Elena and Her Men (1956) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
25 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
To see Bergman's smile
vostf11 December 2002
Jean Renoir once told he wanted to make this movie to see Ingrid Bergman smile to the camera. This is the strength and the limit of Elena et les hommes. Ingrid Bergman smiles, living buoyantly in this colorful political farce. She and every other character involved goes nowhere. Hence the movie can be seen as a light series of social shafts of wit, something Renoir has always been good at showcasing. He delivers this, his nephew delivers a really nice cinematography but on the whole it looks artificial and vain.

Not a great movie so, but it's always a pleasure to see Bergman smile.
29 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The French Way of Life
claudio_carvalho28 February 2010
In the end of the Nineteenth Century, on the July 14th Celebration in Paris, the broken widow Polish Princess Elena Sokorowska (Ingrid Bergman) meets the bon-vivant Henri de Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer) on the streets. Henri introduces his friend General François Rollan (Jean Marais), who is a national hero. Elena has sold all her pearls and needs to get married to keep her lifestyle. Elena involves with a group of politicians that intend to promote the general to the presidency of France supported by the people. Rollan and Henti fall in love for Elena and dispute her love.

"Elena et les Homes" is a dull romance in a political environment in France that is homage to love and the French way of life. Ingrid Bergman shines with her beauty performing a likable character. The bright colors highlight the art decoration, with colorful sets and costumes. This movie was released in Brazil on VHS by Mundial Filmes Distributor. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "As Estranhas Coisas de Paris" ("The Strange Things of Paris")
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
colorfully presented but utterly uninvolving
lasttimeisaw12 July 2014
A Jean Renoir vaudeville stars Ingrid Bergman as a Polish princess-cum-widow Elena Sokorowska in pre WWI Paris, merrily philandering with her suitors, until they are pinned down between two, the radical party general François Rollan (Marais) who is a candidate for the prime minister of the country and a romantic count Henri de Chevincourt (Ferrer).

My second Renoir's film after THE RULES OF THE GAME (1939, 8/10), ELENA AND HER MEN is on a splendid parade of polychromatism with exquisite costumes and interior decoration, whereas the movie is indulged in its own flamboyance and fecklessness, not even Juliette Gréco's superb rendition could ease the despondent frown.

Maybe it was Renoir's intention to make a film pandering for French audience and foreign Gallo- savants at its time, but the story is utterly uninvolving, all the rapid talking side characters pop up and romp around inordinately, which causes great trouble to comprehend what is going on on the screen, soon or later, all of them will inexplicably lapses into ridiculous buffoons, and more unsatisfying is that there is never enough room for viewers to savor the farce.

Bergman has a gregarious presence in this light-hearted rom-com, a skip-deep socialite can equally excel in conquering any man she wants and appeasing any man she deserts, with her charm daisy. Two besotted gentlemen, either the aristocratic and uptight Marias or the more characterless Ferrer, fail to make strong impact other than a convenient pawn to be blindly swept off his feet by Elena ever since the first glance.

Supporting roles galore, Jean Richard is Rollan's guard Hector, fights for the love of Lolotte (Noël), Elena's young maid, with Eugéne (Jouanneau), Elena's soon-to-be son-in-law, and truly, Elena is going to remarry with shoe businessman Mr. Martin-Michaud (Bertin), and their will be a double wedding with Eugéne marries his fiancée Denise (Nadal), things are all mismanaged under a political turbulence which one might find it difficult to decipher with its fast pace. Not to mention Rollan's quartet political corp, things could not be more messier.

