Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

bob-790-196018 Even at the full length that its director intended, this movie strains to convey the complications of story development and motivation that presumably make up the novel on which it is based. The voice-overs (by Truffaut himself) are an attempt to fill in the blanks, but they are rushed and in some cases seem like substitutes for what should have been rendered dramatically.Nevertheless "Two English Girls" offers some of the satisfactions of a good novel, searching out the motivations of Anne, Muriel, and Claude, showing the shifting interactions of these people over time, and in the end leaving us with a sense of the inexorable passage of time and regret for what could have been.What could have been is the fulfillment of love. The story tells how, time and again, love is thwarted or suppressed--by Anne's feeling of inferiority in comparison with her sister, by Muriel's secret puritan guilt, by Claude's self absorption, and by his interfering mother.Another weakness of the movie is the portrayal of Claude by Jean-Pierre Leaud. Given what should have been a profoundly moving story, he is surprisingly inexpressive, and in appearance he could be any young man walking down a street in Paris today--not the Paris of 1900.One of the great strengths of the movie is the wonderful cinematography by Nestor Almendros, including interior shots of the girls' house in "Wales," the panoramas of the landscape in Normandy (which was intended to stand in for Wales), the view of the retreating land from a moving train, and the tracking shot of Anne moving through the forest as seen from a lake in Switzerland.All in all, a very good movie. I am grateful to Turner Classic Movies for the opportunity to see it.

Cristi_Ciopron Two English Girls and the Continent belongs to what I privately call "the other Truffaut"; this wouldn't be the place to specify why I consider some of Truffaut's films (The Four Hundred Blows; Stolen Kisses; The Wild Child; Domicile conjugal; The Story of Adele H; The Man Who Loved Women; The Green Room; The Last Metro) as belonging to a pretty distinct class that I have titled: the other Truffaut. Notwithstanding, Truffaut's corpus is remarkable as one of the most astonishingly beautiful works of his century.Truffaut's cinema is the complement and the result of a very particular and highly differentiated world-view. In a genuine and authentic way, he was aware of his singularity. One of his aims—or rather of his means—of his deliberate means—was to tell dirty things in an ingenuous, naive and gentlemanly way.Truffaut used stylized narrative forms to explore the substratum of the couple relations. He did this in even a more deliberate way than the movie authors he promoted in the '50s. Yet his approach is not a spoofing one; his exoticism isn't mock—exoticism; it is related to some ancient forms of the French culture, to some meta—realist traditions. To a certain Renoir (the one that didn't pretend to be naturalistic or Zolist, but who crafted exquisite _divertissements). It's not that Truffaut's picturesque is a fake one; it is strictly subordinated.In Truffaut's case, a quite peculiar world-view got the chance of a full, direct expression. What is this quality of Truffaut?What is the gist of Truffaut's art?Some have expressed it in indirect or inappropriate or even hostile way;they felt that particular quality; yet their perception is clumsily or inimically expressed—so with Antonioni, who disliked Truffaut's softness and tenderness and feminineness ,if one might say so.Mrs. Deneuve, who was Truffaut's mistress (they had no children together), spoke about Truffaut's feminine side or perception. I do not think this is properly expressed.What needs to be indicated is his delicacy, subtlety, freshness, fineness, gentleness, mildness, and his frank tactfulness.His subtle, smooth irony, his civilized ,polished and indiscreet humor, his highly humane quality in exposing and defining in artistic terms the secret substratum of the human relations, of the desire and of the loneliness and alienation—with a sense of the piquant. As in J&J, whose declared complement it is, this approach helps, enables Truffaut to narrate with due smoothness and finesse a disturbing and twisted story. The same shamelessness, the same suavity.Truffaut has a very cute topic for his movie:--the feminine masturbation (and a dose of lesbianism), at the little girls (needless to say that such things are still strictly taboo for most of the mainstream cinema …);--then the _defloration.As some other Truffaut films, TEG … contains some piquant nudity and sexuality.A word about the beauty of Truffaut's actors:--a beauty that is generally mild and unobtrusive and discreet—yet very physical and subtly sensual and bodily (Jean-Pierre Léaud,Kika Markham,Stacey Tendeter,Marie Mansart). One more thing to be spoken of:this one is a period movie—and consequently there is a fair amount of a certain _colorist instinct, joy and gusto—that I will leave the pleasure to my fair reader to discover for him/herself. Truffaut flirted here somehow with a certain trend of aestheticism and stylization that are customary in the period films. (One can perceive the trepidation of the _erotography of the epoch—the interest for this kind of literary production.) On the other hand, Truffaut's huge interest in making such period films is the pendant and the complement of his studious love for a certain class of literature. Truffaut was, one knows it, such a good reader …. (On the other hand,when he adapted a book, that book was never a mere pretext; on the contrary—it was the hallmark. Truffaut adapted only things that he respected. One sees that is not true about, say, Welles or Hitchcock—who go beyond the literary pretext; Truffaut reveres the book, he deepens it, he remains true to it.)The beauty of the main actors; the finesse; the writer loved by Truffaut; the twisted content; the indiscreet topic of masturbation and bodily life; the hidden substratum; the tactfulness—I hope my fair readers will give this very fine movie the esteem it deserves. Truffaut's stylizations are strictly functional; they are never vain, useless decorations; they wholly belong to the style and are directed towards the movie's meaning and are fully adequate.Truffaut is as true, as authentic as he is smooth and elegant. Through the stylistics of the social life, he reached the stylistics of the inner life.I would include Two English Girls and the Continent in a list of Truffaut's best ten—or maybe even five!—movies—with Jules et Jim (1962), The Soft Skin, Mississippi Mermaid, Vivement Dimanche! (1983) ….

