User reviews

Georges Franju is an unfairly neglected director - overshadowed by Godard and Truffaut, he fell quickly out of favour as a filmmaker, although he is revered as co-founder, with Henri Langlois, of the Cinematheque Française in Paris shortly before World War 2.

The influences to be seen in Franju's films are not those of New Wave directors: Hollywood film noir and trashy American novels. He is more in tune with German Expressionism and, as perhaps befits a film archivist, with silent cinema.

So JUDEX is a very affectionate tribute to Louis Feuillade, and shares its title with a 1916 serial. As the title character Franju cast a magician - Channing Pollock - and other actors include the wonderful Edith Scob (unforgettable in Franju's EYES WITHOUT A FACE), Andre Melies (son of Georges) and Theo Sarapo (one-time lover of Edith Piaf). The music is by Maurice Jarre, and adds to the dreamlike nature of the whole story.

JUDEX may not be a great film, but it is a truly wonderful film. Just let it wash over you, and the memory of it may haunt you for a surprisingly long time!

I never had the opportunity to catch up with this one during my childhood and, for a long time, I had to make do with an intriguing still of the lead character in a large bird mask and holding what appears to be a dead dove. Three years ago, I managed to get hold of a VHS copy duped from what, reportedly, is the only French-language version (an extremely fuzzy 16mm print with barely-legible English subtitles) in existence! Its dire condition had affected my initial judgment and I didn't enjoy the film as much as I hoped I would. Then, two years later, Flicker Alley released the original 12-episode Silent serial of 1916-17 by Louis Feuillade (whose length totals over 5 hours) and I decided to try the Franju film again as a companion piece; this time, I was determined to overlook the deficiencies of the print and just go along for the ride - and, sure enough, it proved to be a much more rewarding experience! This third viewing, then, came by way of an Italian-dubbed 'variant' I recorded off TV which is in much better shape and, despite being apparently trimmed (95 mins. against the official 104), I opted to keep it as the former is a real chore to sit through!

Anyway, much as I admired the already wonderful Feuillade version (which, for the record, I also rate ***1/2), I found the later film - to my mind, an immensely satisfying compression of it - to be even superior because of its genuine touches of poetry and magic, even surrealism (such as the afore-mentioned costume party scene in which Judex - already hiding his true identity under an alias and his features behind layers of make-up - turns up donning a symbolic pigeon mask). In fact, the title role is played by real-life magician Channing Pollock which allows his celebrated act to be cleverly incorporated into the narrative!

I would venture to say that Franju's JUDEX is one of the best remakes ever made - fascinating, exciting and imaginative. The timing of its release (coming immediately prior to the espionage boom of the 1960s) ensured that the film also be viewed as a fond farewell to the days of old-fashioned crime (though gadgetry - soon to go overboard, i.e. when the James Bond extravaganzas descended to the level of a comic-strip - is still present, such as the mirror which allows Judex to peek at his captive and even communicate with him by writing on the glass panel itself).

For all his limitations as an actor, Pollock displays all the stoicism of the typical superhero and carries a genuine screen presence. Besides, Francine Berge' has to be one of the most captivating villainesses to ever grace the screen - utilizing several disguises in the realization of her evil schemes, none more fetching than the skin-tight black outfit (which she also sports when engaging in the climactic roof-top fight with an equestrienne, played by Sylva Koscina in a splendid cameo). Franju regular Edith Scob, then, is the doe-eyed heroine and there's also amiable support from the characters of the detective Cocantin and a resourceful boy who eventually becomes his sidekick. Another of the film's major assets is a subtly haunting score from Maurice Jarre (the last of eight collaborations with Franju, among them the latter's masterwork EYES WITHOUT A FACE [1960]).

The film - co-written by Jacques Champreux (grandson of Louis Feuillade!) and produced by Robert De Nesle (later associated with the dubious work of Jess Franco!) - is a veritable connoisseur's treat and a sheer delight from beginning to end. Franju later made the similar SHADOWMAN (1974; in which Champreux himself took the lead role!) but, by this time, such escapist fare was strictly old hat and, in any case, the result only worked in fits and starts. Another film in the same vein - which I own on VHS and I've been meaning to catch up with for some time - is the Russian-made 4½ hour Silent serial, MISS MEND (1926).

The first "Judex" was made in 1916 and the late French critic Roger Boussinot was hard on Feuillade ,whose films were (I quote him) " brainwashing" .He was speaking of "Les Vampires" and "Judex" which ,for him,were hiding the atrocious reality.

Back in 1963,Franju,who had a penchant for mystery ("Les Yeux Sans Visages" "Pleins Feux sur l'Assassin" ) made a remake.He cast a conjurer(Channing Pollock) as the lead (which was not a bad idea after all for Judex being an almost surrealistic hero did not demand a great actor ) Franju used again his favorite actress ,Edith Scob,("les Yeux Sans Visage" ) whose eyes were the most beautiful (along with MIchèle Morgan's) in the French cinema.

