Film Review: Sons of the Desert

"Sons of the Desert"  *** (out of ****)

Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy prove to be a couple of sons of a gun in the feature length comedy "Sons of the Desert" (1933).

It is often agreed upon by film historians and comedy fans that "Sons of the Desert" is Laurel & Hardy's best movie together. It was even included in the American Film Institute's (AFI) list of the 100 funniest comedies of all time (placing at number 96 on the list).

The reason is because it is believed if you never heard of or seen a Laurel & Hardy comedy (which may not be a religious sin but must be some sort of cinematic sin) "Sons of the Desert" would be the best movie to showcase their relationship and the role each man played in the team.

To a certain extent I agree as well however I am reluctant to call "Sons of the Desert" the best Laurel & Hardy movie. First, the movie "feels" like sitcom material and plot-wise is not strong enough to sustain a 64 minute feature. Secondly the movie goes over familiar ground. As a long time Laurel & Hardy fan (my earliest childhood memories involve watching the boys) I have seen the team in similar situations in their two reeler comedies namely their silent comedy, "We Faw Down" (1928), which features an ending the boys would later reuse in "Block-Heads" (1938), and their talking comedy, "Be Big!" (1931).

To beat my critics to the punch, in the movie's defense, one doesn't walk into a Laurel & Hardy comedy for plot. The boys very often appeared in comedies with minimal plots however those were usually their two or three reeler comedies. The best example may be the Academy Award winning comedy short, "The Music Box" (1932). Essentially it is about the boys delivering a piano up 100 plus stairs. This was actually a remake of one of their silent comedies, "Hats Off!" (1927), a lost comedy where the boys must take a washing machine up a large amount of stairs. "Be Big!" is another example as it largely centers on Oliver accidentally putting Stan's boot on his foot and needs help getting it off. Which leads to the second point, the boys often reworked material, as did many other comedy teams and comedians. If it is funny, you as the viewer, don't mind.

"Sons of the Desert" begins with Laurel & Hardy attending their fraternity lodge of the same name. There is going to be an annual convention in Chicago (The boys live in L.A.) which all members take a oath pledging to attend. It is an oath that has never been broken in the fraternity's history. Stan however is hesitant to take it. He is not sure his wife will allow him to go. Although Oliver claims he doesn't need his wife's permission to go to Chicago, he too is not allowed to go after his wife violently objects stating they are going on a vacation to the mountains instead.

Not wanting to break the oath they have taken Oliver hatches a plan making his wife believe he is terribly ill and a restful vacation to Honolulu is needed. Since Oliver's wife doesn't like to travel by sea, Stan will accompany him. Thus the two men will go to the annual convention in Chicago without their wives knowing.

It is clearly established Oliver is the "leader" of the team and Stan is his faithful friend. Oliver may claim intelligence over Stan but in reality neither man is the brains to the other's brawn. Oliver is what is known as "the big idea man". He cooks up the schemes which get the two of them in trouble which he then blames on Stan, allowing Oliver to air his signature grievance "here's another nice mess you've gotten me into". This relationship is defined within the first two scenes of the movie, eliminating any further need of character development and allows the movie to focus on its plot.

My problem with this is there are no memorable comedy routines for the boys to engage in. A Laurel & Hardy comedy I prefer is "Way Out West" (1937). This also has a minimal plot and could be describe as a series of comedy vignettes strung together yet the boys have several memorable moments in the movie. I can't recite classic comedy routines in "Sons of the Desert". That, for me, is what prevents the movie from being a great comedy instead of a good one.

I have seen "Sons of the Desert" numerous times since I was a child and for me the standout moment is not a comedy sequence but a musical one (you read that right!). Outside of the team's musical / operetta inspired adaptations; "The Devil's Brother" (1934), "Bohemian Girl" (1936) and "Babes in Toyland" (1934), "Sons of the Desert" is their only comedy I can instantly recall to feature a musical number. The song heard here is "Honolulu Baby" sung by Ty Parvis and features a risque dressed group of chorus girls dancing in a poor man's Busby Berkeley choreographed sequence.

Also memorable is the appearance of comedian Charley Chase. In a strange twist of fate, Chase was the popular comedian during the silent era working for producer Hal Roach (whom Laurel & Hardy also worked for at this time until 1940). Oliver used to play the "heavy" (no pun intended) in Chase's two reelers prior to his teaming with Stan Laurel. By the 1930s it was Laurel & Hardy who were the major stars and Roach's biggest audience attraction. Chase unfortunately didn't star in his own feature length comedies and for many viewers this may be the only time they get to see him.

