of the best French actors. He really did his best work in the '30's and starred in some other classics such as "Pépé le Moko" and "La grande illusion" during the same decade.

Some great and unique storytelling equals a great and unique movie.

9/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

What is it about French films that makes them so special?

[adrian290357 · 9/10 · 3 April 2009]

There is something so lyrical about the tale of the doomed François portrayed by the great Jean Gabin that even in its hardest luck moments you feel you are watching poetry in motion.

In addition, Le Jour se Leve is a character study with all the contradictions that tend to go with pained souls like François' - except that there is a further depth that renders the film quite universal, a depth made of little moments in human relationships and the flaws that gently emerge but only renders the humans involved more endearing.

Still, all that glitters is not gold: the apparently pure Françoise has actually been bedded by M. Valentin (Berry); and the police are more interested in getting their man than in saving him.

The direction is precise and inspired, resorting to the then much used flashback technique but never allowing it to dominate the film.

The photography - well, it is gorgeous and it gives the film its expressionistic ambiance. Finally, Gabin - one of the greatest actors ever in one of his greatest roles. Need one say more?

The ending can be predicted from the moment François kills a visitor in his apartment but that aside it is a film full of cinematographic treasures, acting to gape at, and a quality of direction that is seldom seen these days. A must see for anyone who cares about movies.

A tragedy of everyday proportions

[Varlaam · 9/10 · 3 February 1999]

We see a man shot; who he is and why we don't know. The murderer has locked himself inside his room. Police are forced to shoot in, trying to get him to surrender. The story then proceeds in flashback.

Marcel Carné directs this famous French film starring Jean Gabin. The two had worked together the previous year on "Le quai des brumes", a film well known then and now. If you are unfamiliar with Gabin, he was to the late 1930's in France what Bogey would be shortly in America, only Bogey with a soupçon of Cagney. More animated than Bogart, but less than Cagney with his agile song-and-dance-man side. A tough guy who's actually a good guy.

Now, a soft-hearted tough guy who's surrounded by police -- that could also describe Bogart's breakthrough film, "High Sierra", from 1941, and perhaps there is some superficial similarity.

However, this story is mostly a tale of love affairs and working class life -- that's really where its interest lies. There's a real sympathy here for the common man, when even a modest house on a rutted street would seem beyond his reach.

This film's original reputation may have been based at least in part on its Gallic openness about sexual matters. It's quite outré by the Anglo-Saxon standards of 1939. Regardless, the justly celebrated "Le jour se lève" has a poetic quality overall, and a memorably ironic final shot of the kind we don't seem to see quite often enough anymore.

Truth, lies, society: realistic and symbolic masterpiece

[Teyss · 10/10 · 25 March 2016]

"Le Jour se lève" is a French cinema major classic and more specifically the lead title of "poetic realism" genre of the 1930s. Apparently simple in its form, it is an elaborate movie about hidden truth and apparent lies, with social background.

STRUCTURE

The movie is not the first one with flashbacks, but probably the first to use them so consistently and skilfully, two years before "Citizen Kane". There are three of them, surrounded by four "present" sequences. Interestingly, the latter are relatively consistent in duration and space: they all last between 6 and 11 minutes, occur between evening and dawn of the following day and happen in François' building or around. (As such, the movie follows the rules of classic tragedy: unity of time, place and action.)

This contrasts with the flashbacks, which progressively condense time and space, building up dramatic intensity:

• Flashback 1 (22 minutes). Duration: three weeks. Locations: road to the factory, factory, outside Françoise's house (twice), Françoise's house, café.
• Flashback 2 (24 minutes). Duration: at most a few days. Locations: François' building, Clara's room (twice), café, greenhouse.
• Flashback 3 (7 minutes). Duration: real time. Location: François' room only.

As we see, the condensation is threefold: length of the flashback itself, duration of the action, space where it happens. While the first and second flashbacks represent some mental escape (duration, exteriors, love, future plans), the third one loops back with the opening scene in terms of action, location and length. All this creates a sense of increasing pressure and inevitable tragedy, reinforced by the fact the "present" sequences also move progressively from exteriors to interiors and notably to François' room: there is no escaping the reduced environment and limited time; we are increasingly confined with François in his room during his last night. "It is a small world. It turns around, we meet again", Valentin says. Indeed: smaller and smaller, faster and faster.

Additionally, to augur the tragic ending, the movie constantly hints references to death.

• François and Françoise both are orphans.
• François tells her: "It would be nice if everybody were dead and there were just the two of us".
• Valentin says: "I am coming back like a ghost".
• Clara tells François: "It seems you are informing me someone died".
• François shouts at the end: "François is gone!"
• The teddy bear that looks like him is shot.
• François is seen through his window and his mirror riddled with bullet holes.

APPARENT VERSUS HIDDEN

The contrast between present and past reveals another opposition: apparent versus hidden.

• The mystery of the murder at the beginning, behind a closed door, is only explained at the end.
• François looks healthy but his lungs are filled with sand.
• He is considered a nice fellow but will eventually commit murder.
• He has a happy eye and a sad eye, as pointed out by Françoise.
• The deputy director has a nice garden close by the factory which inside looks like a nightmare.
• Valentin's show is a success but he tortures his dogs to achieve it.
• Françoise gives François her allegedly personal brooch that is actually Valentin's.
• Clara is understanding but cruelly hurts François on purpose by revealing the secret of Valentin's brooches.
• François says at the end: "Everybody kills, but secretly, little by little so it doesn't show."
• In a revealing scene, Valentin tells François he is Françoise's father. It is moving and we feel sorry for him. However, we later on discover it was a lie. But where is the truth? Does Valentin just want to manipulate François and Françoise? Or does he genuinely love her so much that he is willing to do anything? He is an ignoble yet complex character, magnificently played by Jules Berry.

The apparent/hidden antagonism is visually illustrated by lights and shadows that frequently divide faces and bodies. Also, many shots through mirrors and windows show us reality is double-sided. And the recurring apparitions of the blind man (a cliché feature introduced with second-degree humour) tell us truth is not what we see.