Renoir certainly is still good at his trick with various characters bungle together within a carefully measured frame, but it doesn't change much for the haphazard love-triangle, in the end, one can only wish it could end as soon as possible, since our rationality determines that it doesn't worth all the effort.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Has its (few) moments
jost-118 June 2003
There is one really great scene in this movie....the ocean of people at the Bastille Day Celebration and the movement of the crowd through its waves. This scene, and the overall color and details of costumes make this movie worthwhile. And of course there's Ingrid Bergman, whose beauty and poise (even when a little tipsy) is always watcheable. (She is really unique in her era.....have you ever seen or heard of her persona being vamped by any contemporary drag queens....can't be done, I'll wager). The rest of the movie tries to be madcap and michievous, but it just doesn't work. I'm amazed at reading the plot description here....so THAT'S what it was supposed to be about! Sure lost me.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
La Comedie est terminée
brogmiller11 March 2020
Jean Renoir will always be judged by his timeless pre-war French classics which means that his subsequent films invariably fall short. This is the third of his 'trilogy' from the 1950's. It is not quite as bad as 'La Carosse d'Or' but not nearly as good as 'French Cancan'.

Ravishingly shot by Claude Renoir, it begins promisingly with the blossoming romance between luminous Ingrid Bergman and elegant Mel Ferrer but the director has alas plumped for a strange concoction of romantic melodrama and slapstick farce and ultimately the film works as neither. Love conquers all at the end which is a relief because it means the film is finally over.

Apparently Rossellini advised his wife to work with Renoir and Bergman. Having made this dud with the former she had to wait twenty years to work with the latter which produced the masterpiece 'Autumn Sonata'.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Considering the names involved a disappointment
jjnxn-111 October 2013
Silly concoction is a minor work for all involved. Ingrid, in her last foreign film before her Rossolini fueled exile from Hollywood ended with her triumphant return in Anastastia, is charming and her dresses are incredibly beautiful. But the settings have a sense of falseness to them, even wealthy people's homes look like someone lives there, these are obvious sets. Even the outdoor scenes have a claustrophobic feeling of being stage-bound. Renoir doesn't seem comfortable with the material or perhaps he didn't believe in it, either way it's missing a light touch that would have turned the film into a charming soufflé instead of the flat farce that it is. Mildly amusing but almost completely forgettable.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"When it comes to living, you can count on the French"
ackstasis4 October 2008
After watching two of his silent shorts, 'Elena and her Men (1956)' is my first feature-length film from French director Jean Renoir, and I quite enjoyed it. However, I didn't watch the film for Renoir, but for star Ingrid Bergman, who – at age 41 – still radiated unsurpassed beauty, elegance and charm. Throughout the early 1950s, following her scandalous marriage to Italian Roberto Rossellini, Bergman temporarily fell out of public favour. Her next five films, directed by her husband, were unsuccessful in the United States, and I suspect that Renoir's latest release did little to enhance Bergman's popularity with English-speaking audiences {however, she did regain her former success with an Oscar in the same year's 'Anastasia (1956)'}. She stars as Elena Sokorowska, a Polish princess who sees herself as a guardian angel of sorts, bringing success and recognition to promising men everywhere, before promptly abandoning them. While working her lucky charms to aid the political aspirations of the distinguished General Francois Rollan (Jean Marais), she finds herself falling into a love that she won't be able to walk away from. This vaguely-political film works well as either a satire or a romantic comedy, as long as you don't take it too seriously; it's purely lighthearted romantic fluff.

