The Creatures (1966)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Perfect cast and a good story

It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

In this totally senseless pseudo-sci-fi film, Catherine Deveuve is mute for 95% of the time; as if to compensate, her husband Michel Piccoli (playing a character named Piccoli - how profound) can talk to animals! Shot in black-and-white, the film uses a red monochrome every time someone does something weird - which happens a lot. It also has an incessantly piercing violin score. One of those art films which drive people away from art films. 0.5 out of 4 stars.

With Christmas coming up,I started searching round for a French New- Wave (FNW) title that I could give a friend as an X-Mas gift.Talking to a DVD seller,I was happy to learn that he had recently tracked down a near-forgotten FNW title starring Catherine Deneuve,which led to me getting ready to discover what creatures lay inside the zoo.The plot:Driving with his wife Mylène Piccoli, Edgar takes a wrong turn and crashes his car,which leads to Mylène becoming a mute.Weeks later:Desperate to complete the writing of his Sci-Fi novel (which is about an evil mastermind,who secretly drops metallic discs into peoples pockets,in order to control them),Edgar decides to put his free-wheeling life behind,and to instead put his head down and spend most of the time writing the book,and spending time with Mylène (who due to still being mute writes on boards.)Talking to Mylène,Edgar is given the excellent news that she is pregnant.Attempting to relax from his writing,Edgar decides to take long walks around the near-by town.Due to it being a small island where everyone knows everything,the locals start to think that some is wrong with Edgar,due to how little he talks to any of them.Running into a number of locals, (from petty thieves to shop owners) Edgar finds his anger to boil over,which leads to most of the towns residence viewing him as a weirdo.Spotting a strange tower on the outskirts of the town,Edgar arranges 2 local thieves to sneak him in,which leads to Edgar discover that the mysterious resident of the tower is playing a rather peculiar game of chess.View on film:Whist she has hardly any lines of dialogue,the gorgeous Catherine Deneuve gives an exquisite performance as Mylène,thanks to Deneuve showing the psychological effect that Edgar's behaviour has had on Mylène,with Deneuve give Mylène a stoic face,which reveals the lack of emotion that she is receiving from Edgar.Entering the movie as a right playboy, Michel Piccoli gives a superb,rather subtle performance as Edgar,whose self-centred edges soften,as Piccoli shows the weight of Edgar's chess game with the mysterious stranger to slowly sink in.Being one of the few women directors of the FNW,writer/director Agnès Varda shows that she can proudly stand her own ground against any guys of the FNW.Giving the film a rustic documentary quality via B&W footage of the towns shipping yard and shops.Allowing the viewer to sink into the B&W,Varda suddenly turns the film upside down,by brilliantly splashing the film with red,which along with expressing Edgar's boiling emotions,also gives the title an ultra- stylised chess motif,as Edgar finds out that there are people who he can't check-mate.

..the others will think it merely arty.Like so many nouvelle vague artists,Agnès Varda tries hard here to say something "deep" "meaningful" and "of consequence".All Varda's qualities seem to have vanished into thin air:spontaneity,simplicity and sensitiveness,which made her beautiful "Cleo de 5 à 7" so worthwhile and so new at the beginning of the sixties.These qualities seemed to remain in the follow-up "le bonheur",but this latter work is rather unpleasant in several respects.(Mrs Alice Liddell wrote a very good IMDb comment for "le bonheur",read it and you'll know what I mean)In "les creatures" Varda casts Piccoli as a writer and Deneuve his mute (because of an accident)wife .The other characters are all pawns in a giant chess game.Sometimes the screen turns red ,maybe to indicate that it's not the same "player",who knows?Actually this is the kind of movie which defies analysis.It was the eighties before Agnès Varda was again in clover with "sans toit ni loi" and "Jacquot de Nantes".

Les Creatures is marvelously created like all of Varda's films I've seen. There are many wonderful things about this exciting movie, especially the story, how it relates to real life, and the roles of the protagonist and the two Quellec sisters.The story of Les Creatures is very impressing with its concern with free will, fatalism, and determinism. Moreover, it gives the impression of a myth and science fiction at the same time. And the idea about the live-chess game is very exciting. I really wish that someone should take this idea as a basis for a TV series or reality show. In Les Creatures, the game doesn't last as long as I want. I want to see it lasts for 30 hours or so. It's very enjoyable seeing characters' lives dramatically change after one character meets one another. (Maybe that's why I like `Melrose Place.') And I think some reality show can use this idea as well.The idea about the abruptly changes of emotion and behavior is also intriguing. Though these sudden changes, which are cleverly emphasized by the changes of color, seem a little bit comical, I think they are an intelligent way of representing reality. Many people, including me, have experienced a lot of these abruptly changes of emotion in real life. Many times anger does arise suddenly, unexpectedly, involuntarily and seemingly unreasonably, and pass away very quickly, leaving only destruction and regret. This movie displays very well this part of real life. And it makes us think about some questions of life. While the characters in this movie suffer the volatility of emotion and behavior because they are the helpless victims of the scientist, does that mean we, who actually suffer severer volatility of emotion in real life, might be the victims of ourselves as `the scientist' lives within our mind? Are we as totally helpless as these characters? Can't we fight our bad impulses? Is it just one part of our mind that makes us suffer? And can that bad part, like the scientist, be destroyed by another part of our mind?The role of the protagonist has so many interesting things about it. In one of the early scenes, he looks down from a high tower to the rising level of water. He lives in a secluded castle. He can scare the bad girl by his mere presence. He can talk to animals. In one scene, he even claims jokingly that he is something other than normal human being. When the game begins, we see his presence in many places. As a player in the game or as a writer, he can manipulate (real or fictional) lives. But the thing that impresses me the most about him is his reaction to the game when the old man harasses the girl. He can't tolerate this. He cannot let it happen without his intervention. He doesn't want to play the game any more if he cannot prevent things like this. He'd rather deny the role of life-manipulator than to let such things happen. However, the role of his wife, played by Deneuve, is quite passive. And I think it might be an interesting idea to compare the roles of Deneuve and Piccoli in this movie with their roles in `Belle de Jour.'However, the characters who impress me the most are the Quellec sisters. In my opinion, they seem to be the true winner in this game of life though misfortunes sometimes befall them. The younger sister astonishes me, and can even surprises the scientist, by her reaction when she discovers the truth about her lover. This minor character wins a lot of respect from me, and will always remain outstanding in my memory. The older sister seemed boring at first. She made me assume beforehand that she was just a character easily found anywhere else – a woman who is foolishly in love. But this character surprisingly develops. She can learn the lesson of life. And at the end, she makes me feel like cheering for her when she reveals to whom her affection might turn.