Fanny

source: Fanny

I really, really love this movie! I saw it as a child when it was new and a lot of it went over my head because I didn't know about the birds and the bees. But I remember the cinematography, the music, the scenery, etc. Now I see it with adult eyes and I love it. It has a strange history. Evidently the original trilogy was condensed into a Broadway musical. Then Joshua Logan took the condensed story and made a non-musical version but kept the score as a beautiful, wonderful, deeply-moving background score. Jack Cardiff's cinematography is magnificent. He had a way of lighting with simplicity and elegance which always looked epic. The scenes of boats in the harbor at night, the interior of the restaurant, Fanny at the doorway, etc. were unforgettable. Joshua Logan did a masterpiece with this movie. I really think this film is a forgotten and overlooked gem. It doesn't have the place in the American consciousness it deserves.

I have been reading all these raves about this movie which I just saw on TMC this morning, 11/4/10, and thought I would write my thoughts. Certainly felt there was an overuse-age of the same song over and over again. I kept asking myself could not the composer think of another? What was with all the close ups? We can see a person's expression without a head shot filling the screen. Leslie Caron wasn't dancing with Gene Kelley and Horst Buchholz wasn't following the other '6" in the Magnificent 7. I liked him better in that movie than this one. There was the 2 older actors, Charles Boyer and Chevalier who I suppose were passing the reins onto the younger generation they were pleasant enough but the reins never passed as both of the actors never did much after this movie, unless you liked Father Goose or How the West was Won. Bottom line is its about a small village, a teenage one night stand that turns into a nightmare when she finds out she is pregnant. Basically after she let's him follow his dream, her mother, his father and the local rich man keep the 'secret' by a quick marriage and a 'pre-mature' birthing which made the rich man's family very happy. Of course you could not get away with that nowadays, someone would be screaming for a DNA testing. It's really just a soap opera in Technicolor, why an R rating? I have no clue, it should have been a PG-13. There was no bad language, no violence, no nudity and sex was mildly implied compared to today's standards. The only thing I could think of is it gives the impression that if a girl gets pregnant and her boyfriend heads out she can still get support for her child without government getting involved. Actually, I like that idea but it only happens in the movies so don't try this at home.

If anyone thinks this movie is good, watch the magnificent, original trilogy by Pagnol. The films are entitled, respectively, Marius, Fanny, and Cesar. After you've seen these films and you're still unconvinced that this version is a hack, rewatch this version of Fanny and look out for Fanny's line, "Panisse is dying" (which makes absolutely no sense as he was perfectly fine until Fanny says this).

This is worth watching for Horst Buchholz and Leslie Caron. The film itself is a sort of pastiche of French life in Marseille, based on the overrated work of Marcel Pagnol who sentimentalized beyond belief and during many years ( less now ) was a popular author. It is supposed to be taken seriously as a love story but frankly it is all over acted and has little sense of reality to it. Irritatingly the relentless music is based on a musical and that sense of an unsung musical blights the reality. The story is basically the love between Fanny and Marius, but sadly much as I appreciate both actors there is just hyperventilating and too much ' acting ' in the scenes of passion. Both Buchholz and Caron have little chemistry together ( see Caron in ' The L-Shaped Room ' for real desire and two people who suffer through loving ), and Buchholz ( one of the most beautiful men in cinema ) looks distinctly detached. But as I said it is still worth seeing just to see them. Boyer and Chevalier try to give authentic colour. Boyer is by far the best actor who I respect enormously, but I do not respond to the stereotypes that Chevalier makes of French men, and if proof is needed of that just seriously listen to his final song in ' Gigi '. Those who have genuine good memories of this semi-lost film will not like this review, but we all have the right to analyse films from different perspectives. For those who appreciate male beauty Buchholz never looked better, and for some obscure reason the beauty of Leslie Caron and him do not go together. If you watch a real satire on French society and delightful exaggeration track down a copy of the 1948 ' Clochemerle '.