Filmed in vibrant Technicolor, 'Elena and her Men' looks terrific as well, a flurry of bright colours, characters and costumes. Bergman's Polish princess is dreamy and somewhat self-absorbed, not in an unlikable way, but hardly a woman of high principles and convictions. She is persuaded by a team of bumbling government conspirators to convince General Rollan to stage a coup d'état, knowingly exploiting his love for her in order to satisfy her own delusions as a "guardian angel." Perhaps the film's only legitimately virtuous character is Henri de Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer, then Audrey Hepburn's husband), who ignores everybody else's selfish secondary motives and pursues Elena for love, and love alone. This, Renoir proudly suggests, is what the true French do best. 'Elena and her Men' also attempts, with moderate success, to expose the superficiality of upper-class French liaisons, through the clumsy philandering of Eugène (Jacques Jouanneau), who can't make love to his servant mistress without his fiancè walking in on them. For these sequences, Renoir was obviously trying for the madcap sort of humour that you might find in a Marx Brothers film, but the film itself is so relaxed and laid-back that the energy just isn't there.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Genius at Work
kenjha30 December 2011
Renoir is regarded my many critics as among the greatest directors to stand behind a camera. By the time he made this film, he was approaching his twilight years and had no doubt read his press clippings and come to believe that he was indeed a great artist who could turn everything he touched into a masterpiece. No director, however, can make a good film without a decent script. The script for this, if there was one to begin with, is a complete mess. There's no rhyme or reason to anything that goes on, and the "comedy" is not the least bit amusing. Poor Ingrid somehow managed to continue her career after this atrocity. At least the color is stunning.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
For the sheer beauty of Ingrid Bergman
ignorantbliss-308024 July 2020
This is my second viewing and I didn't really like it on my first. Actually it is good if you can skip the scenes that took place at Elena's fiance chateau. The main criticsms for this movie is its convoluting and muddling plot. There were so many unnecessary characters in the background chasing up and down running and making stupid faces and movements. At same time the generals were upstairs laying out plots of overthrowing the government that it gets so convoluted and viewers couldn't follow through and they lost ineterest. On the flip side, the colour was superb. I like the technicolor they used in films during this period. It was so rich, striking, and bold. Ingrid Bergman was so radiant and gorgeous filmed in color. She was a dramatic actress not a comedienne so it was interesting to see her pulling it off in the middle of those chasing, yelling, and screaming scenes. The film suffers anytime she was not on screen. I think most of viewers agree. They wanted or can I say it begged for her to be back on screen. Renoir wanted to film Ingrid Bergman smiles. And my God what a smile it was. The ending was masterpiece, it was magic. You have to experience it and feel it to appreciate it. When it comes to kissing you can count on French! Very recommended.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Charm of a Daisy and Ingrid Bergman
alvinkuo25 June 2011
Being both a fan of Renoir and Ingrid, imagine my surprise that they happened to collaborate on "Elena and Her Men!" Having yet to be disappointed by Renoir (Rules of the Game being one of the top five 20th century French films), I knew from the description that it wouldn't quite reach those heights but it should still be fun.

Having watched it through, I have to say that the comparisons made to Rules of the Game happen quite enough in Elena that would make the latter seem trite. Even so, and despite the annoying presence of Mel Ferrer (was he dubbed?) and the sub-plots with Eugene-Denise-Lisotte, I have to say that Ingrid Bergman more than makes up for it, with Renoir showing her in all her luminosity in the beautiful dresses (and she certainly out-acts everyone else). The film itself is a little muddled, the previously mentioned sub-plots and other elements like the gypsy woman not quite fitting together (and the ending seems quite cheesy for Renoir, at least for me). All in all watch it if you are a Bergman fan.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
midway through the movie it falls apart
planktonrules27 October 2005
The first half hour or so of this movie I liked. The obvious budding romance between Ingrid Bergman and Mel Ferrer was cute to watch and I wanted to see the inevitable happen between them. However, once the action switched to the home of Ingrid's fiancé, it all completely fell apart. Instead of romance and charm, we see some excruciatingly dopey parallel characters emerge who ruin the film. The fiancé's boorish son and the military attaché's vying for the maid's attention looked stupid--sort of like a subplot from an old Love Boat episode. How the charm and elegance of the first portion of the film can give way to dopiness is beyond me. This film is an obvious attempt by Renoir to recapture the success he had with THE RULES OF THE GAME, as the movie is very similar once the action switches to the country estate (just as in the other film). I was not a huge fan of THE RULES OF THE GAME, but ELENA AND HER MEN had me appreciating the artistry and nuances of the original film.
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Yet another lovely farce from the hand of the master.
kentmiller24 December 1999
Ingrid Bergman is a temporarily impoverished Polish countess in 1900s Paris who finds herself pursued by France's most popular general and a glamorous count -- and that's on top of being engaged to a shoe magnate. Such is the failproof premise that entrains one of the most delirious plots in movie history. There are backroom political machinations by the general's handlers, a downed balloonist and ecstatic Bastille Day throngs, but the heart of this gorgeously photographed film is the frantic upstairs/downstairs intrigues involving randy servants and only slightly more restrained aristocrats. Yes, it's Rules of the Game redux. Before it's all over even Gaston Modot, the jealous gamekeeper in Rules, puts in an appearance -- as a gypsy capo, no less! Things happen a little too thick and fast toward the end, resulting in some confusion for this non-French speaker, but what the heck -- Elena and Her Men is another deeply humane Renoir masterpiece.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
This is a delicious movie
richard-callian-13 July 2007
I think that most of the folks who have posted comments on this movie don't understand how to watch a movie and/or have little sense of elegance. First, to assess a movie you need to understand the extent to which everything in the film works together. Modern sensibilities demand great drama. No, I don't mean great setting of characters and plots, but they seem to demand emotional trajectories that are greatly tragic or greatly comedic. This is a subtle movie. Its beauty lies in its subtlety (not to be confused with simplicity). Neither the story nor the characters are simple in this movie. It is a beautifully filmed movie that makes the most of combining sensuousness, politics, human weakness, venality...you name it. The world it's set in would be alien and not understood today...a world where if you have it you have to flaunt it NOW and LOUDLY, even if you only think you have it.

