Reviews & Ratings for
Partie de campagne More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Index

18 reviews in total

---

19 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
I've been thinking of it every day...., 23 February 2006

Author: Kirk Miller from Norwich, England

Just how unfinished "Partie De Campagne" truly is remains something of a contentious issue. There are countless differing theories and opinions, some of which seem to have been instigated by the director himself. There are those, this reviewer included, who believe Renoir originally intended this film as one-half of a double feature of Guy De Maupassant adaptations. Whatever might have once been planned, however, does nothing to soften the radiant beauty and brilliance of the film.

Renoir had collected around himself a group of friends and family in the hope of creating what he later described as a "holiday" atmosphere during the scheduled week of filming. In accordance with the story on which it is based, long summer days and balmy afternoons by the river banks were called for in Renoir's script. Unfortunately, the cast and crew were faced with a damp, dismal July which continued long into August. Cramped up in the lobby of the hotel, sheltering from the storms outside, personal tensions and rivalries soon inevitably surfaced. With the months continuing to pass and little to show the financial backers in the rushes, money became scarce. Eventually, after refusing Sylvia Bataille's request for leave so she might audition for a future project in Paris, the director himself nonchalantly announced he would be abandoning the film to concentrate his efforts on his next film, Les Bas-fonds.

Considering all of the above, it is miraculous that the film we see today is such a luminous, sensual masterpiece.

Much is made of Renoir's use of deep focus techniques in films such as Le Regle de Jeu and La Grande Illusion, quite rightly so, but it is also used to great effect in this film. The film's early scenes largely take place inside a rural inn. Renoir keeps the camera mostly in one place, stationary. Then, suddenly, a window is opened; light floods in, we see trees, a breeze blowing lightly through grass, a young woman and her mother arcing high into the summer air on swings. Now we cut to a close-up of the girl, with the camera fixed to the swing, an accomplice to her every movement. She is laughing, ecstatic, exhilarated by her surroundings. It is an exhilarating moment in cinema, the sudden infusion of life and nature into the film echoes in the viewer's mind throughout the short running time.

Renoir is a great film-maker, perhaps the greatest of all, and this is a great film, perhaps his greatest of all.

---

11 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
I saw this film as a child and it made a profound impression on me., 12 March 2002
Author: Adampreston from Cornwall, England

My prep school could hardly be described as being particularly sophisticated or advanced regarding the arts but at some point I benefited from a projected showing of Renoir's Une Partie de Campagne and the beautiful, romantic, sentimental and sad imagery and story got under my skin and has remained there ever since. I probably saw it when I was nine years old and I am now thirty five. I haven't seen it since but I can still see moments and sequences clearly in my minds eye. Certainly a child is a blank canvas and liable to be more influenced by something than an adult - I am just glad that amongst all the rubbish I was exposed to, someone thought fit to show something this beautiful to me at that moment.

---

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Renoir meets Maupassant:up where they belong., 10 March 2002
Author: dbdumonteil

Unfinished,this is a one of Renoir's most remarkable works.As far as Guy DE Maupassant is concerned,only Max OPhuls's "le plaisir"(1951) and Christian-Jaque's "Boule de Suif" (1950)equal it.

This is apparently a very simple story:a couple of bourgeois (Jane Marken and Gabriello) ,their daughter (Sylvia Bataille) and her less-than-handsome husband leave for a day in the country (title).There the young girl meets love ,short-lived happiness.

Beneath the placid surface,tragedy emerges.The beautiful landscape,the simmering water,the whispering grass,the swings which seem to reach for a pure sky,the small fish you savor in the guinguettes down by the river,the thrill of it all!The young girl's longing for true love is harder to endure in such a peaceful paradise.This is one of these rare movies in which you experiment happiness tinged with an infinite sadness.