The last thing I distinctly remembered about the movie was Oliver teaching Stan how to correctly say the expression, two peas in a pod, with Stan over emphasizing the word "pod".

Plentiful memorable comedy routines are not, I'd still recommend "Sons of the Desert" to a younger audience not familiar with the team. In Laurel & Hardy the viewer is going to watch the greatest comedy team of all-time. Why? Rarely have two actors fed off each other as brilliantly. Laurel & Hardy had amazing chemistry. Stan Laurel once said of the characters they played, they were two minds without a single thought. While Stan was being funny, the heart of what he was saying was true. The two men were one. In fact, I'm reluctant to call one of them the straight man of the team, though I guess by strict definition Oliver Hardy would assume this role. But, in his own subtle way, Hardy could be very funny.

Some movie fans tend not to give comedians much credit as actors. That is unfortunate. Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy were good actors. You believe they are these characters when in fact they were nothing like them in real life. That speaks to the effectiveness of their performances. Stan Laurel was not a simpleton man-child. He was actually the creative brains behind the team.

The strength of "Sons of the Desert" lies in Laurel & Hardy. Because we like their characters and laugh at them, we continue to watch. They make the movie work. That speaks to their acting and their star power. They each also had a natural screen presence. Maybe that is why we take their acting for granted. They made it look so easy.

Because of this movie in 1965 a society devoted to preserving the work of Laurel & Hardy was created. The name of the society is Sons of the Desert. Currently 32 states have a society (or tent as they are called). There is even one in Chicago.

While it is true "Sons of the Desert" is not my favorite Laurel & Hardy comedy, watching the boys is too much of a pleasure to avoid it. Don't let this be the only Laurel & Hardy comedy you ever see or it will be another nice mess you've gotten yourself into.

Film Review: The Wizard of Oz

"The Wizard of Oz"  *** (out of ****)

Most fans of classic Hollywood movies, and even some who aren't, are familiar with
the 1939 movie starring Judy Garland, "The Wizard of Oz". For many it is the greatest movie of all-time. However what some may not know is the 1939 adaptation of L. Frank Baum's novel was not the first screen adaptation. In fact there are a handful of live action adaptations still in existence. Of these adaptations, the best may be this silent version from 1925 starring and directed by Larry Semon.

The name Larry Semon doesn't mean much to movie fans today. Semon was a popular comedian during the silent era. His name hasn't lived on as well as Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton or Harold Lloyd. Heck, even Harry Langdon has had his comedies put on DVD. But Larry Semon hasn't been as lucky. There are no DVD comedy collections of Semon's comedies that I know of. His two reeler comedies and feature films are not shown on Turner Classic Movies. Harry Langdon may have been nicknamed "the forgotten clown" but it is a title that suits Larry Semon better.

"The Wizard of Oz" was intended by Semon to be his signature movie. It was going to be the movie he was remembered for. To an extent, it is. If you have heard of Larry Semon, "The Wizard of Oz" is probably the only movie you have seen him in. However the movie has not been embraced by the general public to live on as a great comedy from the silent era.

If audiences know anything else about this version of "The Wizard of Oz" it is that Oliver Hardy co-stars in this as the Tin Man. This is of interest to movie fans that would like to see Hardy in comedies pre-Laurel & Hardy. In fact Oliver Hardy often appeared in Larry Semon two reelers playing the bully intimidating Semon. To the extent Larry Semon is known to movie fans today, it would be because he co-starred in comedies with Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy before they were a team.

This all makes "The Wizard of Oz" sound like a curiosity piece. A movie not necessarily to be enjoyed but watched because of what it represents. Many that chose to watch this movie will be those that are fans of the 1939 movie and will simply not be able to accept any other movie as "The Wizard of Oz". This means the odds are staked against this version. Unfortunately the movie will never find an audience willing to give it a fighting chance and put aside their admiration and sentimental affection for the popular 39 version and accept this movie for what it attempts.

Larry Semon's version of "Oz", which is credited as having been co-written by L. Frank Baum Jr., is very different from the story audiences are familiar with. This adaptation seems to combine elements of other Oz stories Baum wrote in the series.