Many people today don't understand that Victorian society wasn't really Victorian as people understand that term today.

This movie helps set the record straight.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Carry On, Jean Renoir
From the dull opening scene at the harpsichord, to the endless and dull parade, and then all the drawing room antics, I couldn't find one thing even remotely amusing in this farce.

Bergman and Ferrer manage to retain their dignity, but everybody else is just carrying on like they want to be sure the people in the gallery are entertained. I half-expected Benny Hill or Jerry Lewis to make a cameo.

There is allegedly some kind of story here about political intrigue. Who cares.

The only appeal for me was Bergman's magnificent bust in the opening scene, and her attire throughout. She really was ridiculously good-looking. She is extremely fortunate her career survived this ponderous mess. If somebody told me it actually wasn't released in American until years after Anastasia and Indiscreet, I would be prepared to believe it.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of Modern French History's Great "If's"
theowinthrop25 April 2004
I have only seen this silly film once on television, somewhere around 1979 or so. It was, naturally, with English dubbing, not sub-titles. In the years since, I have confused it's title with another silly film, PARIS WHEN IT SIZZLES (there seems a curse on films beginning with "PARIS", all of which are silly or expensive failures - add to these two PARIS HOLIDAY, TO PARIS WITH LOVE, and IS PARIS BURNING?). This one, though, does have a few things going for it - it was directed by Jean Renoir, it stars Jean Marais and Ingrid Bergman, and it deals (albeit in a farcical manner) with one of the great "ifs" of modern French history: what would have happened in 1889 to France (and Europe) had General Georges Boulanger (the man on horseback of the day) seized the moment and completed a planned coup - d'etat of the Third Republic. For that is precisely what the underpinnings of this comedy is about. Boulanger's name is changed to General Roland, but it is the same story.

In the English version, Roland's adjutant (Mel Ferrer) is telling the story - and giving a sardonic account of how the naive patriot is primed to seize the country by a band of cartoon conspirators who use the General's fascination with a Polish countess (Bergman) as a lure. Renoir tries to get as much milage as he can out of the political shenanigans, and the fin-de-siec Paris setting, as he can. Both Marais and Bergman try hard to make what they can out of the frou-frou atmosphere of the film. But although both are good (so is Ferrer and Juliet Greco as a gypsy who loves the General)the screenplay is weak. The motivation of Bergman is highly self-centered (she is attracted to the idea of being the beloved muse to great men, and then leaving them when she feels they no longer need them). It might be good for a minor character, but it is hard for an audience to sustain interest in such a flighty idiot.