So think of a movie musical like "Oklahoma!" and how glorious it is whenever it bursts into song and dance. Fun, isn't it? Now imagine that a genius studio head decided no one would like "Oklahoma!" if it had songs, and so ordered them all to be removed. Imagine what would be left of poor "Oklahoma!" if it were no longer a musical. It certainly wouldn't have an exclamation point at the end of its title anymore. That's what happened to "Fanny," a Broadway musical that was turned into a non-musical in its transition to screen. The result is a film in which clearly everything that made this story worth telling was left at the stage door, and everything that made it impossible to sit through made the leap unscathed. Seriously, are we supposed to give a rat's ass about anything happening on screen? The only thing that keeps "Fanny" from being an utter waste of your time are the loveliness of Leslie Caron in the title role and the showbiz chops of Charles Boyer and Maurice Chevalier as two old dudes stuck in a terrible story on the European seaside. Don't get me wrong -- it's still a waste of your time, but it's less of a waste than if the film had starred terrible actors instead. And to add insult to injury, this is one of those auditory atrocities from the 1960s in which 90% of the film's dialogue was re-recorded in post production, so it feels like watching a foreign film that's been dubbed. "Fanny" was mysteriously nominated for five Academy Awards in 1961 -- Best Picture(!!), Best Actor (Boyer), Best Color Cinematography, Best Film Editing, and Best Dramatic or Comedy Score -- and I can't bring myself to understand how it earned any of them. Best Picture?!! Was there not a single better movie made in 1961 aside from the four the Academy had already nominated? Grade: D-

This has a great deal of old world charm, but ultimately it is rather disappointing. The dated premise clearly causes this vehicle to begin sinking about a quarter of the way through the film, but the performances of Maurice Chevalier, Leslie Caron, and especially Charles Boyer keep it afloat. Another viewer commented that it should have been a musical. It's rather ironic to say this, but it clearly might feel less dated had it been a musical.

I just saw this movie for the first time and loved it very much. The actors are wonderful, especially Charles Boyer (oscar-nominated for his portrayal of Cesar) and Maurice Chevalier; their colorful characters sound so true. Beautifully photographed in Marseille by cinematographer, Jack Cardiff, the scenery is picturesque. Although it was filmed in English, Joshua Logan's film retains the flavor of Marseille and it's people. It is an universal story and has not aged. A mix of comedy and drama, I caught myself laughing and crying at the same time. I highly recommend this movie and hope that Warner Bros. will put it on it's upcoming list of DVD releases.

One of the most beautiful love stories ever made. I defy anyone to watch the scene on the wharf when Fanny and Marius confess their love for one another and not cry or watch the heart wrenching reunion scene that takes place a year later and not be moved to tears. Nope. This is a truly a great romantic film, full of charm, humor, joy and sadness. The writing is excellent. The photography is breathtaking, the score is lush and moving. The movie was made from a Broadway musical, which was adapted from a trilogy of French films by Pagnol. When it was transferred to Hollywood, the music was used as background score, adding to incredible romantic feel of the film. Joshua Logan really outdid himself in his direction of the film. It is one of my all-time favorite films.

This is one of the sweetest movies ever made, without being "sickeningly sweet." The characters are funny and interesting. All kinds of love are depicted here--parental love, romantic love, love between friends. The characters are very much products of the time and place they live in--Marseille, France, before World War 2. They are steeped in Catholic tradition, which contributes to their inner struggles at times. The problems of Fanny and Marius might seem dated, and yet the conflict between pleasing parents and following one's heart remains relevant today for many young people. Father-son relationships are as complex today as they were then. Bullying parents may not be as plentiful, or as extreme, as they were in the time FANNY is set, but they still exist. This is a beautiful film, the right mix of sentimentality and humor. I have only seen it on VHS in pan and scan. There is one place where Marius and Fanny are partially cropped to fit the TV screen, unfortunate but it does not spoil the film. PUZZLE: I don't know why gorgeous Horst Buchholz didn't get more acclaim for this film from critics at the time or reviewers like me, on this site. He was a young German playing a young Frenchman. But no French or American actor could have played the part better. He expressed angst and love very realistically. This is a great film for women and for men with a romantic streak, lovers of French stories and locales, and Caron or Boyer admirers. The wrap-up in the last quarter of the film is not perfect, but the film as a whole is a 10, and the lovely score will stay with you!