This movie begins with Semon playing a toymaker (one of his dual roles), who is visited by his granddaughter, who ask him to read her the story of the Wizard of Oz. The movie cuts back to this image repeatedly, reminding us (?) it is all only a story.

We learn many years ago a baby princess was kidnapped from Oz. The townspeople eagerly await her return to take the throne while an evil Prime Minister named Kruel (Josef Swickard) rules the land with help from Lady Vishuss (Virginia Pearson) and Ambassador Wikked (Otto Lederer). However Prince Kynd (Bryant Washburn) reassures the people of Oz they must have faith. One day the princess will return.

While this goes on we meet a young girl named Dorothy (Dorothy Dwan, Semon's wife) who lives in Kansas on a farm with her Aunt (Mary Carr) and Uncle Henry (Frank Alexander) and the farm workers, two of whom love Dorothy (Semon and Hardy).

The farm sequence focuses mostly on Semon's character and involve plenty of good visual gags including a swarm of bees chasing after him, collecting a bunch of chicken eggs in his back pocket only to get kicked in the behind and running away from an angry Oliver Hardy.

This establishes the real star of the movie is going to be Semon's character not Dorothy. Nearly all of the comedy is performed by Semon. Having seen a few of Semon's two reeler comedies and feature length comedies like "The Perfect Clown" (1925), I must say, Semon is his most likeable in "The Wizard of Oz". I was also struck by how much he resembles Ray Bolger, who played the Scarecrow in the 39 movie.

While I appreciate all the great comedians during the silent era and into the early sound era, Semon never struck me as a great comedian. I don't believe he deserves to be forgotten but the character he played in the two reelers I have seen doesn't strike me as an enduring persona. He essentially played an every man with the typical cowardly tendencies. Lloyd by contrast did a much better job playing the every man character gaining our sympathy.

But this is what makes "The Wizard of Oz" stand out to me in relation to Semon's character. I laughed at his character. I enjoyed the physical comedy and routines. I would even go as far as to say, "The Wizard of Oz" may serve as a good introduction to Larry Semon and his brand of comedy.

Semon does seem to fall victim to the temptation so many other comedians have fallen for, wanting to add a dash of heartbreak to his story by creating pathos for his character, who proves to be unlucky in love. Perhaps because of the success of Chaplin, Semon thought he would try as well. It doesn't exactly work however. Semon, as actor and director, doesn't earn our tears.

To his benefit Semon keeps these moments few and far between and instead turns this story of Oz into slapstick comedy. One good (if not predictable) routine has Semon mistake a friend disguised in a lion's costume with a real lion, that begins to attack him. There is also a good chase sequence with Semon hiding from Oliver Hardy under boxes. It seems there are multiple Semons as several boxes are seen moving in different directions at the same time. It is never explained how Semon does this.

Of course, in the end, none of this matters. No one is going to watch a movie called "The Wizard of Oz" to enjoy the comedy antics of Larry Semon. You simply cannot ask an audience to "forget" the 1939 version and not make comparisons. I can. But how many people are there like me?

"The Wizard of Oz" is a funny comedy featuring a good performance from Larry Semon, who may be at his most likeable. The movie is filled with slapstick, physical comedy and will lack in any "magical" quality audiences may be expecting. It does however have impressive visual effects for the time period suggesting this was a rather expensive movie to make.

This version of "The Wizard of Oz" is clearly not for everyone. The majority are going to say it is a waste of time and a failure compared to the version released 14 years later. Modern audiences aren't going to like the comedy as well and complain it is "dated" and perhaps even "corny". Though they may not come out and say it as directly, modern audiences simply aren't going to like this movie because it isn't the 1939 version. And there's nothing this 1925 version can do about that.

If you are able to tolerate silent movies and silent comedies in particular, I'd say check out "The Wizard of Oz". If names like Harry Langdon and Charley Chase mean something to you, I'd definitely say check out this movie. Or, if you have an open mind, check it out.

There are some public domain copies on DVD of this movie however the copy I own was part of a three disc collector's set celebrating the 1939 version of "The Wizard of Oz". This silent version was added on as one of the special features. It was restored and given a musical score by the great Robert Israel. This is the version to see.

Film Review: Hold 'Em Jail

"Hold 'Em Jail"
*** (out of ****)

The comedy team Wheeler & Woolsey score a touchdown in RKO's "Hold 'Em Jail" (1932).

