Montparnasse 19

Not particularly stunning but very effective and rather affecting film roughly based on the last years of the life of Modigliani directed by Jaques Becker following the death of Max Ophuls who had already done much preparation. That early work included the recruiting of glamour boy of the time, Gerard Phillipe. He did not have the physical presence of the painter, nor was he Italian but he was considered good looking and I feel carried off the role of the vulnerable, violent and volatile painter well enough. Lilli Palmer and Anouk Aimee excels as his mistress and lover respectively with Lino Ventura turning in a wonderful small but key performance as a rather state dealer. The streets and buildings of Paris and Nice are depicted well although much is filmed in the studio and although Becker is to be congratulated to bring this film in in difficult circumstances ( the writer took him to court and Ophul's death hung over proceedings) it is not typical of his output.

First, the re-issue is excellent; the Centre National de la Cinematographie has really done a fine job of restoration of the negative. The black and white values come through very well.

I suppose Gerard Philipe was the natural choice to play Modigliani, but I wasn't as impressed by his work here as I had been by Les grandes manoeuvres or Les orgueilleux: there's a routine quality about his acting here that I hadn't seen before. Anouk Aimee is very beautiful, and manages to infuse her portrayal of Jeanne Hebuterne with some life. Gerard Sety as the lifelong friend Zborowsky, Lilli Palmer as the wacky English mistress, and Marianne Oswald as the gallery owner all contribute fine performances. I don't care about how the picture was made--the lawsuit and everything else--just about the results.

A few years ago it was hoped that Anouk Aimée would attend a screening of 'Lola' at the French Institute and afterwards answer audience questions. To my great disappointment and that of many others, Mlle Aimée failed to materialise.

I had been hoping to ask her just how much influence Modigliani's daughter Jeanne had on the making of 'Montparnasse 19' which covered the final year in her father's life.

She herself was two months old when he died at just thirty-five but her birth and her mother's suicide by defenestration are absent from the film.

The other mystery of course is how much of Henri Jeanson's original screenplay was changed or jettisoned when Jacques Becker took over the direction from an ailing Max Ophuls. By all accounts Jeanson was thoroughly displeased and took legal action.

What is certain of course is that cinematographer Christian Matras has shot this in the style of Becker and not of Ophuls. There are also scenes with which Ophuls would I'm sure have felt uncomfortable, not least that in which Beatrice Hastings asks Modigliani to hit her again after he has knocked her to the floor!

However ruthless, selfish or anti-social great painters might be they are invariably excused as their behaviour is considered part of the artistic temperament or the prerogative of genius.

Although Modigliani might not have been a jackpot of admirable character traits, the compromises of film dictate that his character be sympathetic. Gérard Philippe is ideal casting in this respect. Granted, the massive ego of the artist is there but also the despair and vulnerability.

It is a pity that the character of his common-law wife Jeanne Hébuterne is so thinly drawn here but Mlle Aimée does her best.

The two performances that stand out are those of Lilli Palmer who is magnificent as Beatrice and Lino Ventura as Morel, a morally vacuous art dealer who observes Modigliani's decline like a vulture circling a dying body.

As one would expect from Becker there is a wonderful sense of period and place and his direction is taut.

There are weaknesses to be sure but one accepts those in exchange for its strengths and the film has a special quality that is hard to define.

Becker was one of the select few that received approval from the Cahiers du Cinema/New Wave contingent.

Jean Luc Godard's appraisal is insightful: "Everything rings true in this totally false film. Everything is illuminated in this obscure film."

Ophuls died shortly before the film was released and within two years both Philippe and Becker had passed away. Ars longa. Vita brevis.

the temptation to see the film as one about Gerard Philipe is not small. and, in a way, it could be the basic motif for admire it. because it seems be a film for his admirers. a last word, testimony /legacy of great art. the close up, the dialogues, the reactions of Amedeo Modigliani are easy to define the last years of his interpreter. because, except that, "Les amants de Montparnasse" gives the same picture of damned artist, ignored by his contemporaries, single against the love story, fragile, vulnerable, strange. of course, a good recipes for public success. but, maybe, not the best. and this does it a homage to an unique French actor. and the beginning of the end of an age of cinema.

Every generation sees or thinks it sees things differently from previous generations; this film shows yet again that bohemian boorishness and temperamental talent is and was nothing new. If you're seen to be an Artist also being a fascinating penniless perpetual drunk yob can be acceptable, that troubled spirit is sometimes the price of Genius. Amedeo Modigliani was an Italian artist who died at 36 of TB in France, the almost impossibly handsome Gerard Philipe who played him here died the year after the film also at 36 of cancer, and director Max Ophuls died before production started – it makes this French-Italian co-production especially poignant.

The story follows the last period of Modigliani's life about 1919, after he met and fell madly in love with fellow artist Jeanne Hebuterne, their trials, tribulations and tragedy. It's all done very well, definitely not as the elegant Ophuls would have done it (witness those clumsy tracking dancing scenes) with good black and white photography and great acting: basically no problems with any of it. However the end of the film was very different to the reality and bearing in mind it was fairly frank anyway I can't understand why the truth was jettisoned at the climax. Did Modigliani's daughter object? What actually happened was incredibly sad, brutal and even incomprehensible but still would have made more sense than the end to the film did. It turned a study in romance into a lesson in sordidness.

But never mind, it was still an interesting journey into an Artist's troubled mind and life and the joy and pain he brought to those around him. I wouldn't hang one of Modigliani's hideous paintings up in my house unless I was paid a lot to; I prefer the film – because Beauty is either in the eye of the beholder or the owner.