A whole sequence is missing:a card explains the events which were not filmed.Sylvia Bataille's last line(to the man she fell in love with) will make you cry out:"I've been thinking of it every day".Woman has always been sacrificed in Maupassant's work.At a running time of 40 minutes,a lot of people claim it for Renoir's best though.I do.Claude Renoir marvelously conveys Maupassant's depictions with his pictures.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
A Day in the Country, 10 August 2008
Author: Michael_Elliott from Louisville, KY

Day in the Country, A (1936)

**** (out of 4)

Incredibly touching and extremely beautiful film from the French master Renoir. A Parisian father takes his wife, mother-in-law, daughter and future son in law on a trip to the country where they plan to have a picnic. While the men fish two gentlemen with not-so-innocent plans take the women on a canoe ride. I've been looking to see this film for quite sometime even though the reviews I've read have been rather mixed. I personally found this film to be incredibly beautiful and I'd probably put it as the greatest French film I've seen. The peacefulness of the country that Renoir brings to the screen is quite breathtaking and he really does capture the freeness of being out in the middle of no where surrounding by silence. I thought all of the characters were very well written and the dialogue suited each of them perfectly. A lot of times all the characters sound the same but I was very please to see how different each of them were. The film runs a very short 40-minutes but Renoir throws everything into the picture. This includes terrific laughs and some very heartfelt moments towards the end of the movie. The film also features some very beautiful cinematography including a terrific sequence near the end where the river is shown with rain drops hitting it. Another great sequence comes early on when the two men are inside the diner and push the window open to reveal what's outside. This scene works even better thanks in large part to the terrific score by Joseph Kosma. All of the performances are great but Sylvia Bataille is the real standout as the daughter who is going to encounter and lose love over the span of a short evening. Jacques Borel is also worth mentioning as the womanizer who adds a lot of the comedy to the film. I've heard various stories about the short running time. It seems Renoir never go to finish the film but to me the running time is perfect and it's amazing what the director does capture and show in the short time.

---

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
A random slice of life., 22 July 2008

Author: Boba_Fett1138 from Groningen, The Netherlands

This movie is a beautiful looking one and is like a day in the life of of a family on their summer holiday on the countryside, somewhere in early 20th century France.

The movie is filled with some unexpected contrasts and metaphors. The movie in now way can be called a formulaic one and it picks its own path with its story. This ensures that the story is both realistic as well as unexpected in parts.

The way how the movie ends is in large contrast with the rest of the otherwise happy and cheerful beginning of the movie. It has a summer holiday look and feeling over it, in which the main characters, from the big city, are obviously enjoying the beauty and quietness of the country life. You would expect the love story to unravel as a romantic one but the romantic first encounter really doesn't go as often gets portrayed in movies. I must say that the movie is just like life and it doesn't try to bloom things. But perceptions differ, as can be also seen in the final sequence of the movie, in which the events of that one summer day in the country left a big lasting impression on the girl.

What Jean Renoir does really well is capturing the right mood and atmosphere of the movie. Even though I obviously wasn't around in 1936, it still feels all very familiar and pleasant. Of course the movie gets helped by its country side environments, which gets captured perfectly on camera.

Not all of the actors were real experienced professionals, which can be seen back in their performances but overall this shouldn't trouble you to much, since Jean Renoir perfectly knows to tell the story with its images and character behavior, rather than relying completely on the actor's skills.

I wouldn't go as far as calling this Renoir's best but it's nevertheless a great, humble, realistic, honest, warm portrayal of life.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

---

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Idyllic country scenes., 30 March 2004

Author: Ben_Cheshire from Oz

A 40 minute fragment of an unfinished movie which Truffaut describes as a cinematic short story, about a picnic in the country.

Renoir movies are always idyllic visually - like beautiful cinematic paintings, but Partie de Campagne is particularly idyllic. For some reason Renoir really wanted us to feel that we were in the country. This is his most visceral movie: he really takes you into the landscape in a way he does not usually do. Usually we merely sit back and admire it - here we are shown some gorgeous images of rain on the stream from the view of a boat on the water. The bottom half of the frame is virtually in the water we're so close to the action.

