I have seen a lot of films--far more than anyone you'll normally meet. This isn't bragging (after all, imagine what I could have done with this time)--just a fact that I have seen and reviewed a huge number of films. And, in the course of looking through IMDb, I have often noticed reviewers who compare films to those of Hitchcock--often calling them 'Hitchcockian'. Well, I HATE when people do this. I am not even sure if Hitchcock himself was always Hitchcockian--whatever that means! And, often I have seen this term used for various films of Claude Chabrol. While a few are vaguely like SOME of Hitchcock's, these comparisons are useless. I think Chabrol's films are much more 'Chabrolian'! This is not an insult--Chabrol did some very nice films. But the fact is, "Leda" is very, very little like any of the films of Hitchcock--mostly because there really isn't a whole lot of suspense and some of the characters (especially that of Jean-Paul Belmondo) are NOTHING like any you'd see in a Hitchcock film...nothing. So, please, do NOT keep calling films 'Hitchcockian'--let them succeed or fail on their own merits!
The film is a very sexually charged film--especially for 1959. It seems that most of the characters either embrace their sexuality or deny it--and this seems to be the main underlying theme in this film. It seems that if you embrace it, you seek happiness and if you deny it you are choosing misery. This sexuality and the occasionally bizarre nonconformity of SOME of the characters make this seem like an early example of the French New Wave movement. In fact, Belmodo's character seems exceptionally similar to the seminal New Wave film "Breathless"--but two other New Wave film makers, Godard and Truffaut. This observation is not meant to be a criticism or recommendation--just a statement that this film is a clear break with the earlier styles of film making--something the New Wave clearly was attempting to do.
The husband and wife in the tale are trapped in a loveless marriage. He somewhat openly has an affair with a younger, prettier and less emotionally constricted neighbor and the wife refuses to grant him a divorce. His daughter has an on-again/off-again relationship with an obnoxious and care-free goof-ball (Belmondo) and it seems like the lady is torn between the lifestyles of her parents. The brother is a cypher--a weird guy indeed. As for the wife, you really can't tell if she's a horrible person or a victim throughout the film--and that is okay. However, when the mistress is murdered brutally, the story heats up---just a tiny bit. In fact, this is a problem with the film. While the characters are reasonably interesting, WHO committed the murder isn't much of a mystery--as the script only really gives two reasonable choices for this. And, sadly, the most obvious is the killer--and the ending just seemed indulgent and loud--and not particularly satisfying. There is no Hitchcockian twist (or Chabrolian, for that matter) to make this anything other than a very ordinary film.
The film is a very sexually charged film--especially for 1959. It seems that most of the characters either embrace their sexuality or deny it--and this seems to be the main underlying theme in this film. It seems that if you embrace it, you seek happiness and if you deny it you are choosing misery. This sexuality and the occasionally bizarre nonconformity of SOME of the characters make this seem like an early example of the French New Wave movement. In fact, Belmodo's character seems exceptionally similar to the seminal New Wave film "Breathless"--but two other New Wave film makers, Godard and Truffaut. This observation is not meant to be a criticism or recommendation--just a statement that this film is a clear break with the earlier styles of film making--something the New Wave clearly was attempting to do.
The husband and wife in the tale are trapped in a loveless marriage. He somewhat openly has an affair with a younger, prettier and less emotionally constricted neighbor and the wife refuses to grant him a divorce. His daughter has an on-again/off-again relationship with an obnoxious and care-free goof-ball (Belmondo) and it seems like the lady is torn between the lifestyles of her parents. The brother is a cypher--a weird guy indeed. As for the wife, you really can't tell if she's a horrible person or a victim throughout the film--and that is okay. However, when the mistress is murdered brutally, the story heats up---just a tiny bit. In fact, this is a problem with the film. While the characters are reasonably interesting, WHO committed the murder isn't much of a mystery--as the script only really gives two reasonable choices for this. And, sadly, the most obvious is the killer--and the ending just seemed indulgent and loud--and not particularly satisfying. There is no Hitchcockian twist (or Chabrolian, for that matter) to make this anything other than a very ordinary film.