Characters also are antagonised: François (simple, frank, honest) versus Valentin (intelligent, manipulative, sleazy); Françoise (young, shy, apparently chaste) versus Clara (experienced, outspoken, flirty). So is society: opposition between workers and "artists", "simple" people and intellectuals, people and policemen, hard work and pleasure, living conditions and plans for a better life. François is a strong character but denied a proper existence: he dresses like a monster without a body and a face in the factory; he is dominated by Valentin's rhetoric; he lives isolated at the top of the town's tallest building; the police do not negotiate with him, they simply shoot; he shouts at the end, in a memorable monologue, "There is no François any more!"

As a result, the movie manages to be both symbolic and realistic: working conditions, living conditions, social context just before WWII, close shots on important details (brooch, gun, burning cigarette). Ironically, at the end when François is dead, his alarm rings so he can wake up to go to work.

A DREAM TEAM

A last note about the crew. The three main actors (Jean Gabin, Jules Berry, Arletty) are among the greatest ever in French cinema and it is their only common appearance. Notably, it is the only movie featuring all-famous Gabin and Berry together, which makes the contrast between their styles even more striking.

Dialogues by Jacques Prévert (a major French poet) are simple, powerful and somewhat poetic. Scenery is the work of the master Alexandre Trauner: efficient reconstitution of the whole quarter, impressive usage of the building (e.g. fabulous travelling shot from top to bottom), minute reconstitution of François' room condensing his past. Cinematography is from another master, Philippe Agostini, and lightings from yet another, Curt Courant. A true dream team.

Last but not least, Carné is an acclaimed director and "Le Jour se lève" is considered by many as his masterpiece, ahead of other classics such as Le quai des brumes (1938) and Les enfants du paradis (1945).

Before the flood.

[dbdumonteil · 10/10 · 9 August 2001]

That was one of the last French masterpieces of the thirties just before the war.Marcel Carné was accused of pessimism and the movie was quickly forbidden by the military censorship that used to say in 1940:"if we've lost the war,blame it on "Quai des Brumes""(Carné's precedent movie.The director answered:"you do not blame a barometer for the storm"). "Le jour se lève " is,if it's possible,darker than its predecessor. From the very beginning,the hero,a good guy (Gabin) is doomed,his fate is already sealed,because the tragedy has already happened .That's why the movie is a long flashback.The memories are brought back on the screen with an astounding virtuosity by some elements of the set (the teddy bear for instance).Only three main characters outside that of Gabin,the evil one (Berry who was to play the devil in "les visiteurs du soir "1942),the lucid one (Arletty) and the ambiguous one (Jacqueline Laurent).The latter provides

the only flaw of the movie:Laurent acts Françoise as the innocent pure girl,however Carné leaves no doubt about her relations with Berry. A remake was made by Anatole Litvak with Henry Fonda ,Barbara Bel Geddes and Ann Dvorak (who must have been studying Arletty's acting for a long while),called "the long night" with an absurd happy end. Needless to say,it's the French Carné movie that you've got to see!

the day rises

[gabrizzio555 · 30 August 2006]

the main setting of "le Jour Se Leve" is the top floor of a french apartment. the film opens with Jean Gabin character Francois - a factory worker- killing a dog trainer named Valentin who we find out (as the story unravels itself) was "involved" with his girl. Francois then barricades himself from the police, and the reason for the death of Valentin is told in simple sets of flashbacks that Gabin remembers between cigarettes as he decides what his next move will be. the story is simple and delicate in manner and substance but nonetheless the director/writer team Marcel Carne and Jacques Prevert succeed in turning the realistic (and sometimes edgy) conversations, movements and places into poetry. and in response to an earlier review, the simplicity of the flashbacks, is what makes the movie so intriguing. instead of relying on a heavy plot that might challenge audience, Prevert and Carne decide to put great detail into a simple tale about a sentimental man who is torn to ruin by a contemptuous and Machiavellian man.

A fascinating, slow, intense original to "The Long Night" from 1947

[secondtake · 7/10 · 25 May 2010]

Le Jour Se Leve (1939)

This French movie is oddly famous as the original, almost lost (destroyed) version of the American, The Long Night (1947), and it almost demands comparison. In all, the American version with Henry Fonda in the lead is more beautifully made, and perhaps more compelling for a lot of very small reasons.

But this French one, which is not only first, has a couple key qualities that make it worth getting absorbed into. For one, it is more seriously realistic, with both a sexual frankness (implied, but not ignored) and a lack of a "Hollywood ending," naturally enough. It is filmed beautifully, and acted really well (the "bad" man in this one is more convincing and lifelike than the Vincent Price incarnation in the later one).

But it is also a slow film, with far too much of the man, played by Jean Gabin, who was also in the 1937 Grand Illusion) staring and pacing. Here is where the photography and editing of the later film sustain us through the solitary moments much better. This version almost feels low budget, at least by American standards, without making the uncomplicated production always a virtue (it doesn't cost more to move the camera closer, or cut out sections of staring into space). I know this is all an aesthetic decision, and the slow, sad realizing of the character summing up his life is really at the center of it all, but see both films and see what you think.

Two things are really astonishing.

First, the almost scene by scene similarity of the second film to the first. Camera angles, dialog, flashbacks (many), even the dog trainer's show, and the teddy bear missing an ear, all of this is just copied and reproduced in the later movie, to an almost ridiculous extreme. (No wonder RKO tried to destroy every single copy of Le Jour Se Leve before making The Long Night. Sad and weird.) That's certainly a bowing down to this first one for good reason.

Second, the dilemma the men face in the two movies is actually a little different at the core, and this is a product of the times they were made. In The Long Night, the man is an ex-soldier suffering from having been through the horrors of World War II, and so the standard American film noir themes are distilled and honed down to this one man (Fonda) in his room. The earlier French film was made just as the war was about to start, and the man (Gabin) is suffering from a more universal problem of being a working class man putting in long hours, cheerfully, with little hope for a future for himself. The dandy-ish counterpart that is his nemesis is unattractive in nature, but has charm and education and abilities beyond this man's noble simplicity, and it seems that society, and women, favor this more false kind of man.