My favourite parts of Renoir movies are when he goes out on location (which he did quite a bit) and shoots wonderful scenes in nature. Here we have forty minutes of pure natural beauty (with a group of characters added for colour). I'm not sure that if Renoir continued with this project it would have retained enough interest over a two hour length - most likely its merely the central episode of a movie. Like Kubrick, Renoir made his movies up from several big, beautiful chunks. This applies most to Grand Illusion, so perhaps this sequence would never have been intended to supply enough dramatic interest for an entire story, but for lovers of Renoir, here are some of the most beautiful things he ever filmed. If you've never seen a Renoir film, the first experience is always the best, and it might be spoiling you if you start with this one, but it would be a beautiful introduction to him.

---

8 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
A rare and beautiful moment in film, 4 May 2005

Author: sjs257 from United States

There are rare and fleeting moments in film history when one is suddenly given a glimpse of the specific beauty of the medium. This sort of ephemeral beauty can only be expressed by the marriage of temporal and spacial (and some may include auditory) elements that is singular to film. One such moment is the storm sequence in "Une partie de campagne." I saw this film once, several years ago, and yet the haunting poetry of that scene still sticks in my mind vividly. Combined with the intense love scene which precedes it, and its contrast to the overall frivolity of the narrative, makes it the most beautiful film of one of film's greatest directors. If you get the chance to see it, its well worth your 40 minutes.

---

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Renoir's unfinished masterpiece - perhaps his greatest achievement, 11 June 2010
Author: Richard Burin from advicetothelovelorn.blogspot.com

Partie de campagne (Jean Renoir, 1936) is one of the great unfinished films. Usually such projects exist in tantalising snippets because a director snuffed it before realising his vision, or failed to get a movie off the ground due to short-sighted financiers. In this case, Renoir quit because it kept raining. Admittedly it rained for much of a six-week shoot, but even so... Happily, the 40-minute Partie de campagne doesn't seem unfinished, with an intriguingly-paced three-act structure that works just fine and a heady summer atmosphere that stands as perhaps the most inspired example of its director's quiet lyricism. It's an often breathtaking pastoral film, creating a fully-realised rural world a la Tol'able David and Louisiana Story into which to throw our protagonists.

Sylvia Bataille is Henriette, a Parisian girl who decamps to the countryside for the weekend with her parents, her grandmother and her fiancé. There, she and her mother (Jane Marken) encounter a prospective-family-man-cum-intense-romantic and his caddish mate, who sweep them off their feet and onto a pair of rowing boats. But this is 19th century France, and the ties that bind won't slacken just because someone's fallen in love.

The film is gentle, entertaining and sometimes very funny, benefiting from superb performances by Bataille, Marken and young romeos Georges D'Arnoux and Jacques B. Brunius, a luscious musical score composed for its 1946 release and Renoir's effortless, transcendent handling of the material. Its coda is absolutely heartbreaking: the perfect wrap-up for a film that's shot through with unshakeable conviction and a tangible love of the countryside. Renoir's fondness for Bataille's expressive, elfin face is just as obvious - he would return to it later the same year in his fascinating serio-comic polemic Le crime de Monsieur Lange. A set piece here that sees her guilelessly embrace the pleasures of a swing is slight but somehow unforgettable. Elsewhere, Renoir's script matches the exalted treatment, encompassing as it does themes of nostalgia, teary joy and the essence of being.

But Partie de campagne does have one - perhaps major - flaw, so bizarre as to be unintelligible. That's the presentation of the father and the fiancé, Anatole, as music hall imbeciles. The younger is particularly ridiculous, resembling a young Stan Laurel as he repeatedly squawks and wobbles his bottom lip. For that matter, the dad looks not unlike Oliver Hardy. Really odd. Perhaps Renoir, adapting Guy de Maupassant's novel, is making a satiric point about the unredeemable unsuitability of the young couple, or the ineptitude of Parisians cast adrift several miles from the big city, but it's a directorial decision that's never really justified.