It would have been better if they had stuck closer to the historical reality (and ultimate tragedy) of Boulanger's hour of historical importance. France was recovering from the humiliation of defeat in 1870, but the Third Republic was born with grave weaknesses: it signed the treaty of peace ceding Alsace-Lorraine to Germany, it had okayed the extermination of the Communards in Paris in 1871, and it lacked the legitimacy of French government. But its opponents were weak too - the defeat in 1870 was due to the Bonapartiste regime of Napoleon III. He had fled (and was dead in 1873). His son, the Prince Imperiale, died fighting for the British in the Zulu War in 1879. Most of the French, had they a choice of the Third Republic or Second Empire would have chosen the Second Empire, but without Napoleon III or his son they were not too interested in restoring the Bourbons or the house of Orleans. These two families had (by 1877) seemed prepared to compromise their rival feelings, and accept the restoration of the monarchy. The Bourbon pretender, the Comte de Paris, was childless, and would be restored, leaving his cousin, the Duc de Orleans as heir. The first President of the Third Republic, Marshal MacMahon, was ready to order the army to assist the Comte ascend the throne. But the Comte refused the deal unless the national flag reverted from the Revolutionary tri-color to the old Fleur-de-lys of the pre-1789 Bourbons. This was not acceptable. The Comte died in 1883. By then MacMahon had been eased into resigning the Presidency, and the Third Republic continued stumbling on and on.

One of the few generals who had not been damaged by the disasters of the Franco-Prussian War was Georges Boulanger. He was an above average commander, and he actually did do some innovation. By 1887 he was attracting attention, and was elected to the Chambre of Deputies, and became Minister of War. At some point, he began to be approached by the Royalists in France. He had the choice of the Orleanists or the Bonapartistes. He remained vague about his view on whom he'd support, but this may have been his way of guaranteeing that he would be supported by both groups (with Boulanger it is hard to know if he was a brilliant opportunist or just a lucky fool for awhile). He catered to the Paris and French desire for revenge by speaking out against German acts of aggression or of spying - talking about the future war to regain the lost provinces. Initially he had the support of the Republicans, but this was slowly lost as their suspicions of the man grew. Clemenceau, sick of his one-time friend's antics, confronted him on one occasion with a bitter reminder: "General, at your age Napoleon I was dead!"

Despite being thrown out of his cabinet rank, and his seat in the Chambre (he got reelected soon after from another district) Boulanger went on. Then, in September 1889 events climaxed with a series of pro-Boulanger desplays by the army and various supporters. It looked like the General was going to lead the troops onto the Chambre of Deputies or the Elysee Palace and seize control. The moment arrived....and passed. Nothing happened. The leaders of the Republic regained their nerve, and ordered his arrest. He fled, with his mistress. In fact, rumour had it that he wasted the critical hours having sex with the mistress [a rumour that has never been totally dismissed]. He spent the remaining two years of his life in exile in Belgium. His mistress died there, and in 1891 Boulanger committed suicide on her grave. Clemenceau, upon hearing the news, summarized the tragedy appropriately (if cruelly): "The General lived as he died, as a subaltern" [The lowest rank in the French army - and one where the young officers have cheap prostitutes for lovers.]