It's because of these themes the French version has a growing reputation. It's really well acted, and a classic dilemma played out with beauty and pathos. That it isn't perfect is something we have to adjust to, remembering it was forward looking for its time.

"Freedom is quite something!"

[morrison-dylan-fan · 10/10 · 17 May 2015]

After talking to a number of fellow IMDbers about French cinema during The Occupation of France in WWII,I decided to watch 5 films which would show the effect that the beginning of the invasion in France,the Occupation itself, and the ending of the Occupation had on French cinema.

Whilst struggling to find a title that could act as a starting point,I picked up an old dusty copy of a UK film mag called Empire,and I spotted a DVD review for a 1939 French Film Noir which had been banned by the Vichy govt, (which also cut some scenes from the film,that thankfully survive)due to it being "demoralizing" which led to me getting ready to see the sun go up.

View on the film:

Surviving the censorship of the Vichy govt and an attempt by RKO to destroy every known copy, Studiocanal delivers an elegant transfer,with the 2 minutes of cut footage being seamlessly re- instated,and the audio/picture quality being crystal clear.

Rumbaing behind the stark background of the opening credits,the score by Maurice Jaubert creates a superb undercurrent mood for the title,as Jaubert keeps the score light & breezy during François's blossoming romance,which transforms into a bellowing shriek,as François sinks into a Film Noir dead end.

Made just before the country fell to Hitler,the screenplay by Jacques Viot and Jacques Prévert brilliantly displays the impending darkness that France was about to enter,as the writers show the police to be faceless figures who attempt to "gas" François out of the building,and stop anyone from criticising the government.

Along with the ruthless shots at the police and government,the writers smartly take a Film Noir route to reveal the unease that France was experiencing,as François and Valentin spy/listen in on those nearest to them,whilst the Film Noir loner François becomes a hero to the crowds standing outside the guest-house,as François yells that he wants to be left alone in his flat,where he can lock his door to the despair taking place outside.

Showing Valentin's stairway to death with a hard stare which makes the viewer feel every thud that his dying body makes on the steps,director Marcel Carné unleashes a chilling Film Noir atmosphere,as long,winding shots around the guest-house,and tightly coiled whip-pans in François flat show the doom-laden mind-set that François has entered.

Delicately using flashbacks, Carné creates a contrasting feel to the bleak Film Noir world that François is now locked in,by giving the scenes with Clara & Françoise a stark,shining lightness which represents the relax mood that François feels around them,which slowly transforms into a brittle darkness,as Valentin starts attempting to wipe François from his two dream girls.

Sharing a mutual desire for François's love,the gorgeous Arletty (who destroyed her career by having an affair with a high-ranking Nazi,and spending most of the Occupation going to fancy dinners held by the Nazis) and Jacqueline Laurent (who in a banned scene appears topless!) each give beautiful performances as Françoise and Clara,with Laurent showing a genuine sweetness in Françoise's desire for her past with Valentin to be left in the dark mists of time.

Arletty lights up the screen as striking Femme Fatale Clara,whose mask of acceptance over François fight for his "true love" Françoise breaks,as Clara finds herself being pushed to the wilderness by Valentin & François.With Carné sealing his fate by filling him with bullets in the tense opening, Jules Berry gives a wonderful performance as Valentin,thanks to Berry turning Valentin's charm into sharp manipulation ,as Valentin finds François trying to take all that is his.

Sealed in his prison cell/flat, Jean Gabin gives an explosive performance as François,with Gabin hitting a light touch with an expert eye in François's blossoming romance with Françoise,which is haunted by the bleak, burning rage that François's fate is now trapped in,as François looks out of the window in his flat,for hope that daybreak will appear from the darkness.

Worth seeing once.

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 19 November 2005]

The story is almost rudimentary. An honest plain-speaking working man, Francois, is in love with a fresh-faced young Francoise, but she begins hanging around with an older man burdened with a diabolically sinister face, Valentin. The older man travels around with a trained dog act and a pretty but worn assistant, Clara, who falls in lust with Francois, much to the annoyance of Valentin.

Actually neither man cares much about Clara. They both have their eyes on Francoise. There is a big argument between the two men in Francois' room and Francois shoots and kills Valentin.

The police surround the room in which Francois has hunkered down. He broods about the events in flashbacks, then shoots himself. Fin.

Maybe I was expecting too much because the movie is generally regarded as a classic of its kind. "Poetic realism"? The subtitles are sometimes far enough off to be amusing. The acting is nothing to write home about, but the direction is functional and the success of the movie -- and it IS successful -- hangs on the characterizations.

Absolutely nobody is entirely sound morally. Take Francois (Gabin). Yes, he's honest, plain-spoken, ordinary looking, and honest -- he hates people who lie. But, well, there's the business of that rather nasty murder. Valentin has just insulted the beautiful Francoise but he's also suggested that Francois is a pedophile for wanting her. It's at that point that Francois picks up the pistol and plugs the other guy. Is he responding with such fury to the insult aimed at Francoise -- or the one aimed at himself? In either case, the insult is delivered casually, almost jokingly, and hardly an excuse for such an explosion of rage. And we can't overlook the fact that -- insult or no insult -- Francois is shooting and killing a rival for his girl friend's affections. All through the movie, Francois has shown himself to be ill tempered and the murder seems not much more than a logical expression of that character flaw.

Valentin is evil looking alright. His eyes seem pasted onto the sides of his head. He wears a loud phony checked overcoat, as opposed to Francois' working kit. He waves his hands dramatically. He lies fluently -- at one point claiming to be Francoise' father. A roguish fellow, the sort, as he explains to the slightly dull Francois, that interests women, while Francois is the sort that women fall in love with. He's probably more perceptive than anyone else in the movie, even about himself. "People loathe me. I am a figure of ridicule," he tells himself in the mirror. He's obviously meant to be some kind of bad guy. Why doesn't he leave Francois and Francoise alone to live happily ever after. Why does he keep NUDGING them? Okay, but that's hardly enough justification for his murder.

