Brilliant and touching

A Brilliant Conflict

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

The alternative title for this film is The Loss of Innocence, which sounds deceptively exploitative. It is however an appropriate description of a charming yet sinister film.The film is set in the Champagne Country in France, so we get some lush views of the French countryside and even a look into the champagne caves. That alone would probably be enough for some people but we have a great story too: four children (for those who read the book, the character of Cecil has been merged with Hester) are left on their own in a grand hotel in France when their mother gets taken ill. Thirteen-year-old Hester, the second eldest, takes charge of The Littles (their name for the two young children) as she has the best knowledge of French, but it is the eldest child, sixteen-year-old Joss, that blossoms almost overnight. Her beauty captures the heart of their unofficial guardian, middle-aged Englishman Eliot, and Joss soon becomes entangled in a love triangle between her, Eliot, and co-owner of the hotel, Madame Zizi. Further complications arise when Eliot proves himself to be untrustworthy, perhaps even criminal...The novel has been diluted in the transition to film. The novel's equivalent of Hester, Cecil, is the narrator of the novel, so we see her sister's sexual awakening through her eyes. Cecil also undergoes a transition into womanhood, however all hints of this are eradicated in the film. Whether this is due to time restrictions or trying to please the censors is unclear. The focus of the film is on Joss and her coming-of-age. Fans of the book may be disappointed that Susannah York does not have the exotic dark beauty that Joss is supposed to have, but she is suitably pretty and passes as a sixteen-year-old who is just turning into a woman. She also resembles Sue Lyon in Lolita, which came out in the same year, and the two films have some similarities in that relationship. Kenneth More is a bit old to play Eliot so one might have to stretch their imagination to believe that Joss fancies him. He also doesn't have the suaveness or mysteriousness of Eliot in the novel. However he does have a chirpy charm and works well with the children. A mention should also go to Jane Asher, who plays Hester's curiosity of the adult world very effectively.Although the film does not capture the darkness and perfection of the novel, it remains a nice exploration of the process of growing up.

I'm surprised to find that this has not as yet been given a video release. More and more films from the various studios' archives are finding their way to a public that craves the kind of entertainment which was once much more available to those willing to attend a film in a theatrical setting, that is, films with a respect for adult sensibilities and without the tiniest nod to the sensation-seekers who crave explosions, mindless (and excruciatingly extended sequences of) violence and special effects which are, let's face it, beginning the inevitable downward spiral of diminishing returns. Really! Are any but those who refuse to refine their tastes in theater, films, etc., still impressed by the ever more astonishing demonstrations of the computer geniuses' craft and which are the reason that dozens and dozens of artisans make a closing credit roll-up almost as long as a typical film these days (and which precious few theater patrons will now sit through)? I was able to see "Loss of Innocence" (its American release title) at a first-run theater in Beverly Hills, California and the print was absolutely pristine, doing full justice to Freddie Young's exceptionally fine work behind the Technicolor cameras. A projectionist of my acquaintance at the time told me that Columbia Pictures Corporation was especially particular about the condition and presentation of first-run films released by that studio, sending technicians frequently during first-run engagements of Columbia films to check on the condition of projection equipment, correcting any flaws that may have shown up in the reels, the proper masking of projected films according to the aspect ratio used in production, and so forth. I no longer live in southern California but I'm somewhat reluctant to believe that such care (and expense) is still lavished on films at first-run houses down there these days. It certainly doesn't appear to be true here in the Northwest. Anyway, with the lovely scenery of its French countryside settings and two truly beautiful actresses (the exquisitely young English rose, Miss York, and that elegant flower of French womanhood, Madame Darrieux) to delight one's eyes, plus a delicately scripted story of more than unusual interest, this is a film I shall always remember as one of the most ravishing cinema-going experiences that I can recall. I join others who have commented on this site in hoping that we will one day be rewarded with a happy refreshing of our memories with a video release of this gem.

Susannah York is magnificent as the young girl who must protect and nurture her siblings while being attacked by unfamiliar situations and coming-of-age. Kenneth More is magnificent as the suave thief with whom she gets enthralled. And Danielle Darrieux is a study in magnificence as the past-her-prime working girl resigned to her fate. The photography is luscious. And the dialogue is utterly realistic with witty repartee giving way to raw feelings. This is one of my top 10 favorite movies of all time.

Next to A Man For All Seasons, this is the best-scripted movie it has ever been my pleasure to watch, then read, then watch again. And every performance from the three leads on down is perfect. The photography and direction are also first-rate. The result is a flawlessly told coming-of-age tale exquisitely acted by Susannah York with able assistance by Kenneth More and Danielle Darrieux.