In the English version of the film, Ferrer is gentler, suggesting that had Boulanger/Roland done what he was expected to do his biographical standing would be as large as Napoleon I's. Probably true. The film does show Roland leaving with his gypsy lover, not going into the sad death that awaited them soon after. To a viewer in the know it is a bittersweet ending. But a better version of the story remains to be done - and to try to come to grips with the General who held France, briefly perhaps, in his hands, and then dropped everything in so inexplicably a manner.
21 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The Star Who Came In From The Cold
writers_reign23 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Several posters have quoted Renoir voicing his desire to make a film showing Ingrid Bergman smiling to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all whilst the harsh reality is that only a select few got to do so. At this stage of her career Bergman couldn't get arrested; in 1949 she left Hollywood to make a picture in Europe, fell for director Roberto Rossellini and never looked forward. After five turkeys in Italy she was probably ready to open a vein but within the year, after making this for Renoir, she was back where she belonged and with an Oscar to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three movies that Renoir made in color around this time and on balance it's better than The Golden Coach, which isn't hard, and about even with French Can Can. Renoir probably figured that with so much going for her Bergman could get away with a couple of wooden leading men and Renoir picked two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid mahogany in both cases. The plot is actually based on a real incident in French history but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and concentrate on replicating the paintings of his father in set up after set up. In its pastel colors it resembles another film of the period Les Grandes Manouvres which is no bad thing. All in all it remains a pleasant trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Elena is such a strong, free, sensual and charismatic character that the moments of her absence are the weaknesses of the film.
guedesnino17 June 2017
By embodying in a woman the archetype of an idealized France, Renoir, positively expands the perception of the feminine role, issues already evoked and debated in that period of the fifties, but that Renoir, inserts in a farces France of 1890, about to live a blow Where Elena (Ingrid Bergman) is the muse capable of influencing General François Rollan (Jean Marais), and consequently changing the political directions. In order to move this turbulent relationship further, there is the figure of Le Comte Henri DE Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer), who falls in love with Princess Elena, tries anyway to keep out the possible opponents of his love affair, something not simple for Henri, since Elena Is a poor finance widow, but rich in candidates for a new marriage.

"Elena ET Le's hommes" already begins with a comical and embarrassed request of marriage of Martin-Michaud (Pierre Bertin), suddenly refused by the Princess. In this first "take" we are already inserted in marks that have made the work of Jean Renoir singular and prosperous in the cinematographic grammar. The play with windows and doors (perhaps inherited from the theater and the circus spectacles), the effects of cutting in planes and against fields, working with depths, but without adding something new, Renoir more than inventing, I knew, mainly in this Delimit the necessary number of resources to tell a story.

One reason why Renoir is regarded as a modernist is that many of his films have a looser narrative compared to the typical Hollywood films of the time, Renoir's plots were generally less structured and more open to the digression, which would become The dominant mode of European art films from the 1960s, but Elena and her men unfortunately are not. The great cast and the need to follow historical events closely together give the film a much more complicated story line, which is much less open and enjoyable than the other two. The only excursions that Renoir allows himself are the many scenes of farce, but framed in a contained, even bland laugh, due to the novelty nothingness of the jokes. Renoir thought it would be fun to see serious actors in scenes that were pushed to the point of absurdity, but forced humor attempts do not work.

Elena, while occasionally suggesting that the state of the nation is at stake, represents more a theater of the heart than a theater of war, and Renoir seems determined to move completely out of the domain of realism, but contradictory it is on that road he prefers The opposite of what is suggested by the prophetic shadow of wars or battles there is a palette of vivid and colorful colors, for the battle here is of love, as it is phrased in the film "In a country where the Love, there is no room for wars. " In addition to the colorfully used to counter the proposals of a war movie, its importance is also in the perspective of an archetype of the protagonist of the film, Elena is a contrary joyful widow, although all the adversity of his life still maintains traces of the freshness of youth , The joy of better days and the sensuality of colors, reflected in their costumes and the colorful composition of the paintings - excellently captured by the photograph of Claude Renoir, nephew of Jean Renoir - paintings always ornamented with flowers, a spring and Utopian's France , Considering the events of the past and the threatening future.

Curiously it is with a flower (daisy), that Elena presents General Rollan, claiming to be a lucky charm. Among the many symbolic that this flower evokes, the most interesting is the wisdom to use as a resource to promote links, since the general, for various reasons, always loses it, and the repair of this amulet only occurs when Elena offers another , That is, Elena herself is the lucky charm. The good things that happen to the general and consequently to France occur when Elena is close to the general. A second curiosity is that 14 years before, in the movie "Casablanca", it is also with a daisy that Ilsa Lund Laszlo (Ingrid Bergman) presents Richard Blane (Humphrey Bogart), and with the same effect of an amulet that finally gives luck, But can not promote the bond between the characters.