Anyway, his possessiveness towards Francoise does raise an interesting question. Not about Valentin but about Francoise. What is her game anyway? She seems to like Francois well enough and kisses him warmly once in a while, and she keeps his photo on her mirror, although when he proposes marriage to her (more than once) she guides the conversation in a different direction. She turns down Francois' offer of a soirée to watch Valentin perform in the café, but although she applauds enthusiastically and allows him to shepherd her around, she never seems to care that much for him. All in all, she's a blank.

The complexity of the characters adds a layer of meaning to the movie that the plot simply can't supply. I was glad I watched it, in the same way I'd be happy to take another peek at the Mona Lisa, because everybody says its so good. But I don't think I'd watch it again.

"Despair, inevitability of fate, and a working - class character unable to find his place in the world"

[antcol8 · 10/10 · 31 July 2016]

I think this film is a Masterpiece. But I am somewhat uncomfortable with this thought - why? This is a truly great movie - films like this have everything to do with why I fell in love with the idea of living in France. The frankness about love and sex, and about all of the similarities and differences between the two. That still seems so audacious. And the A Team brought its A Game: Carné, Prevert, Alexander Trauner, Maurice Jaubert, Gabin, Arletty, Jules Berry...all killing it. When Gabin puts on the leather jacket and goes through all that torture with a cigarette - it is perfection. Pre - War Existentialism at its finest! The shot of Françoise carrying the flowers down the alley by the factory - this is the kind of poetry that cinema alone is capable of.

So what's my problem? Something a bit unacknowledged - ly "pulpy" in its heart? Ultimately, is it a "real" Work of Art? How many films really are? Does this matter, in any way?

Carné's reputation is complicated. The younger generation - the Nouvelle Vague - really denigrated him, it seems. How much did this have to do with his being seen as a collaborator during the Nazi Occupation, and how much did this actually have to do with his style? He needed Prévert, that seems clear. Prévert - how does he do it? Screenplays with such a deeply poetic quality, still managing to move and inflect. Genius. Gabin - my favorite screen actor. What he doesn't know about screen acting isn't worth knowing. His poise. His coiled energy - that voice that, at the drop of a hat, can modulate from silence and repose into a vicious growl. Arletty - when I first saw her in Children of Paradise I was mesmerized. Every time I've heard someone say "But I don't understand why people fall all over her - she's not really THAT hot!" it has felt like a friendship dealbreaker. At the very least, it evokes Andrew Sarris' great line that anyone who resists Children of Paradise's charm deserves never to see Paris.

Maybe I see through this film a little bit. Maybe some of its gravitas seems not quite earned. But look at that set! That street! The crowds! All those fantastic details - the bored coat - check girl plunged into her book during the dog show. And that ending, with its brilliant pile - up of several key images, one at a time...which makes me think of what we lost when we lost Maurice Jaubert, not just a great film composer, but also a brilliant critic of film music and its meaning:

"In The Lost Patrol - -otherwise an admirable film- - the director was apparently alarmed by the silence of the desert in which the story was laid. He might well have realized the dramatic possibilities of silence, but instead he assaulted the ear -without a moment's pause- with a gratuitous orchestral accompaniment which nearly destroyed the reality of the visuals."

Well, Jaubert practiced what he preached - so much of this film is underscored by little more than subtle and ominous low - register percussion (tympani, but not only, I think...). Are those the storm clouds looming over Europe when this film was made? Or is that reading too much into it all?

And, after that question - one more question: how can the man who made Hôtel du Nord, Quai des Brumes. Le Jour Se Lève and Les Enfants du Paradis be considered more - or - less a Tradition de Qualité hack? These are the mysteries...Subjects for further study and reflection.

The First Film Noir?

[MogwaiMovieReviews · 7/10 · 22 July 2018]

'Film Noir' was a French term for a type of violent, pessimistic American film that started to appear around and after the second World War, usually shot in sparse, dark rooms at night, at least partly to save money.

Often they would take place in flashback - as in Double Indemnity, DOA, and Sunset Boulevard - with the fate of the hero already carved in stone, and the film just the series of bad decisions and treacherous women leading up to his fall.

Oddly though, this French film might be the one that started all of that, and though it might not compare with the Chandleresque dialogue and fast-moving shoot-em-ups that followed, it is decidedly more beautiful, mysterious and atmospheric.

On the downside, even though it is a short film it drags, and there are some poorly developed characters and plotholes (François following Françoise all the way into town about 10 feet behind her in an empty street while pushing a bike and she never sees?)

I've only seen it the once but I was confused as to the relationship between François, Françoise and Valentin: first we were told these two new lovers with the same name happened to be raised in the same orphanage, then an older man who is having an affair with the female one claims to be her father. This plot twist doesn't seem to lead anywhere but thin air, and I would have thought the much better story would have been the revelation that Valentin was BOTH of their fathers, and hence the two lovers were actually brother and sister. Was this a storyline left undeveloped because of its taboo nature? I don't know, but I feel it would have been a much better catalyst for François shooting Valentin than the somewhat unconvincing showdown in the final film.

In conclusion: it's a flawed jewel from the past: watch for the exquisite photography and silver atmosphere, as well as the central performances, especially from Jean Gabin, who was perhaps never better.

Great example of French Noir

[mrtransfer-40808 · 9/10 · 12 February 2017]

Told in flashbacks, the story slowly enfolds to explain the death that started the movie. A very touching love story. The guy is just trying to find a little love in his daily struggle to work a dead end job and make ends meet. There is miscommunication between some couples. Characters are unsure about what it is they really want out of life. Events lead tragically to a death. Trapped in his room by the police, the crowd responds with varying degrees of sympathy and confusion. Was the death inevitable? Those are the questions. In the end, you understand how the situation could have ended differently. You will enjoy this movie.