"Hold 'Em Jail" is really two different movies combined into one. It is half prison comedy and half college sports comedy. Both genres provide interesting material for comedians and comedy teams as seen in movies such as the Marx Brothers comedy "Horse Feathers" (1932), the Laurel & Hardy comedy "Pardon Us" (1931) and the Harold Lloyd classic "The Freshman" (1925).

One can see why a prison setting would serve as comedy inspiration for the right comedian. A prison is known for having rough and tough inmates. Violent killers. A prison is built on order as the guards discipline the inmates. Now imagine a comedian talking back to the guards, dishing out wisecracks. Imagine the comedian afraid of the other inmates, who would be stronger. Finally imagine the comedian getting accidentally mixed up in a prison break. It would all be funny and a lot of it is in "Hold 'Em Jail".

You can make the same case for sports. Athletes are thought to be very masculine. Certain sports can be dangerous. Throw in a wimpy, cowardly comedian and again you can imagine opportunities a good comedian can get laughs.

However one wouldn't think the two genres are easily combined and to a certain extent they are correct. "Hold 'Em Jail" isn't a great movie. It isn't Wheeler & Woolsey's best comedy. I can't even pretend the movie makes much sense. But, I did laugh. Wheeler and Woolsey are funny in this. The movie has a devil-may-care attitude that works to its advantage and is able to easily slip into a football sports comedy even though it starts off as a prison comedy.

The movie takes place in Bidemore Prison where the warden, Elmer Jones (Edgar Kennedy) is more concerned about the prison's football team than the prison itself. The main concern of Elmer is the big game against Lynnwood, a rival prison, and a $1,000 bet he made with that prison's warden. Elmer needs some good football players. But, how does a prison get good football players? According to the football captain, the prison needs to arrest a better class of people.

In an effort to help the prison, a gangster and former inmate, has one of his henchman frame two men he believes know a lot about football, Curley (Bert Wheeler) and Spider (Robert Woolsey), two salesmen who sell novelty gags and know nothing about football.

Oddly enough neither Curley or Spider show much fear when entering the big house instead they proceed to engage in as much mischief as possible as Curley instantly finds himself attracted to the warden's daughter, Barbara (Betty Grable) and Spider flirts with the warden's sister, Violet (Edna May Oliver).

This causes the movie to miss out on several opportunities for laughs. No one intimidates Wheeler and Woolsey. Elmer doesn't object strongly to his daughter falling for an inmate nor does Violet. And Violet doesn't seem to mind Spider's advances towards her. This all allows the movie to find laughs in different ways. Now Barbara and Violet gang up on Elmer to be nice to Curley and Spider. Curley and Spider act like they are running the prison.

All of this slips into a football comedy when the prison's star quarterback is released from jail after the governor pardons him when new evidence proves his innocence. What will the prison do now? Naturally recruit Curley and Spider to play on their team.

We get a football practice sequence which reminds us of Lloyd's "The Freshman" but never quite reaches those heights of comedic brilliance. But, it should be good enough to get some laughs out of an audience, especially fans of classic comedy, whom I assume would be the only ones watching this movie.

One thing that makes "Hold 'Em Jail" stand out compared to other Wheeler & Woolsey comedies is the absence of frequent co-star, Dorothy Lee, who would play Wheeler's love interest. She would also not appear in the next two movies the comedy team starred in, though one was made at a different studio, Columbia. The role she would normally have played went to a very young Betty Grable, who isn't given much to work with. When Dorothy Lee would co-star, she and Wheeler would often sing and dance a duet together. In "Hold 'Em Jail" there are no musical numbers.

The lack of musical numbers however allows more time for comedy which isn't just provided by Wheeler and Woolsey. Veteran Edgar Kennedy, known for his frustrated slow burn, starred in several of his own comedy shorts and played foil to Laurel & Hardy, the Marx Brothers and Charley Chase. Edna May Oliver was a funny character actress who had also appeared in Wheeler and Woolsey's comedy "Cracked Nuts" (1931).

Unfortunately the movie doesn't provide much of a courtship between Spider and Violet to exchange witty insults and double entendres to each other in the tradition of Groucho Marx and Margaret Dumont. Though there is one good sequence with Spider and Violet playing the piano.

The funniest moments may come during the big football game with Spider and Curley causing mishap after mishap and creating new ways to play the game. Although other good sequences involve a character trying to serenade his love while a prison breakout is going on and the boy's unknowingly destroying the warden's office.