Judex is some kind of mysterious Robin Hood,who comes to the rescue of poor people an unscrupulous banker has swindled . Franju's sense of mystery works wonder and creates a strange atmosphere with this hero with a bird mask .A sequence was filmed in Château-Gaillard ,les Andelys .

Franju's evocation of a lost innocent era of French silent cinema is a real gem, and a much neglected film. The film creates an air of gentle menace from the opening scenes featuring a bird-masked magician at a masked ball. We soon learn that he is, in fact, Judex, the legendary crime-fighter. He soon becomes engaged in a battle with a cat-suited female criminal. The plot itself is one-dimensional comic-strip stuff, as the above suggests, but what constantly impresses is the poetic set-pieces Franju sets up, particularly a burglary at a country house swathed in mists. The show is continually stolen by Francine Berge, as the criminal - she seems a not-too-distant relation of Diana Rigg in television's "The Avengers", at least in dress sense - and this highlights a slight problem. The hero, played by American magician Channing Pollock, is bland by comparison, as is Edith Scob's heroine-in-distress. It seems that the bad girls get all the fun! Overall, this is the type of film that doesn't get made any more, yet doesn't seem dated. Franju's more famous "Les Yeux Sans Visage" is, in terms of mood, very similar, as is Cocteau's breathtaking fairy tale, "La Belle Et La Bete". The sixties British horror, "The Haunting", also pulls the same trick of showing little by achieving everything through mood alone. Do try to see all of these if you get the chance.

This film is most certainly worth a watch if you're at all interested in classic film. Highly stylized and full of fun and suspenseful moments, Judex is a gem amongst crime thrillers.

There are quite a bit of issues that keep it from being a perfect film though, not the least of which is how dated it is. As some shots and practical effects are less than stellar, almost comical at times.

At points as the story goes on you'll likely find yourself thinking "Well that's convenient" or "What, how?". But a lot of that can be chocked up to the already ridiculous nature of the plot, and aren't necessarily due to negligence from the screenwriter.

The acting from some characters can be a bit off putting at times as well, but there's enough great performances in there to offset that.

However despite its flaws this is a good early film for the genre.

Louis Feuillade, one of the true pioneers of cinema whose work has undeniably influenced Lang and Hitchcock, had been criticised for glorifying villainy in his hugely popular serials 'Fantomas' and 'Les Vampires'. He redressed the balance somewhat by creating Judex, a hero who is both judge and jury. Director Georges Franju has managed here to reduce the original 5 hour, 12 episode original to just 97 minutes which is no mean feat although unavoidably, compromises have had to be made. Some have confessed to being baffled by the twists and turns of the admittedly condensed plot but their bafflement quite frankly baffles me as the film is sufficiently well-constructed and the pace certainly slow enough not to cause confusion. Feuillade's work is known for its anarchy and surrealism. This adaptation has little anarchy and its surrealism is mixed with realism. This is Lunacy restrained. Essentially a film of moments, or 'set pieces' if you like, Franju's unique visual style and sense of atmosphere make it mesmerising to watch. Behind every great fortune there is usually a great crime and banker Favraux, played superbly by Michel Vitold, has enriched himself by the Panama Scandal. He is called to account for his crime in an anonymous letter which threatens death at midnight if he does not atone and return to his victims his ill-gotten gains. He chooses to ignore this warning and at the stroke of midnight at a masked ball he appears to drop dead, only to awaken in an old castle to find himself the prisoner of a mysterious figure in a cloak and a slouch hat............. Judex is here played by Channing Pollock, a handsome hunk who made a few European costume films at this time. He began as a magician and in this is able to perform his famous 'dove act'. As an actor alas, he is a plank. Franju regular Edith Scob as the banker's daughter is required to do little more than play a Miss Goody Two Shoes but the camera loves her will o' the wisp persona. Saints are not nearly as interesting as sinners of course and by far the most fascinating character is that of Diana di Monti. As a ruthless, sensual and utterly deranged villainess she is a gift to any actress and is here played with relish and aplomb by Francine Berge, complete with catsuit and nun's habit, wielding a dagger and a hypodermic needle. Her choreographed fight on the rooftop with luscious Sylva Koscina as Daisy the circus performer is guaranteed to quicken the pulse. Franju is reported to have said of Daisy's character: "I could have done without her" but happily for us he couldn't! Jacques Jouanneau does a good turn as the incompetent detective Cocantin and there is a captivating performance by Benjamin Boda as Reglisse the boy. Also of interest is a brief appearance as a doctor by Andre Melies, son of that other pioneer director, Georges. Mention must be made of Robert Giordani's superlative art direction, Marcel Fradetal's magnificent cinematography and Maurice Jarre's atmospheric score. Whatever its weaknesses this bizarre opus is immensely entertaining and can be revisited with pleasure. Ideally one could have done with a little more flamboyance but that after all, is simply not Franju's way.