Good, if not anything super special

[I_Ailurophile · 7/10 · 9 June 2023]

The crew behind the scenes turned in fine work, including production design and art direction not least, but also effects. The cinematography reflects keen eyes, and the editing is adept. Jean Gabin naturally stands out, not just as the protagonist but also with his international renown, but the cast give fine performances at large. Marcel Carné's direction is terrific, broadly speaking, and the writing team of Jacques Prévert and Jacques Viot penned a compelling story.

All this is well and good, and the picture is all that it needs to be to entertain, and certainly to stand above other titles that have been less carefully crafted. There's just one problem: the heightened emotions and charged dynamics that should define characters and their relationships, and drive the story, too often fail to fully come across in my opinion. We see Francois become more tense and undone as both the flashbacks and the active narrative progress; a small late scene between Clara and Francoise might be the top highlight of the entire feature for me. Otherwise, whether it's a question of the scenes as written or a wrinkle in Carné's direction, those taut feelings that define characters and the fundamental advancement of the plot just don't truly manifest. On paper Valentin is a mess of ugly behavior and attitudes, Clara and Francois share sparks, Francois and Francoise are in love, and Francois is increasingly incensed at and by Valentin. In practice, I'm not inclined to think these notions were meaningfully conveyed. As a viewer, I don't Feel It.

It speaks well to how well this is otherwise made that it's still as solid and enjoyable as it is. Only, as the full weight of the drama isn't present, the film isn't nearly as impactful as it could have been. Obviously this is pretty highly regarded, and other folks have gotten more from it than I have; I'm glad for them. I do like 'Le jour se lève,' but I just don't think it's anything special or remarkable. It's worth watching, for sure - maybe not something one needs to go out of their way to see, however.

Well-acted but plodding, uncreative glimpse at love quadrangle

[Turfseer · 5/10 · 12 December 2010]

Le Jour Se Leve was considered good enough by Hollywood to be remade into a Henry Fonda vehicle in the 1940s. It's also currently considered a classic by many film critics and appears on some of the top ten lists for best film of all time. From my perspective, it's just another one of those films that's gained a reputation and because everyone else says it's great, it must be! But looking at it objectively, the story not only plods along but fails to pay off.

The film begins with Francois, a factory worker, who has barricaded himself in his rooming house after shooting a man. The police arrive and he fires bullets through the door which almost hit the unarmed officers standing outside. The police call for reinforcements and a standoff ensues. The rest of the film involves flashbacks which explain how the situation arose as well as flash forwards to the present, with Francois holed up in his apartment as the police take various actions to try and get him out.

It seems that Francois has fallen for a young waif, a floral shop worker by the name of Francoise and courts her assiduously. After a few weeks, he wants to stay the night with her but she tells him she has another engagement in the evening. Francois follows Francoise to a nightclub where Valentin, an older man, is performing a dog training act. Francois spies Francoise as she goes through the stage door in the back of the club to visit Valentin. Meanwhile, Francois runs into Clara (played by Arletty who was blacklisted for awhile in the French film industry after having an affair with a German Officer during the Occupation in World War II). Clara, who is Valentin's assistant and lover, reveals that she's just broken up with him after a three year relationship.

The rest of 'Le Jour' revolves around Francois shacking up with Clara but also seeing Francoise. Valentin confronts Francois continuously and at one point falsely claims that he's Francoise's father. Finally, Valentin comes over to see Francois with a gun and admits that his initial intent was to shoot him. After further angry conversation, Francois takes Valentin's gun and shoots and kills him with it.

That's almost it. After all the flash forwards to Francois dodging police bullets fired into his apartment, he finally decides to shoot himself. After all the machinations amongst the quadrangle, the suicide is probably the most unimaginative way to conclude the story.

Le Jour's characters are all rather one note. Francois is the probably the best of the bunch since he has that gift of gab with women. But he's also an obnoxious hothead who can't control his temper. After he shoots Valentin, are we really supposed to feel for sympathy for him? The shooting is completely uncalled for. As for Valentin, his wacky demands for Francois to stop seeing Francoise become tiresome. Yes we get it that he's insanely jealous but it would be nice if we found out some things about him. Francoise appears particularly spineless as she continues her relationship with Francois despite continuing to see Valentin. I couldn't understand what she saw in Valentin and it's never really explained. Perhaps she's 1939 France's answer to a 'flower child'. Finally, Clara is the most level-headed of the bunch. She garners sympathy at the end when she attends to Francoise after she faints as the police close in on Francois. But Clara's screen time is limited and seems to be the odd woman out in the drama.

Le Jour is certainly well-acted and Jean Gabin is particularly good as the smooth-talking Lothario who seduces both women. But with all long-winded 'present day' scenes with Francois besieged by the police, unexplored motivations of the various principals, one note characterizations and that climax which ends in a whimper, Le Jour Se Leve is a decidedly overrated film, undeserving of inclusion in the pantheon of art house winners.

Beautiful performances and cinematography

[vanessa_meikle · 19 September 2000]

A fantastic film, which plays with the emotions of the spectator while stunningly portraying the feelings of a pent-up man whose end echoes his pent-up life in the city. The film is beautifully shot in black and white and is a perfect example of French realism, with a modernist time disorientation tossed in for good measure. I found the performances by Jean Gabin and a showgirl with whom he gets involved (played by Arletty)to be strong, portrayed with a kind of hopeless, clutching pathos. Worth it simply for the beautifully constructed final shot.

Faded, inadequate, heartbreaking.

[alice liddell · 9/10 · 27 October 1999]

Carne's murder romance seems a little dated now, its rigid structure and frail artifice too polite for the hysteria necessary for film noir. Carne's tendency to reduce to types is at its most stilted here, leaving one with little room to breathe. There is still much that is majestic and dreamlike - the extraordinary sets, their imposing facades as repressive to Francois as the human world he can't understand; Carne's elegant way with composition and camera movement, especially when he allows himself to see people, not allegories; the unparalleled acting, emotion from another age, yet yearningly, recognisably human.