The movie was directed by Norman Taurog, who had never directed a Wheeler and Woolsey comedy prior nor would he direct any of their future comedies. Taurog did have a long career in comedy and may be best known for directing a few Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis comedies such as "The Stooge" (1951) and "Living It Up" (1954). He was also twice nominated for a best directing Academy Award, both were for dramas he directed including "Boys Town" (1938).

More notably, one of the movie's co-writers was the great American humorist, S.J. Perelman who wrote Marx Brother comedies; "Horse Feathers" and "Monkey Business" (1931) and had several short pieces published in the New Yorker magazine.

"Hold 'Em Jail" isn't as funny as "Diplomaniacs" (1933), for me the funniest comedy Wheeler & Woolsey appeared in, "Peach-O-Reno" (1931) or "Hips, Hips, Hooray!" (1934) but is funnier than "The Rainmakers" (1935) and "Silly Billies" (1936).

Film Review: Toy Story

"Toy Story"
*** (out of ****)

A toy is a boy's best friend in the Pixar animated movie, "Toy Story" (1995)

"Toy Story" is a movie that can appeal to children on multiple levels. On one hand it shows the relationship between children and toys. Toys are a special part of a child's life. Even as you grow older, you'll remember what your favorite toy was. Yet, on another level, "Toy Story" is a story about the fear of the unknown or being replaced and learning to fit in.

"Toy Story" was the first feature-length movie released by Pixar (which at the time was a separate from Disney) and revolutionized animated movies as we know it because of its computer animation. Today, every animated movie is done with computers but back in 1995 it wasn't the norm. "Toy Story" was the first computer animated movie released in feature length form.

When initially released most of the public and sheep (movie critics) spent a majority of their time talking about the computer animation and how different "Toy Story" looked from every other animated movie before it. Unfortunately, the story was neglected. The praise for "Toy Story" was largely based on its place in history and what it would mean for animation going forward.

You can't deny "Toy Story" is a technical marvel but its story is a little weak. Mainly what I dislike about "Toy Story" and all subsequent Pixar movies is they become action / comedies. Do children have such short attention spans that they can't sit down and watch a movie where there isn't running and jumping? Sometimes the action sequences interfere with the stories as in "Up!" (2009), which could have been a very dramatic movie. Movies like "Toy Story" or "Finding Nemo" (2003) could have had strong enough stories that action chase scenes weren't needed.

"Toy Story" is comparable to a buddy cop movie. You have two opposites that must learn to co-exist and eventually depend on each other. In the case of "Toy Story" we are talking about toys, an old-fashion pull string cowboy doll named Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks) and an astronaut action figure named Buzz Lightyear (voiced by Tim Allen).

Woody is six year old Andy's (John Morris) favorite toy. Because of that, in the world of toys, Woody is the leader. Woody receives special treatment from Andy, such as being the toy placed on Andy's bed as oposed to being left on the floor. Woody gets the leave the bedroom as Andy carries him around, while the other toys are confined to the bedroom. But all of that changes on Andy's birthday when he gets the coolest toy a kid could ask for, the space ranger action figure, Buzz Lightyear. Could Buzz replace Woody as Andy's favorite toy? Signs seem to point to yes as Andy's bedroom, which once had a cowboy western theme to it, is now filled with space related posters and bedsheets. What will this mean for Woody?

The comedic twist to this story and plot-wise the best thing the script writers do, is Buzz Lightyear doesn't know he is a toy. He honestly believes he is a space ranger on a mission to save his planet and he awoken only after a crash landing, Andy throws him and the cardboard box he came in, on the bed.

Part of what makes this story so fascinating for children is it confirms what all children already know. Secretly their toys are alive. In "Toy Story" all of Andy's toys come to life after he leaves a room. Every child has had a suspicion a toy has moved from the last spot they left it in. If you don't know what I'm talking about, you must have never played with toys. What is strange and I have a difficult time believing is merely a coincidence is Andy was the name of the boy in the horror movie "Child's Play" (1988) also about a toy that comes to life. That movie takes a child's joy in believing their toys are alive and turns it into a nightmare. Their toys are alive and out to kill them. Why did the people at Pixar pick the name Andy? Was it a joke?

