Steven Torrey
I read "Quiet Days in Clichy" some fifty years ago. Whatever else can be said for porno--it does have a certain joie-de-vivre to it. And this movie--more or less--captures the mindlessness of Henry Miller chasing after c**t in Paris. And apparently with some success. (The word is splattered all over the film in the opening minutes of the film... So trust it doesn't violate IMDb TOU. And the reality of Henry Miller and the story is reduction of women to a simple anatomical part.)While the 1990 film portrays the 14 year old Collette with a certain charm, innocence, style, and attractiveness--this film prefers to depict Collette as some sort of simpleton waif, mentally unbalanced.While I thought the 1990 version bordered on the silliness--partly because of the sterilization of the sex scenes, which I thought Henry Miller would not have approved, and partly for use of studio sets for exterior shots of Paris--this version actually is filmed outdoors with Paris as a backdrop. The cineme-verite added a dimension of reality that was appreciated.The story, "Quiet Days in Clichy" Henry Miller records his sexual exploits in vivid detail--I thought one of those great moments in story telling. "Wow, who knew mindless humping and drinking could be fun?" And this 1970 version managed to capture that in a small way that sense of fun that mindless humping is--and that Henry Miller wanted to convey in his autobiographical story. While the 1990 version seemed to never quite admit that basic element of effing for fun.A great movie ?--not by a long shot; but interesting to see how Henry Miller's pornographic autobiographical sketch was transposed to film; and this movie was a far more successful adaptation than the sterile 1990 version. (And both worth a look see on a rainy Saturday evening.)
hippiedj
*Contains Possible Spoilers* I consider myself quite well connected with the late 1960s, even being quite a Joan Baez fan in kindergarten! In the mid-seventies a relative gave me a big stack of old Evergreen Review magazines, and I started an interest in more counter-culture things from the '60s because of that, since I was just a child when much of it took place. One of the films Evergreen released in 1970 that they gave a lot of coverage to was Quiet Days In Clichy, showing tantalizing pics of the cast in naked moments. And in 2004 I finally got to see what the hubbub was about...Mainly a curiosity of the late '60s and of interest mainly for those interested in the "art" cinema of that time, this film is really another of those where philosophy and intellectual conversations are padded with people having sex, showing even the intellectuals have a base interest just like everyone else. But since it centers around someone like Henry Miller, it's high art apparently. Certainly off to an interesting start, the film immediately gets one to think though that there is a promise of more like the hardcore footage shown right after the strange credit sequence. That might have been better actually, because instead we then mainly get characters meandering around Paris and Luxembourg, laughing a lot and wondering why they are never satisfied.Here are some of the perplexing things for me:--Joey complains that Nys could have left him a few francs after he first met her and gave her his money, but Joey actually INSISTED she take all of it to begin with. --The guys keep yakking about how Colette's brains are in her genitals and that she just wants to have sex (a feeling they seem to have about women in general), but by watching this whole film it seems Joey and Carl spend all their time trying to get laid as well.--The women are portrayed as a bit mentally off, except for Colette's mother (upon which Carl then just says how hot she was, which seemed like belittling her after she was kind to them).--Joey is a writer, but we rarely see him even doing that, he just complains how he has no money and has nothing to eat, but can spend a lot of time walking around town and looking for sex.--Suddenly while in Luxembourg, and somehow with money, they wind up pouring bottles of wine all over prostitutes and letting the bread they have to just wind up in the tub and going down the drain with the wine. If we're supposed to appreciate Joey and Carl's "bohemian lifestyle," it doesn't help that they just waste food and drink after always saying they never have it.--Hoping there would be a resolve to the story, instead after a naked woman can't have sex with them because she was crying over the memory of her late husband, the others just sit there naked and laugh while the camera zooms in on their genitals. Huhhhh??? That's it?I don't regret seeing this film after wondering for so many years what it was all about, and discovering more curiosities from that era. It's just that I think some people will find any reason to say it's poetic mainly because Henry Miller is involved -- if this were not based on him and just a film of its own, I doubt as many folks would be worshiping it. Had a film been made of a character based on Henry Miller washing dishes for an hour and a half, I'm sure these people would somehow come up with many a thesis on the amazing meanings of it.But it all just comes down to silly naked people laughing, in my eyes...
Brian
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.