More of a character study than a thriller

[bandw · 8/10 · 21 January 2007]

The plot device of having a story begin with a pivotal event and then filling in the details as to how that event came to pass can be effective, as is illustrated here. The event is a murder and your interest is piqued as to the circumstances that provoked it. Details are supplied using flashbacks intermixed with events subsequent to the murder. As the movie progresses you can see potential motives develop, but it is not until the actual murder takes place that the mystery is resolved.

The appeal of this film for me was in trying to understand the four main characters: François, a blue-collar worker who loves Françoise; M. Valentin, an unctuous older man who also loves Françoise; and Clara, Valentin's partner and François' mistress.

John Gabin plays François as an ordinary man, but with a more complex personality than first meets the eye. He can be amiable and easy-going in most situations, but contentious and angry when pushed a little. I thought Gabin did a great job in integrating these disparate moods into a believable character. I am a bit mystified by his behavior after the shooting - I found his reaction of barricading himself in his room to be unusual. The murder was impulsive and, given the circumstances, could have been presented to an understanding jury in such a way as to yield a minimum sentence. So, why did François immediately behave in a manner to insure his doom? Did he see his future as hopeless? Was it anger bubbling to the surface at a society that he felt had kept him down? Was it to give himself time to decide what to do? This is where a novel may be superior to a movie - a novel could tell us just what François was thinking in his time of being holed up in his room.

Françoise is played with seeming innocent sweetness by Jacqueline Laurent, but her character is also hard to figure. Her relationship with Valentin is never clear. She seemed to love François, but vacillated in committing to him apparently because of her relationship with Valentin.

Jules Berry does a fantastic job in creating a unique and unforgettable character in his portrayal of Valentin. He has an appealingly glib charm but ultimately comes across as being offensive and pathetic. He is aware of his failings and his behavior is due in good measure to his self-hatred. But why did he taunt François in such a provocative and self-destructive way?

And then there is Clara. She dissolves her partnership with Valentin and then takes up with François. What is François doing taking up with Clara when he really desires Françoise? That can't help. And what is Clara doing taking up with François when she knows he loves Françoise? As seen by François, Clara is a mistress, but is there more? Clara understands how François views her, but she develops a deeper attachment anyway. However, she is able to break things off with a world-weary detachment. Behavior is not rational I guess.

As you might expect from director Carné, the black and white cinematography is creative and engaging. The script is tight; every scene has substance. Consider the scene where François first meets Françoise. François is at work in a line of men who are sandblasting heavy equipment. We see the miserable conditions of his workplace, but when Françoise comes on the scene he takes off his head gear and is quite tender with her. We learn a lot from that simple scene. And the scene showing Valentin's act with the trained dogs is transfixing and gives us a quick insight into his character. And the final scene is a memorable classic.

As is shown, life is tenuous - a single impulsive act can change the course of your life.

Le Jour se Lève (Daybreak)

[jboothmillard · 7/10 · 24 January 2015]

I found this French film in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, it was rated very well and the plot sounded good, so I was looking forward to what would hopefully be a good foreign language film, directed by Marcel Carné (Les Enfants du Paradis). Basically factory worker François (Jean Gabin) has shot and killed M. Valentin (Jules Berry), and following this he has locked himself in his guest house room on the top floor of the building with many flights of stairs, the police soon arrive to arrest him, they fail to shoot their way into the room as François has barricaded the door. In a series of flashbacks, occasionally returning to the present to see his attempts to avoid being caught, it is revealed François had been having a relationship with both naive floral shop worker Françoise (Jacqueline Laurent) and more experienced performing assistant Clara (Arletty), who until meeting him was working with Valentin for his performing dog act. Valentin is manipulative and had also become involved with both women, and becoming jealous of François, as a constant liar he even tries to convince his foe that he was Françoise's father, but in fact both she and François were raised in orphanages. The rivalry between the two men eventually leads them to the guest house, Valentin confronts him with a gun, and in the tussle between them François grabs the weapon and fires, this is what has lead to the events of the present. As he continues to protect himself in the room François continually chain smokes with nerves, he has become delirious having learnt of his plight, before two police officers throw tear gas grenades into the room François consumed by despair shoots himself in the heart, the film ends with his lifeless body on the floor and gas filling the room, and the alarm sounds to announce it is morning. Also starring René Génin as Concierge, Mady Berry as Concierge's wife, Bernard Blier as Gaston and Marcel Pérès as Paulo. Gabin certainly exudes existential despair as the man who has unintentionally and sympathetically got himself into trouble, Berry is a terrific villain as the deceptive entertainment performer who tries to get one over his rival and treat his women like possessions, while Arletty is as loathsome as the showgirl, and Laurent is fine as the innocent woman stuck in between. It has moments of suitable claustrophobia, it works well as a tragic story filled with false love and a man breaking down into complete sorrow, it is written well and it has many interesting moments, a worthwhile crime melodrama. Vey good!

A feast for the Gabin fans—Gabin in one of his very best roles ever

[Cristi_Ciopron · 9/10 · 14 September 2008]

Daybreak is one of the best, if not the best Gabin film of the French poetic realism. Gabin was a handsome young man, still supple ,and here he plays François, a virile, vigorous workman ,disputed by two women—an older seductress, Clara, and a girl, Françoise. The workman François registers as one of Gabin's top performances, especially memorable; and the movie is maybe the finest product of the famous Carné/Prévert collaboration—among the richest in human, psychological content. François is a doomed character in this suspenseful drama—yet the movie does not belong to Prévert's symbolical , fatalist plays, it rather gives place to several realistic characterizations. The economy a means needs not be underlined—it is a drama of four characters (the three already mentioned, and a deprived , poisonous debauch oldster). The story ,presented from François' point of view, is told as he, after murdering his rival, recapitulates the phases of his love affair. François recounts how he met a girl, while at work; how he dated her; how she had a mysterious night life, and he eagerly follows her and spies. Then enter a demoniac character, from the variety's world, and Gabin begins a relationship with the former mistress of this spinster. He gets caught in a net of lies and of dirty secrets which destroy his inner coherence. His need for joy remains unsatisfied, he is betrayed. He is a honest rough tough workman unaccustomed with the ambiguities of the small world that allowed him in. His drama is precise, well defined, tangible and concrete. If other poetic realism outings favored the lyricism, this one favors the realism. The things inhere are very concrete, and of a remarkable good taste, something Carné had in his best days.

