The greatest movie ever made..!

Good concept, poorly executed.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

A great filmmaker, at the height of his art, working with very strong material. To distill Bernanos' great book down to so few essentials and still convey its full force took a great mind and a great spirit. bleakness has never been more uplifting.There is no need to be religious to partake by this masterpiece, it spirituality will move all equally. Be aware however of one thing: just as many films are not for children, some are not for all adults. Do not watch this (nor read the book) if you are not prepared to have your soul harrowed to its very bottom. you cannot and will not be the same person after watching it.

In "Diary Of A Country Priest", Robert Bresson has made an almost impeccable film. He has neglected nothing in creating a nearly perfect masterpiece, and it is hard to determine its most outstanding quality. The photography was brilliant in its gloominess and the acting was real - so real that it gave the film unusual authenticity. Bresson also co-wrote the script, which was intelligent and lyrical in places and perhaps the best part of the film. And a previous reviewer has mentioned that he is a master of the mise-en-scene.An introspective young priest is assigned to a small parish in the French countryside - so small that he complains that only one parishioner attends daily mass - and brings some unwanted baggage with him. He is socially inept, a drab young fellow who makes little or no impression on anyone. He also doubts his commitment to his calling and is unable to gather any enthusiasm for praying. Lastly, he is ill with an undisclosed stomach ailment. The parish is poor, the parishioners unfriendly and nothing he does seems to satisfy anyone.I don't want to give too much away, but suffice it to say that the film stays with you long after it is over and the haunted and haunting young cure lingers in your mind. It is ultimately a downer, but the cinematic experience is nothing less than exhilarating. It played recently at the Film Forum in NYC.

This one is one of the most novelistic films I've ever seen. I haven't read the source material, yet, but I feel that it's been adapted almost word-by-word. Even the scenery, the landscapes, the interiors, the characters' faces appear to be like pictures, imaginations you have in your mind when you read a novel and experience the story through the subjectivity of the main protagonist - dreamlike, mysterious, vague, greyish, dark, incomprehensible. Every scene in the film shows a moment in the life of the young, idealistic priest as a depiction of his being, his disease, his questions and his silence. These bits and facets slowly come together for the viewer - just as for the protagonist himself. The last shot of the cross is the summary and the extension of the film: grey, hazy, crooked, almost without contours it is not a sign of victory and redemption, but a remembrance of the endlessness of the grey landscapes, the dark buildings, the incomprehensible gestures, recalling the suffering and immense loneliness of the priest. It recapitulates his pain and is a sign of torment. Now that I've seen one film by Bresson made before this one and several made after this week, Journal is a transition in the filmography and contains seeds of almost every moment in Bressons later works, especially the typical Bressonian techniques of sound editing, and, of course, the unique monotony and brilliant coherence of the images.

I kind of feel like a genius; I feel like I'm the only one who saw through this fake film. I watched it three times, once with commentary, and I found myself getting annoyed at all the close-ups, all the times the screen just blacks out, and worst of all, I feel the film never really resolves anything. Yes, the priest dies, but he didn't really seem at peace with the town that gave him so much grief, or with himself. That and he was an idiot. If it weren't for the commentary by Peter Cowie which explained not only the movie but the book it came from, I wouldn't have been able to stomach it at all. I enjoy French movies, but this is one that was completely absurd.Diary of a Country Priest is filmed in beautiful black and white photography but, that alone cannot save this deadly dull tripe. Scene after scene of extreme close-ups where characters don't say anything until the camera cuts away and goes to a black out do NOT make an interesting or relevant story. How this film ever became a classic is mind boggling: it reminds me more of The Emperor's New Clothes.Yes, Claude Laydu's performance is heartfelt and thought provoking, if you are a sadist, but this film left me feeling empty because overall it is a weak impression of the Catholic priesthood, which is an ignoble and inglorious institution of corruption. The young priest's triumph over the countess's pride is a weak scene but 90% of the film will drag you down with its dreary introspection and window into the young priest's melancholy thoughts. This priest doesn't come across so much as being humble as he does just plain pitiful.Being that I don't speak or understand French I was looking forward to doing the English SUBTITLE thing to help understand the film. Well, the English SUBTITLE is at times impossible to view/read and the text rolls by so quickly that there was much I could not read (and I am not a particularly slow reader - I just finished Dostoyevsky in 3 days). I really wanted to like this film . I try out everything "chosen" by the Criterion Collection, and yet can not see why in many ways this one merits some sort of critical nod. However, I sat through this entire two hour film yearning to feel some sort of empathy for the main character, and it never materialized. He just seemed like a victim rather than a fighter. And for that, I say it stunk.