Children however will be able to relate to Woody's fear. The most popular kid in school might feel threatened when a new student enrolls, as all the attention is on the new kid. Siblings often believe the other one is their parents favorite. Being liked, having the admiration of your peers, is very important to children (and some adults). It can make your early school years very difficult. But, "Toy Story" teaches children, no one can be replaced. Each person (or toy) is unique and serves a purpose. And, we are stronger when we work together, as Buzz and Woody eventually learn and become best friends. This is also reinforced in the Randy Newman song written for the movie, "You've Got A Friend In Me".

There are many that believe great animated movies have the capability to appeal not only to children but adults as well. If that is the metric to use when rating an animated movie, "Toy Story" definitely has that ability. There is a lot of humor in the movie that will appeal to adults. The best example of this was the decision to cast the late Don Rickles as the voice of Mr. Potato Head. Young children won't know who Don Rickles is but adults will appreciate the script allows him to insult the other  characters in the movie.                                                                                                                                                                                                   
The movie also makes, not too subtle, references to Woody being attracted to Little Bo Peep (Annie Potts). One line has her tell Woody, how about she find someone else to watch her sheep tonight. I'm not sure how children will interpret that line but adults will understand what is implied.

The animators of "Toy Story" also throw in a lot pop culture references and refer back to Pixar's own short films. In one scene there is a book shelf with various book titles shown. The book titles are names of previous Pixar shorts. There is also a scene that draws a reference to "Night of the Living Dead" (1968). And within the "Pixar Universe" we get an introduction to Pizza Planet restaurant and the gas station Dinoco. Both of which will reappear in other Pixar movies.

Of course the two final things worth discussing is the voice work of all the actors and the look of the movie. It has been said that Buzz and Woody may be the best characters Tom Hanks and Tim Allen ever played. Their voices seem perfectly matched for the characters which is odd given that Allen wasn't even the original choice for Buzz. Billy Crystal was. But it is not just Allen and Hanks that do wonderful work, Rickles is great as Mr. Potato Head. The late Jim Varney (of "Ernest" fame) as Slinky Dog, Wallace Shawn as Rex, a Tyrannosaurus Rex figure, that feels he just isn't scary enough. And Pixar favorite John Ratzenberger, who has done voice work for for all of Pixar's movies, as a piggy bank named Hamm.

And of course the look of "Toy Story" is amazing. For those of us old enough to have grown up with traditional hand drawn animation, we naturally had never seen anything like "Toy Story" before. It looked "real". And the amount of detail Pixar provides is impressive. You can shut the volume off and simply look at the movie and pay attention to the small corners of the frame and you notice something with each viewing. Look at the light smudge marks on the bottom of doors, the chipped paint on furniture, the cracks and marks on the trim of the wall. That is a lot of detail that honestly wasn't necessary. It speaks to Pixar's high standards. There is still a part of me that misses hand drawn animation however.

"Toy Story" will please children, as has already been proven, and adults will like it too. It has a sweet message but I think relies too much on action sequences when a simple sweet story about children and their toys would have suffice. Time has proven "Toy Story" to be a classic in the animation genre however despite my feelings.

Film Review: A Gorgeous Girl Like Me

"A Gorgeous Girl Like Me"
*** (out of **** )

Beautiful women. There is something about beautiful women. Men, mostly lonely or sexually inexperienced men, will do anything to make beautiful women smile. They will do anything just to talk to beautiful women. Men only want to spend time with women. They will shower them with gifts, give them money and delude themselves into thinking their actions will "buy" a woman's affections. Most people (men and women) live under the fallacy if a person will just get to know them, they will see how special they are.

No, I'm not reading my diary smartalec. These were my thoughts watching the French comedy directed by Francois Truffaut, "A Gorgeous Girl Like Me" (1972). It seems to be what Truffaut was going after.

By the time Truffaut directed this movie he was a well established figure in the French New Wave, having directed "400 Blows" (1959), "Jules & Jim" (1962) and "Shoot the Piano Player" (1960). After directing this movie Truffaut's follow-up would be "Day For Night" (1973), perhaps one of his most popular films. It was very well received earning Academy Award nominations, even winning one for the best foreign language film. The late movie critic Gene Siskel called it the best movie of the year. It may be because of this "A Gorgeous Girl Like Me" (AKA "Such A Gorgeous Kid Like Me") gets lost in the shuffle of Truffaut's films and is rarely discussed. It doesn't help that the movie is not available on DVD in the U.S. and back in the days of VHS was out of circulation.