This is not a symbolical misty allegorical drama, but a love movie, a hugely interesting and beautiful and humane, with likable characters, very _relatable to. One of the great French love movies. Particularly involving and enjoyable and masterly composed. The good taste is enhanced, strengthened by a particular lightness—the touch is light, fine, masterly ;such art warms the heart, encourages and satisfies the mind. It is one of the great almost unknown (today) films. Yet this precious _pellicle registered Gabin in one of his ample, large youth role, and benefited from Carné's talent …. Indeed, one cannot love Carné and Gabin too much ….

And Gabin performs with such a verve, a dynamism, an obvious pleasure he takes in his role …. When he did not enjoy a part, he could simply be lukewarm, detached, bored—not so here, where his interest is evident.

From this film, one understands why Gabin was looked upon as a sex symbol; in his work outfit, or in his leather jacket, he looked awesome indeed. He was young, blue eyed, a chain—smoker, and his head, with his mean mouth, had a leonine air. This makes the film especially important for all the Gabin fans, who can see him here in his best shape.

For every one who wishes a marvel, or just a strong large Gabin performance, this is the movie .A singularly graceful one.

In popular terms and low—brow jargon, I would state that here is the coolest Gabin movie that I know. It is cool in all respects—first of all Gabin himself; the other roles (Clara, Françoise, the demoniac tamer) ; the movie's look and brio. Gabin is self—aware of his coolness in the Cagney/ Gable/ Grant/Bogart/Brando/Rourke/Crowe way .He knows he is young, handsome, has beautiful hands and looks cool as a chain—smoker. The movie is a tribute and a testimony of his youth coolness. Yet it's also far from being only a pretext for showing Gabin's good looks. It is a work of art, a meaningful work made with unspeakable lightness and discernment and also instinct, feel for these things. It leaves a wonderful taste. Gabin's coolness is only a side, an aspect of the movie, it serves the film, it does not deprive it of autonomy and inner interest. It is subordinated to the film's significance.

It verifies again the assertion that Gabin basically made one role throughout with career—with virtuous variations and deft modulations (as opposed to the _chameleonic Americans like Brando, De Niro, Pacino, Rourke—and also unlike the great Europeans: Simon, Fresnay, Jouvet, Stroheim and Belmondo). This is part type—casting, and part vocation. Gabin brought all the roles to himself (and the roles were anyway visibly similar and homogeneous); not that he did not take chances, but in his choices, so stable and almost uniform, there was something at unison with his own human nature.

Very French

[stimpy_tr · 7/10 · 18 February 2021]

It has specific elements that can be found in a French movie. A man wavers between two women and a woman wavers between two men, and moreover, they are doing all these quite explicitly. I cannot imagine how these kinds of behaviors would be represented in a movie of another culture and whether they would look as natural as in a French one.

Carné gave eloquent voice to a mood of fatalistic, romantic pessimism

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 8/10 · 19 October 2005]

In the late '30s and early '40s, the films of Marcel Carné gave eloquent voice to a mood of fatalistic, romantic pessimism… After the war, however, his career was a sad shadow of its former self…

Central to Carné and Prévert's conception of doomed love was Jean Gabin's proletarian antihero, trapped in darkened rooms and foggy streets while awaiting retribution for crimes he barely knew he might commit: in "Quai des Brumes," Gabin's deserter comes violently up against local gangsters in a battle over the girl with whom he has fallen suddenly, passionately in love; in "Le jour se Léve," surrounded by police but unable to contemplate surrender, he recalls the events leading to his shooting of a girlfriend's seducer…

Widely described as poetic realism, Carné's style is in fact anything but realist; the squalor, shadows, and smoky bars all externalize the hero's melancholy resignation to an unjust Destiny… Without Carné's expert control of atmosphere, the effect might seem merely picturesque, for rarely have solitude, alienation and death been imbued with such elegance and beauty

So ends the day

[AAdaSC · 7/10 · 8 January 2024]

No-nonsense factory worker Jean Gabin (François) falls in love with flower-girl Jacqueline Laurent (Françoise). However, she is seeing dog-trainer and master story-teller Jules Barry (Valentin). The story focuses on the rivalry between these 2 and their dialogue between one another is compelling and drives the film along. Arletty (Clara) also plays a good role as Barry's ex-assistant who has broken free from him and formed a liaison with Gabin. This is a French film, so guess what, don't expect a happy ending!

There are some cruel conversations and very frank dialogue exchanges between the characters. And some interesting lies that are thrown out there! It's an entertaining film but let down for me by a gloomy ending. The actors do well - Barry is excellent in his role whilst Laurent is a bit of a weirdo. Not sure if she is a simpleton innocent or a master manipulator. Characters tell lies and Gabin can't align with this way of being. Arletty and the others can. Maybe this is the moral of the story - if you can't cope with a little deception, then maybe this life isn't for you.

So, get lying, everyone. Go forth and tell some crackers. I have now retired from the rat race (my aim was always to get out once I could) and I think I will now tell people that I am a Legal Arbitrator if I am asked. All that means is that I am listed on a Power of Attorney document for my dad. It sounds like a top profession, though - ha ha.

In a world with no room for decency, honesty and dignity, Gabin finds one... but for how long?

[ElMaruecan82 · 9/10 · 18 April 2017]

On the surface, Marcel Carné's "Daybreak" is a heart-pounding claustrophobic thriller based on a then-revolutionary use of non-linear flashback-driven narrative and that was two years before Orson Welles' "Citizen Kane", on the surface, one can see the film and find every reason to love it.

Still, one viewing wouldn't do justice to the film. You might watch it once to get the overall picture, then a second time to really appreciate the existential poetry of Jacques Prévert's script, which operates like the raw and penetrating lyrics of a tragicomic symphony speaking the deepest truths about life and rejection, and you can watch it a third time, to appreciate the fiery and haunting performance of Jean Gabin as François, a simple foundry worker becoming despite himself the immediate instrument then the collateral victim of an unexpected killing.

And unexpected is the word since its from gunshots that the film opens, a murder just happens off-screen, we only see someone getting off the apartment, his hand on his belly and then tumbling down the stairs until landing on the feet of a blind resident, of all the witnesses. Honest people shout for help, police come but the man inside won't give himself easily, he's armed, he can protect himself and has all the time to figure out what the next step is. The irony is that there's no possible escape, the siege immediately begins, he's literally cornered and the apartment becomes a temporary but fragile shell of safety. He has some cigarettes but like most resources: it is limited in time. Time is all he's got and it works like the countdown of a ticking bomb.

Not only Gabin but Arletty and Jules Berry are many reasons to appreciate the film, but it is Gabin who steals every scene, Gabin as the subject and the object, he's the one who starts the plot by killing, and enriches our experience by telling us why he did. The film has always been associated to the poetic realism movement but the notion that immediately emerges is 'fatalism'. There's a sense of impending doom over the shoulders of François and we know it's a matter of time before he'll be lured into the fatal action. But the film isn't interested in the fate of François who's already lost at that time but on the circumstances that lead him to that act, because obviously, he doesn't strike as your "typical" killer, does he?

The use of flashback is crucial because what we see proves our doubts right, he's a decent man, a rather friendly one, despite his tough façade, but he's driven into a dark corner because of a rivalry with a man who's everything he's not: an older man, more manipulative, a smooth talker, an upper class erudite dog trainer played with classy sneakiness by Jules Berry. Both are in love with the same delicate woman, and she's too shy to reject them. She wasn't the prettiest or the smartest one but she was gentle, innocent and too much of a beautiful flower to let some manipulative smooth talking pervert corrupt her.

There's a subplot involving an affair between Berry's mistress played by Arletty and Françoise but it never distracts us from the core of the film, which is the uprising tension between two men and two different versions of humanity. Meanwhile we're taken back to the apartment, which gets smaller as the plot advances, and the situation gets similar to these media circuses showcased in movies like "Dog Day Afternoon", one of the emotional climaxes of the film involve an angry monologue of Gabin toward the crowd, he can't stand the hypocrisy of a system that will label him as a criminal while men accomplish more cruel things than plain killing, this is Gabin at his finest, the sign that he's a tragic figure to be and won't really accomplish himself until the last act.

There's something so premonitory in a film featuring a French men caught in a lonely place and force to commit suicide because he just can't face the ugly reality. The film is from 1939 before the War would put thousands of citizens in similar situations, the dawn that was ready to break was one of an ugly nature, forcing men to transcend their nature and ethics and do things they wouldn't be proud. The question that Gabin's rant asks is "who are we to judge?" and this question resonate even more powerfully when put in the context of the film's making and the film hasn't lost any of its relevance today, like many classics of Gabin.

Here, he's is at his most complex and tortured but somewhat, this is his most decent character, which makes his ending even more tragic or given what was awaiting France, not as tragic as it seems, after a second thought maybe he was lucky to get the hell out of the place, to be the master of his own destiny, instead of surrendering to mediocrity.

Couldn't find much to like here

[Jeremy_Urquhart · 5/10 · 9 October 2021]

Fool me twice, shame on me, hey? Everything I felt about Port of Shadows in terms of being disappointed and kind of bored, I felt the same here. It's a shame, because I remember really liking Children of Paradise when I watched it a few years back.

So while it has a cool premise, decent visuals, and an interesting flashback structure, it didn't add up to something more than I could at best begrudgingly admire in parts. But then again, the flashback stuff, in hindsight, didn't add a huge amount to the film, really.

I guess I should be thankful if it helped give birth to film noir, if the Mubi description is to be believed? Said noir feel without a narrator was cool I guess?

But I just found it an absolute chore to get through. Beyond the initial premise the story didn't engage me, and the characters didn't seem compelling to me either.

For its technical proficiency and potential influence on later film noir/crime films, I can't in good conscience give it a lower rating, but given how little I enjoyed watching it, I can't really go high, either.

Twilight At Dawn

[writers_reign · 8 December 2003]

Carne and Prevert on a roll; hot on the heels of 'Quai des Brumes' comes this, next up will be Les Visiteurs du Soir' and THAT will be followed by 'Les Enfants du Paradis'. Get out of that, John Ford/Dudley Nichols. Where do you start with something like this, someone send a Runner for a new set of superlatives. Start with the heavy? Jules Berry, they don't come any oilier, he'd already scored in a previous Prevert script, 'Le Crime du Monsieur Lange' with Renoir on bullhorn and he used this as a warm-up for his Satan in 'Visiteurs'. Arletty? Garance-in-Waiting, 'Hotel du Nord' behind her, 'Visiteurs/Enfants' to follow. Gabin? What can I say. Even Nat Cole didn't have a trio like this. To quote the title of an earlier (1935) Gabin vehicle this was truly La Belle Equipe. How Hollywood could cast Hank Fonda in the Gabin role is beyond me. Hank, 'aw shucks' Fonda, niceness personified as decent but RUGGED Gabin? Come on, already. Vincent Price plays Jules Berry? Get real! Sandy Trauner's brilliant apartment building sets the tone here from frame #1. What an opening, Jules Berry exiting Gabin's room and running out of breath. Crowd assembling. Nowhere-To-Go Gabin holed up in his 10 by 6 reminiscing in Gitane time. Never had a chance, life's a bitch and then you die. Basically that's all there is to it. But, as someone once said, it's the way you tell them. Brilliant in spades.