The Elusive Corporal
The story serves as a companion piece to Renoir's 1937 film, Grand Illusion, once more bringing together men from across the broad social spectrum of French society to depict one man's Sisyphean efforts to escape captivity in a German POW camp.
- Stars:Jean-Pierre Cassel, Claude Brasseur, O.E. Hasse, Claude Rich, Jacques Jouanneau, Sacha Briquet, Raymond Jourdan, Guy Bedos, Philippe Castelli, Gérard Darrieu, Lucien Raimbourg, François Darbon, Cornelia Froboess, Elisabeth Marcus, Elisabeth Stiepl,
- Director:Jean Renoir,
- Writer:Jacques Perret (novel), Jean Renoir (adaptation), Guy Lefranc (adaptation), Jean Renoir (dialogue)
An upper-class corporal from Paris is captured by the Germans when they invade France in 1940. Assisted and accompanied by characters as diverse as a morose dairy farmer, a waiter, a myopic... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
The Elusive Corporal torrent reviews
(au) wrote: I thought this movie was hilarious
(br) wrote: A really funny movie!!!
(au) wrote: An elegiac piece that entrances due to its unfamiliar setting - wartorn Chad; yet away from the front line in the curiously cosseted environs of a posh hotel swimming pool under Chinese ownership. At heart, it's a movie about a relationship between father and son and one that goes seriously off the rails due to pride and jealousy - needless to say, the consequences in Ndjamena are a little more problematic than they would be in Leighton Buzzard.Chad has always been one of Africa's most troubled countries and yet there are signs here that normality is being approached in the early scenes at least - it's no Somalia. Yet, many familiar themes emerge - the hotel reminded me of those I stayed in in India on my most recent visit - an utterly artificial environment that swaps one form of colonialism for another.
(au) wrote: Really its an R-rated Lezbian Porno with a little bit of vampire action badly done....not worth anyones time
(mx) wrote: Talk about a disappointment. This amazing woman falls for an absolute douche bag....yea right. It wasn't romantic, it wasn't funny, it wasn't original and it wasn't even made by Italians! The only reason I sat through this unrealistic, tedious blunder was because of Cerina Vincent.
(jp) wrote: slowwwww quirky movie that is kinda rom-com kinda dramedy.
(ag) wrote: 9/10 ign would ign agen plz mony thunks
(ag) wrote: Good movie, but it was sooooo sad at the end :'(
(ag) wrote: This was a great chick flick rom-com, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would...
(ag) wrote: Again, the Brits know how to make a movie scary. Could be the accent, could be the grim setting of the typical dowtown area, or it could just be a good movie. The acting is good, the flaws in the plot are not numerous, so try it out.
(jp) wrote: Really good movie for anybody into future movies. There is one scene where they spend to much time on action. It's slow in some scenes but is still pretty good.
(it) wrote: Solid 7/10. Acting and story were both great, but it was not the top tier film I was expecting. Average story that was elevated by the acting and brilliance from the source material's author.
(mx) wrote: Was there a bit of a robot craze in the 80s? You had films like Short Circuit 1 and 2, the RoboCop franchise and I do remember there being a robot in Rocky IV (though that one was for a small scene, I think) and this one of course. All of these movies (at least the first movies for both Short Circuit and RoboCop) came out from around 85-87, so there was a bit of a "craze", if it can be called that. Obviously, this movie was the least successful of them all. It's a low-budget horror movie featuring robots in the era when Jason and Freddy, among other slashers ruled the horror landscape, there was no way that this movie was gonna be a hit. I mean, the movie is about as absurd as it gets, conceptually speaking, but there's no way that robots, as villains, are just gonna match up with any of the big monsters in the scene at the time. Unless you're one of those conspiracy theorists that believes that machines will eventually reach a state of intelligence and self-awareness that they'll realize humanity is useless to them and kill us all off, then maybe these robots are a terrifying preview of the future. But, for everyone else, they're just robots. There's nothing threatening about them, even though they have the capacity to murder people. Then again, I don't assume that they ever meant the robots in this movie to be anything more than just B-movie villains, like something you'd see in a 50s sci-fi movie. And, as far as that's concerned, they're effective. The movie, obviously, isn't any good. The acting is really bad, the gore is meh, the special effects are not particularly good either. But I'll be damned if this wasn't charming as all hell. I mean charming by the standards of a cheesy 80s horror movie. Unlike the last movie I reviewed (The Rezort), which took itself way too seriously, this one is shameless in how much of a joke it thinks its own story is. And, really, with a movie about security robots, who guard a mall, losing their 'minds' and murdering the people in the mall, you can't really be taking yourself all that seriously. This is a horror movie that invites you to laugh at it and with it at the same time. Part of me just wishes that the gore would have been better than it was. Outside of one preposterous scene, you'll know the one, the gore here is surprisingly lackluster. If it had been better, I might have enjoyed this movie even more, even if I wouldn't say it was actually a good movie. Another thing is that the movie, even at 77 minutes, 4 minutes of which are credits, does drag a bit. And this is an edited version of the movie. Apparently the original cut goes over 90 minutes, which I just find impossible to believe. The movie loses a lot of steam the more characters start dropping like flies. It hurts when the last two people alive are the least interesting characters in the entire movie. Now, don't get me wrong, there are no great characters in this movie, so it's not like any of all the other possible combination of characters would have been any better. The characters are just 80s stereotypes. There's the dork, the hot chick, the goody-two-shoes and the jock douchegbag. And that's all there is to the characters in the movie, no substance whatsoever. Which was to be expected given what this movie ended up being. But, still, some sort of effort could have actually been made to write likable characters, given the limitations. Really, at best, this is a bad movie that glides to an average rating based on the fact that it's quite entertaining in its badness. It's not quite a masterpiece of awful, but it's an enjoyable little piece of cheesy 80s horror. Get a group of friends together and you'll have a blast watching this.
(fr) wrote: Delving once again into the idea of perception and reality, Bergman utilizes the effects of psychological illness as a means of separating the characters from the universal idea of consciousness to something less concrete. Karen hears whispers in the walls, incessant boat horns, and the cries of far-off animals, her illness giving way to existential dreams and fantasies about God. She embodies the idea of struggling with instability and uneasiness in reality, while her father attempts to use her periods of "insight" for his own gain, a character Bergman indicts as he creates "art" without reflecting on his inner truths. Filtering all of these themes through the concept of love and the idea of what it represents, Bergman presents Through a Glass Darkly as a case for this love, calling for its use as a means of providing insight into the self and that of others, as this is the only way those aware of the fragility of consciousness can bear to exist without falling apart.
(ru) wrote: Meh. Has its funny moments, cute idea. Every comedian in the area must have made an appearance. But it was just okay. Some of it was too much or dragged on and took the spoof a little too far. Not a bad Netflix watch.