Quiet Days in Clichy

I am a fan of Henry Miller and have read many of his books. When I saw a DVD of "Quiet Days in Clichy" on my local video store's "Staff Pick's" shelf, I excitedly plucked it off and read the back.

It sounded great, an artistic rendition of one of Miller's works. I took it home practically rubbing my hands.

As the previous reviewer commented, the acting is abysmal. Painful to watch. What a disappointment.

The photography is good. There are some (filming) tricks employed, but do nothing to salvage this failure.

This is a poetic movie describing recollection of aging Henry Miller of his stay in Paris before the WWII. It follow the adventures decribed in the book of the same title. The movie has both good humor and great bodies. I would love to have a copy of this movie in any format.

If you were there at the time the film makes sense. All of the taboos were there to be broken and this one tried to break them all at once just to prove it could get away with it. So there's naked women everywhere (in poses 'pushing out the envelope' of the day), bad language and lavatorial humour in abundance. My guess is that the producers were so fixated on pushing back the boundaries of the then conventional taste, that even the most the most rudimentary craftsmanship was contemptuously discarded.

So it's a pity that the acting is terrible, wit is noticeable by its absence and the nudes aren't really all that exciting. Some gross outs can be amusing. These ones were not.

With very little effort this could have been so much more fun and put one over on the wicked establishment at the same time.

Watch 'I Am Curious' instead. It's (they're) no great shakes but much better than this.

My girlfriend said she'd never seen a porno film, so she dragged me into the cinema to see "Stille Dage i Clichy" in Copenhagen, when the film was new. To say it's a bad film is to overvalue Warhol's "Flesh." It was worse. The only good bit was right at the beginning, with the play on "Gray Day." After that, it was downhill all the way.

The acting was abysmal. The plot... well, what plot? The "Germs won't attack a starving man" scene was memorably sickening. The bonking was overdone and hugely "in your face."

For a poetic film, See "Last Year in Marienbad." Spot the difference.

IMHO, Miller wasn't a particularly good writer. His books did, however, mark a turning-point in censorship. This film, though, has about the same artistic qualities as "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "The Toolbox Murders."

When the film ended, though, it was interesting to note that, while the women in the audience stood and put on their cardis and coats, the blokes sat quite still for a minute or so :-) .

Joey, a writer, and Carl, a Frenchman, are two bohemians living in Paris spending all their time looking for more poon. All the women are slut and/ or mentally unstable and stupid only good for what's between their legs in their world view and the film itself seems to suggest that the idea is true. Based loosely on the Henry Miller book which was in turn based loosely on his actual life. Made and seems to be only for the pretentious and unbearable Art-house crowd. (hey even THEY have base interests..I think) For the rest of you people (Ie. Normal) just go rent some real porn instead, you'd get more out it. And likely more of a plot to boot. I usually like the movies that Blue Underground choose to release, but this one is a vast disappointment. It is however the most anti-feminist movie you'll likely ever see. I guess that deserve something.

My Grade: C-

DVD Extras: "Dirty Movies, Dirty books" featurette; an 11 minute piece on the music, Poster and stills gallery; Bios of Henrey Miller and Jens Thorsen

DVD-ROM: Court Documents

2 Easter Eggs: highlight the word EXTRA in the extras menu, and the word CLICHY in the talent bios menu for 2 more clips of Barney Rosset interviewed

Eye Candy: Ulla Koppel. Suzanne Krage, Lisbet Lundquist, and Louise White all so much flesh