French remake of a 1914 serial involving a "crime fighter" who uses masks and deception to right wrongs and such. Similar in someways to a more real batman. This remake has Judex-the Latin for judge- going after a banker who swindled people by telling him that if he didn't repay the money he would die. And die he does-or so it appears as Judex spirits the man away and hold him prisoner. From there it gets complicated. Good but unremarkable as a whole mystery/adventure story set in the late 1800's thats perfect for late night viewing since its the sort of thing I used to run across at 2am. Worth a look if you run across it but I don't know if I'd go out of my way to see it.

I have to agree with the review by Swanger2001. After the initial set up of the characters and the amazing Masked Ball scene, the film settles into boring dialogue and badly staged action.

I'm curious to hear what a French-speaking person thought of the acting. I don't speak it myself, but this one of the few times I've seen a French film and thought "this (acting) seems really lousy - like a low budget exploitation film".

I don't know if this film is available on DVD. I saw a VHS copy courtesy of Something Weird Video...and the subtitles left something to be desired. Film quality was mediocre.

Worth seeing if you liked "Eyes without a Face", but not essential viewing.

a decent film. not great, not good, not convincing. seductive for its flavor and for beginning. for the references. and for few scenes. action, drama, justice, the silhouette of good guy are old ingredients and that reduced the surprises. the atmosphere is well , not bad for remind the Edgar Poe's Red Death . but something missing. too predictable, with few characters in wrong places, without a remarkable acting, it is only nice and, maybe, useful for remember the spirit of old French cinema. but, despite the story, it has the sin to seems almost boring. and that could be all. without great virtues or ambitions, it is a decent movie. and that status could be enough for viewer.

Based on a serial from the silent era, Judex (Judge in Latin) is a relentless avenger of bad people, like corrupt banker, Favraux, who has impoverished many, but happens to have a lovely and virtuous daughter (Edith Scob), a redeeming feature. Judex (Channing Pollock, the magician turned actor, who coined the famous aphorism, "A critic is a legless man who teaches running.") resolves to bring the banker to justice, but his task is complicated by on even more evil servant (Francine Berge), who has designs on the banker's money and is completely ruthless. The black and white costumes, elegant settings, and well photographed gardens offer great visual appeal and the magic tricks of Channing Pollock are always entertaining.

I saw Judex in 1964 in the movie Theater movie Niza in Barcelona. I was a teenager and I remained shocked by the images fascination. I review the film time to time. It is a masterpiece to recover the spirit of the old shows by Louis Feuillade before the I World War, with love and taking care of infinite details. If we compare the images with those taken in fresh air by Feuillade in 1912-14 Paris we can realize the accurate work of the art directors. All movie is an exercise of cinematographic calligraphy that only a poet can do. Franju and Luis Buñuel are the greatest surrealist in cinema history. This sequence of the masked dance is the best I have never seen: there is magic in the pigeon mask by Edith Scob..

"Such carefree horseplay can be mirthfully imbibed by audience of Feuillade's time, but as an updated remake, Franju's effort seems jarringly timid and cumbersome with respect to the raging nouveau vague mode in the Sixties. JUDEX still substantiates that Franju is an excellent aesthete, the film's sophisticated compositions and melancholically beautiful cinematography are indelible, not to mention the lavish-looking ornithological masquerade party, the high point of the whole picture."

read my full review on my blog: Cinema Omnivore, thanks.

At the beginning, and for a long while, I just thought : good visual cinematography,

but it was too slow for me... I even used speed advance !

But what kept me not stopping the film, was it seemed amazing, for the visual Black and White aspect,

even if the movie was much too slow, again... Because the plot seemed so small...

My impressions, say until the third of the movie, were about of how much I appreciated the impressive dark atmosphere the director created...

I Remember thinking how I would rate it, may be 6 on my personal scale ?

and only for the B/W technique ? still because it was... almost boring slow.

And telling myself : once is enough...

Now I can say I think I was not in the mood...

And incredibly to believe for me, a kind of brain wave happened in my mind (it may happen, sometimes, yes... :)

Frankly, I was completely wrong !

More I watched, more I wanted to continue the viewing...

Started really to enjoy, admitting I was impressed !

Until then, I didn't appreciate enough the slow pace (was I in hurry ? no...) and the easy plot, (stupid, I thought in the beginning),

still kept on watching... for the fairy-like and poetic sides ...

And finally, went on being strongly and deeply impressed for the whole performance of the camera and picture work...

The Clair/Obscure work just let me admiring : wow !