A sum inseparable from what nourishes the film is the quality of its actors, especially when considering the little experience or familiarity with comedy and or farce. Ingrid Bergman as Princess Elena Sokorowska is a ladder to various comic moments, but rarely can she produce comedy of her own, which is not a problem in the film at all, her princess turns out to be moments of female freedom, sensuality and action leader. Jean Marais as Gènèral François Rollan is also more ladder than comic, but he punctuates his general and the love triangle with Le Comte Henri DE Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer), but the high point of the comedy is in the characters that appear to be, a A reference to characters such as the harlequin, Pierrot and Columbine of the comedian dell'Artie, depicted in the film by Eugène (Jacques Jouanneau), Lolotte (Magali Noël), the princess' maid and Hector (Jean Richard).

Although the use of Renoir's misc en scene is as interesting as ever, and the positive performances, this is possibly his least interesting film. For, it generates a superficial and less enveloping tale.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Ingrid is so beautiful!
HotToastyRag17 March 2023
When you rent this Jean Renoir historical comedy, you can expect lush colors, beautiful costumes, and a bit of the absurd. There's a certain style of French comedy that is very silly, which you can easily imagine being played on the stage with all the actors trying to reach the back row. What you might not expect is an entirely French movie, despite non-French leading actors. Ingrid Bergman is Swedish, after all, and Mel Ferrer American. But there they are, speaking French! (Actually, I couldn't tell if Mel's voice was dubbed, but I did watch his mouth, and he spoke all the French words, regardless if they got another actor to correct his accent.) The story centers around the beautiful, flirtatious Ingrid who has every man at her fingertips. They meet her, they fall in love. She ends up getting involved with several powerful men and influencing history and important war decisions, all because of her beautiful smile and charm. Before you think it's ridiculous, let me tell you she really does look beautiful in this movie. With her hair highlighted and piled high on top of her head, a constant smile lifting her features, and gorgeous period gowns showing off her figure, it's really a treat to watch this movie even if you think it's silly or have no idea what's even going on.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
elena and her men
mossgrymk4 January 2022
As in most instances when a great director (in this case, Renoir) decides to poach on another great director's turf (in this case, Ophuls) the result is ersatz boredom.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Renoir, the best French authority
loschavez15 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I couldn't help seeing some of the negative remarks here, making light of a truly venerable French film. They don't come any more glamorous.

Seeing Ingrid Bergman as captured by Jean Renoir also reduces the cavils to ordinary vanity on the part of pompous reviewers. After all, it's Le Comedy Francais, not Ingemar Bergman diamond-cutting. To understand this kind of refined madcap, you have to lighten up! Even today with two world wars and world-wide depressions behind us; Ingrid the mother of all film actresses appears effortlessly artful and glamorous. Champagne doesn't age as spectacularly as this movie has. Together with the grandiose military posturing of Jean Marais, and with France in its Belle Epoque, Renoir gave us his own brilliance to treasure. Spoiler alert: Sorry to say poor Mel Ferrer alas, was out of his league. But he never danced better. The cameras betrayed his inner ardor, he was in love with Ingrid, as what virile hunk wouldn't be, holding her close? I'd have tumbled for her in a New York minute. The camera never loved her more audaciously either. Here is a lovely old movie with class.

I have only two plebeian thumbs. They serve little purpose here but to contradict so many art connoisseurs in these pages who presume to teach Jean Renoir et Companie how to film a French romantic farce. Well, I offer two thumbs up! To all who remember the grace and beauty of Ingrid Bergman, then: SEE THIS JOYOUS MOVIE!
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Just Average Movie Entertainment
StrictlyConfidential25 March 2020
Set in Paris, France (in the year 1890) - 1956's "Elena and Her Men" is a decidedly fluffy, light-weight costume-drama (filmed in Technicolor) which was directed by French film-maker, Jean Renoir.

One of the main reasons for taking the time to watching "Elena and Her Men" is to see actress, Ingrid Bergman (40 at the time) in a non-Hollywood production.