Stanislas Previne (Andre Dussollier) is a sociologist who visits a prison in order to interview Camille Bliss (Bernadette Lafont), a convicted murderer, for a thesis he is writing on criminal women. As soon as Camille sees Stanislas she plays him for a fool. Stanislas may be meeting her for an interview but he may have other motives. One of the prison guards tells him there are far more interesting women in the prison he can interview but Stanislas insist on Camille. Why? It is because she is an exceptionally beautiful woman? Or is her criminal profile truly fascinating?

During their several meetings Camille compliments Stanislas on his appearance, his constantly asks for favors, wanting him to buy her gifts and she even makes wardrobe suggestions to Stanislas, commenting on his tie. Stanislas may not be aware but the viewer can sense she is buttering him up. In the moment however all Stanislas knows is a beautiful woman is paying attention to him and he likes it.

Truffaut doesn't tell Camille's background story in a linear narrative. Instead it plays like vignettes as Camille tells us about her relationship with men and the real story on how certain men died that she has been accused of killing. Naturally her version of events is a little different from the truth. This is also an interesting commentary adding to the theme of delusion. Not only do we delude ourselves into thinking members of the opposite sex find us attractive, we also delude ourselves into thinking we are good people and create our own history of events, justifying our behavior.

In Camille's for eyes for example, is it her fault her father died after she moved a ladder which caused him to fall to his death? Shouldn't he have known the ladder was missing? And its not like she did it on purpose or anything. She needed the ladder to do chores.

Then there is the issue of her sexual relationship with men, which seems to be an endless list but as she tells the story, the men were using her. At one point she even refers to herself as an "almost virgin". Whatever that means. And Stanislas falls for it all believing she is "pure" an innocent girl that has been taken advantage of.

This seems to reflect an old belief that all men want to "save" the bad girl. The bad girl is fun. She has an outgoing personality. She can make men feel attractive and good about themselves. She's not above flirting with strangers and telling a mildly dirty joke, allowing the hint of sex to fill the air. At the same time every man believes the "bad girl" is misunderstood and just needs a good man to take care of her and love her. That will change her.

It is what seems to be happening to Stanislas. He always defends Camille's behavior to his secretary, Helene (Anne Kreis), who has a crush on Stanislas, and can see right through Camille and sees the effect she has on Stanislas. Again, its the old story of a person ignoring the one who loves them for someone more exciting. Or a case of, the person we like, never likes us back.

What makes "A Gorgeous Girl Like Me" so entertaining is the performance given by Bernadette Lafont. Truffaut is able to do to the audience what Camille does to Stanislas, make us fall in love with her. Much is made of Camille's beauty and Lafont is a beautiful woman. Truffaut creates a lot of scenes with Camille wearing very little clothing which stirs up a sexual excitement among the male viewers. This is to say nothing of Lafont's charisma and natural screen presence and the fact she has good comic timing. We believe she is this character.

Lafont, who died in 2013, had a long career in French cinema, working often with Claude Chabrol, appearing in his first feature film, "Le Beau Serge" (1959), considered by many film historians as the first film in the French New Wave movement. But it is her performance in "A Gorgeous Girl Like Me" that was a star making turn.

While I wouldn't consider this a satire of film noir, Truffaut does have some fun creating a comedic femme fatale character in Camille. Like all femme fatales, Camille is a dangerous woman who will bring men to their downfall. She knows how to play against their weakness. Truffaut, who started his career as a movie critic, may have been thinking of Barbara Stanwyck or Marlene Dietrich when he wrote this character. In the end the message in "A Gorgeous Girl Like Me" is the same, beautiful women make men do stupid things.

Truffaut's movie does comment somewhat on human behavior and is funny to watch, it only hits the surface and doesn't really examine these characters. It probably wasn't Truffaut's intention to do that anyway but his minor ambition prevents the movie from being something greater. Comedy can hit on basic human truths but "A Gorgeous Girl Like Me" almost seems more motivated to go for silliness and play around with movie genres, particularly noir and mysteries.

On the other hand it achieves what it set out to do and for that you must give Truffaut credit. By not setting the bar high that most likely is why the movie is not well remembered. But, we must accept the movie on its own terms and in that context the movie is rewarding.

If after watching this you want to see more of Truffaut's comic side, find "The Man Who Loved Women" (1977).