snucker there are two things that held this film back from being a truffaut masterpiece: the voice over and jean pierre leaud.the voice over is overused in this film and is hardly effective in many cases. the voice over always sound rushed, hasty and monotonous, it hardly treats the story sensitively and it sounds like truffaut (the one doing the voice over) is trying to say it as fast as he can so he can move on to something else in the story. the problem is he uses the voice over to explain complex emotions of the characters and he could have used someone else to do the voice over with more expression and pace. this brings me to my second problem with the film. the voice over is often explaining the complex emotions of leaud's character, claude, while leaud wears the same expression of confusion and dismay throughout the film. he says his lines in that same quiet, shy voice for most of the film and looks uncomfortable and timid in the role. my suspicion is that truffaut used voice over to compensate for leaud's lack of acting ability. leaud is thoroughly miscast as claude, a complex character who is at the center of the love triangle. but somehow, the film does pull together and is a very moving story about what happens when three people distrust their instincts and refuse to make decisions about their feelings for one another. anne and claude hide their intention of committing to each other behind this french idea of "free love" that neither really buys into. muriel is a very religious woman who treads very carefully with claude because of his ideas on love and sex and has some very strong guilty feelings about her sexual desire. claude...well according to the voice over, he prefers to love them from afar than to choose between them. he wants both women, but knows he can't so he subconsciously refuse to choose between them and just go back and forth between the two when the relationship with one becomes difficult. anne and muriel are similar to other truffaut heroines. anne is more forgiving and nurturing and patient, very much like Julie from day for night. muriel is the unstable passionate one who could sacrifice her sanity for a man, very much like catherine from jules and jim or adele H. they're both well acted by kika markham and stacey tendeter, and they're the ones who carry this film. the photography wasn't as lush as i expected it to be, but it has enough eye candy for those who love costume dramas with nice houses and gardens. the voice over and the dialogue are very well written and is poetic without sounding trite most of the time.the film could have been a masterpiece of truffaut if he'd got someone else to do the voice over and got a more competent actor for claude. the film compensates for these weaknesses with superb writing and good performances from the rest of the cast.

LeRoyMarko Another great film by François Truffaut. This one resemble «Jules et Jim» but this time it's about a man, Claude (played by Jean-Pierre Léaud), and the love he's developing (it's reciprocal) for two sisters from Wales, Anne and Muriel (played by Kika Markham and Stacey Tendeter). Usual emotional twists that are a trademark of Truffaut. Nothing is easy, and even love can be extremely cruel.The film is moving and the acting is very good. The photography and the use of the camera is also pretty good.Out of 100, I gave it 81.