Far from being a great cinematic experience - "Elena and Her Men" certainly had both its fair share of good moments, as well as its not-so-good moments, too.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Everyone has Their Plans...
LobotomousMonk10 March 2013
Renoir introduces Elena as a "fantasy musical". The opening scene is in an artist's studio while a piano is practiced on. There is a superior use of depth of field but Bergman is the focal point (Renoir was quite smitten with her as evidenced by their years of personal communication). There are shades of Nana however that may have marred positive response to the film upon release. Bergman's character is not imbued with a clear motivation that brings everything around her into focus. It is simply her external self that is to be that which is focused upon. Well, that wasn't good enough in 1926 and nothing much had changed thirty years later. Is Bergman's Elena a symbol or a mere good luck charm? Hard to tell at first viewing. Again multiple cuts replace the long take and tableau construction of mise-en-scene replaces mobile framing. Elena is certainly not in the realm of 'realism' attributed to Regle. Point in case is when an old military jacket is commented as being tattered yet is clearly immaculate and freshly dry-cleaned at the other end of the studio minutes before. The immaculate mise-en-scene of the color "trilogy" is a psychologically-based construction and operates as a reflective process for the spectator to find pleasure in an unblemished vision. In effect, Renoir has shifted from letting a story tell itself through his direction to directing how the story is projected. "Everyone has their plans" replaces the old Renoir credo of "everyone has their reasons" and the distinction fits nicely with my own thesis about Renoir's two stylistic systems. In Carrefour, the camera investigates through the lattice work of a door window creating a layered space whereas in Elena an idle courter bangs in futility at a door with similar lattice but no great depth of field. For Faulkner, it is a conflict of private and public spheres at play where the woman's power is effected through performance. It seems unlikely that this theory plays out cleanly given Renoir's consistency with empowering female characters through a variety of means. The film has more significance and less entertainment value the more you know and understand of Renoir's oeuvre.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Hypnotisant mais pas très amusant
LeonardKniffel1 November 2019
Whether farce or satire, this film is unmistakably French in sensibility. For American viewers, it might help to remember that the French sense of humor is often difficult to comprehend. Other reviewers have recapped the political plot line--which is also difficult to follow--so I will not. Like other reviewers I was eager to see this performance by Ingrid Bergman, and I found her as mesmerizing as ever. The camera adores her smile and laughter and beauty; yet, she is really not a comedienne (not even in "Cactus Flower"}. What drew me to this film was the Polish connection. Bergman plays penniless "princess" Elena Sokorowska from Poland who sees herself as something of a guardian angel to promising men everywhere. The references to the relationship between France and Poland are many, and some of the lines I love best result from the French characters' lack of knowledge about their devoted ally. Asked what vodka tastes like, Elena replies, "Like nothing. I prefer wine." One of Elena's men quips, "Polish women can be hard to understand." So can French films, even those directed by the great Jean Renoir.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
nice
Vincentiu31 January 2014
it is its virtue. and its purpose. not to impress or to be remarkable. only a nice mixture of color, joy, music,crumbs of comedy and lovely actors. and it is enough. a film of Ingrid Bergman. and Jean Marais. Mel Ferrer and Juliette Greco as perfect spice. and few adorable scenes. a film of romance, songs and joy. short, a Jean Renoir and piece of a long chain of period. an oasis. not complicated, not really bad, far to be boring. charming at whole. and, sure, full of lovely situations. a film who remembers a special lost sensitivity. and nothing more. because, as Disney creations, essence in this case is the spell. the delicate and precise magic. and mission is complete.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
nice
Kirpianuscus2 August 2017
it is the film of Ingrid Bergman. like a demonstration of the comedy virtues of an actress defined by the roles in drama. in same measure, it is a Jean Renoir film. and both pieces are important for define a seductive, easy story about a young woman and her cruelty, in different forms, against the men. all is predictable and charming and comfortable. and this is the most important thing. because, it is the good occasion to meet an old fashion seductive small film , perfect for a beautiful leisure time.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed