Bed and Board (1970)

4/5

François Truffaut's Bed and Board is a playful and touching exploration of the life of a young married couple, Antoine (Leaud) and Christine (Jade), and their continual learning and maturing process. It examines the joys of a new child, the trials of adulterous desires, and the aches of separation. It is a simple yet well-made film that is filled with vivacity and infused with love for its inhabitants.

The editing is efficient, almost too efficient, never letting us take a breather from the whirlwind that is this couple's new life. The acting is capable, but the script often feels a bit written or staged. And some audiovisual quirks and idiosyncrasies stand out as bizarre or strange to people unfamiliar with Truffaut. This is in part due to Truffaut's history with New Wave, although here it is more refined and less experimental than in his earlier works. Truffaut does not always make good movies--and he has in fact made some terrible movies--but his Antoine Doinel ones are fantastic. And trust me when I say that this is one that I fully enjoyed from beginning to end and highly recommend.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065651/

The Wild Child (1970)

3/5

The Wild Child is based on the true story of a young boy found in the woods of France and taken in by a doctor who wants to educate him. I went in with little interest in the subject matter, but found the movie to be surprisingly engrossing. I was impressed by the remarkable child acting by Jean-Pierre Cargol in the titular role. Although there were some missteps and errors, it was a very solid and endearing performance overall.

In addition to writing and directing this piece, Truffaut also acts in it as Dr. Itard. Unfortunately, his acting was terrible, as if he were reading from a script without emotion or complexity. It's rare that you see an adult actor put to shame by a child actor, but here you have it. Normally I would say he should stick to directing, but that's not really his forte either. We have an abundance of lingering shots and boring scenes. The pacing is atrocious. While the content is always interesting, it doesn't ever build up to anything. It just keeps going on and on. There is no climax and the ending is abrupt. Nothing really impressed me, but the film is actually quite engaging to an attentive audience. Don't go out of your way to find this, but if you catch it on TV, you might be hard-pressed to change the channel.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0064285/

The Conformist (1970)

4.9/5

Bernardo Bertolucci's The Conformist is a visual masterpiece. The compositions and camera movements are utilized with such purpose and precision--such confidence in their meaning--that it transcends simple descriptions of events and becomes lyrical poetry. The breathtaking cinematography is made more impressive by the incredible set and costume designs. All of this merely provides the framework over which the exquisite acting can play out. As the movie starts, we are at once made aware of the striking editing style. The non-linear complexity pulls you in, sparking your curiosity and then feeding you answers, and keeps you engaged as a participant in the movie. The structure follows a simple arc in characterization and mood that a chronological retelling would have completely missed out on. The film's themes, while enigmatic, are far from indecipherable. Their importance lies in their timeless relevance while their draw lies in their subtle ubiquity.

The plot follows Clerici and his attempts to be normal, both socially and sexually. He joins the Fascist party while they reign over the country and condemns it immediately after Mussolini's fall. The brutal and shockingly sudden about-face at the finale is by far the most haunting image in this film for me. Perhaps my favorite line in the movie is uttered by Italo, Clerici's blind friend, after being asked what normal is: "A normal man is one who turns his head to see a beautiful woman's bottom." I could go on and on quoting this movie, but why read a transcript when you could simply watch the movie and experience it for yourself? I am still remembering scenes in the movie as if they are just now happening.

There were some problems with the movie, however. I actually thought some of the shots felt too set-up and composed, shedding off the poetic realism and with it the subtlety that intrigued me. The plot could sometimes get a bit convoluted and crowded with seemingly pointless scenes, although most of the time their beauty and meaning find you over time. Also, there seemed to be some sound issues of the kind that usually mar student films, not major features. At any rate, none of these negatives are significant in any considerable fraction, and should not dissuade you from seeing this unforgettable piece of art.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0065571/

MASH (1970)

4/5

This has got to be one of the funniest movies I have ever seen. Altman's first major movie has such memorable and unique characters that were pulled off with such perfection (especially by Donald Sutherland and Elliott Gould) that by the end it's like losing close friends only two hours after meeting them. Altman's trademark style (of overlapping dialogue) captures the mood, even at the expense of jokes. This helps immensely with the replay value of both the comedy and the movie as a whole.

There were some events that dragged on a bit, but they were few and far between. It definitely felt a little too episodic to be a movie; the style works better as a TV show. Thus the movie wasn't as cohesive and parts didn't flow as well as some of Altman's other movies. These are otherwise small qualms with an altogether engrossing and effective character-driven comedy.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0066026/