And the multiple rebounding script, fairly from another era, enjoyed it...

The actors were good, OK, but it was not especially them who made the fantastic performance :

it was the man behind the camera ! The one who did the master work : the Director...

Didn't know that gentleman, but if only some (or all) his work has the same quality, what a discovery for me !

My print is so so, but never mind...

Great, great work !!! Will see it again... in some time...

It is said it was made as an homage to Louis Feuillade, a merited great one...

Every bit as good as the original serial (and shorter!), Judex is a masterpiece. I've had quite a few arguments over whether this was the director's best with partisans of "Eyes Without a Face"... though it's a close call. Edith Scob's performance is astonishing (more so for the early '60s) - she also appeared in Bunuel's exquisite "Milky Way", but little else.

It's too bad that Franju never had the chance to make more films - he was a real master.

Maybe TCM will book Judex on one of those late Friday cult programs. Until they do, I found a fairly good copy through Atlas Visuals.

Judex "1963 redux" has been produced as a homage to Louis Feuillade's original serial. The production values are very much aligned with that endeavour, so you can't blame Franju's work for a shortage of faithfulness, let alone dissecting it to pinpoint some lack of respect or understanding of the source material.

The point is the movie works as a homage, and then what? You can't tell a story in 1963 the same way it was told in 1916. At the time there was a developing medium, silent and with static setups, yet a medium Feuillade helped transition away from the filmed stage by making it closer to the action-packed serial pulp fictions.

So Franju adds nothing. This would be OK if it was the first shot at features from a naive cinema student, but here lacks something closer to a real movie, a movie with its own rhythm, its own structure and real suspenseful action not silent action designed to fit a frame.

It is true that Franju was more interested in remaking Fantomas. How would he have succeeded in doing this any better, i.e. matching the original popular success of fascination for a frightful villain? That takes much more work than a nice little artsy homage to the movies of yore.

I haven't seen the original Judex, but I've seen Ultus, the equivalent British serial of the era... and I definitely recognise the style here. Multiple disguises, hairbreadth escapes from death, jawdropping coincidences, gadgetry and sleight of hand... and villains who never kill their victims when they ought to!

The print in the BFI National Archive was in beautiful condition (save for some oversized and rather intrusive subtitling), and this film is visually and musically stunning; the Maurice Jarre soundtrack is lovely, fitting and eerie. The morality of the story -- despite its simplistic chase format -- is surprisingly grey, with Jacqueline the only pure innocent (and thus, alas, the least interesting character). It's hard not to sympathise with Favraux in his situation, despite everything that we learn, or with young Morales, caught between the ruthless woman he loves and his long-lost father, and Judex himself finds his self-appointed mission of punishment harder and harder to fulfil.

Scenes like the masked ball (shrouded in almost surreal mystery, since it is not until afterwards that we have any idea what was going on!) and the spider-like climb of Judex' minions to the roof are very memorable, while the film also has a nice line in self-deflating humour, courtesy of the fiction-obsessed detective Cocantin and his rapport with small children. For such a preposterous comic-strip confection the plot holds together quite well, although having displayed such crowning ineptitude in their first attempt to kill Jacqueline (and what happened to the original idea of questioning her first?), it's hard to understand why the plotters don't just make away with her immediately the next time they get the opportunity!

The one thing that really grated, as with all old historical dramas, was the very 'modern' hairstyles and make-up used on all the eye-candy characters in order to make them attractive to a contemporary 1960s audience -- the result now, of course, is that instead of appearing subconsciously appealing they appear distractingly out of period. It's hard to credit a swooning damsel of 1916 when she is made up to look more like Brigitte Bardot...

Casting a professional magician as Judex enables the character to perform some impressive sleight-of-hand, and there are some subtle references to the original era, like the opening iris shot, the super-advanced (and supersized) antique surveillance gadgetry, and the title cards setting the various scenes. But perhaps the most impressive thing is that this is basically played entirely 'straight': it's not a tongue-in-cheek homage to pulp serials, it's presented in its own right as a piece of poetry for us to suspend disbelief -- a 1914 adventure of a mysterious caped avenger, an athletic, resourceful villainess, and a celestial innocent who sought to redeem her father's deeds.

What a strange and wonderful film this is. If you find yourself bored beyond belief during the early moments, hang in there for about 13 or 14 minutes and your patience will be amply rewarded. From that point on, I caught myself saying "Wow!", over and over again! Some of the imagery is just fantastic. It reminded me in places of some of the Dr. Mabuse films from the 60s. I have a sub-titled version and the story was very easy to follow.

It is not the greatest film ever made, but "Judex" has become a permanent part of my collection, because it is so different and quite enjoyable. I got my copy from Sinister Cinema and their print is not as pristine as it could be, but it is certainly better than good.