Still, that's the only gripe about this amazing piece of work, which largely hums with brilliance and ultimately stands shoulder-to-shoulder with La grande illusion as the director's greatest achievement.

Trivia note: That's Renoir himself as the restaurateur, Poulain.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
"Personally, that sort of affair doesn't appeal to me", 3 December 2008

Author: ackstasis from Australia

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Last week I watched Jean Renoir's 'The Rules of the Game (1939)' for the first time, and, while I quite enjoyed it, I felt rather distanced from the story, as though the film was so preoccupied with snappy characters and dialogue (as in a stage play) that it didn't bother with emotion or atmosphere, the evocation of time and place. Happily, this wasn't a problem with 'Partie de campagne / A Day in the Country (1936).' Renoir's unfinished adaptation of a short story by Guy de Maupassant gains a wonderful personality through its on-location filming. Even though we ourselves never observe the oppressive, polluted Parisian streets, Claude Renoir's outdoor photography sweeps over us with the cool and cleansing touch of a fresh breeze, somehow translating into visuals the revitalising sensation of clean country air in one's lungs. Unfortunately, it was also this on-location shooting schedule that proved the film's demise, weather problems delaying and eventually leading to abandonment of production. The film was not released until 1946, faithfully edited together using the existing footage.

Renoir's film undoubtedly feels like an unfinished work, but what exists is nonetheless brilliant. Unlike many unfinished or studio-butchered would-be masterpieces, that 'A Day in the Country' was not completed to the director's satisfaction causes minimal detriment to the sequences that remain today. The narrative up until the "ending" is perfectly-structured and enjoyable to watch, all planned sequences up until this point having presumably been filmed without incident. However, after Henri (Georges D'Arnoux) and Henriette (Sylvia Bataille) come together for the first time in a reluctant but passionate embrace, the story then jarringly cuts to a years-later epilogue, a wistful conclusion that reflects on events that seemingly never took place. "Every night I remember," confesses Henriette, as she meets her former one-time lover, having settled on marrying a scruffy imbecile (Paul Temps). But exactly what does she remember? There had been nothing in the film to suggest that she and Henri had fallen in love; this eventuality had always been implied, but never satisfactorily executed.

A strong cast – including André Gabriello, Jane Marken, Jacques B. Brunius and Renoir himself – bring lighthearted humour to their respective roles, but it is the budding romance (never quite realised) between D'Arnoux and Bataille that form's the story's heart. Following its eventual 1946 release, 'A Day in the Country' was lauded as an "unfinished masterpiece," and I suppose that such a description is appropriate. Had filming been completed, such that the story followed through its intended and logical arc, I can only imagine what a powerful piece of cinema the film might have been. Have you ever had a wonderful dream from which you were woken prematurely? This is how I feel about 'A Day in the Country.' Everything up until the hasty ending is funny, emotional, glorious, and invigorating, yet we're wrenched from the dream-like clasp of Renoir's hand unexpectedly and disappointingly. But I'm an optimist: we should simply be glad that this much of the film exists for us to enjoy. Reflecting on what might have been is a task that should ideally be left to movie characters.

---

Fascinating but Flawed Early Work by Renoir, 10 November 2011
Author: David Le Sage from Australia

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Une Partie de Campagne is a fascinating early film by Jean Renoir that already demonstrates his masterful cinematography. The outdoor scenes are superbly shot and feel very modern, even when watched in the twenty-first century.

Based on a short story by Maupassant the film has a typically French light touch, even when dealing with serious subject matter.

The main problem with this film is the casting. As others have noted, both the father and the fiancé are depicted as comic fools and this jars against the style of the rest of the film. The fiancé, in particularly, is constantly mocked in an attempt to justify Henriette's affair with the (slightly) more sympathetic of the two seducers.

Henriette herself is also miscast. Played by Sylvie Bataille (later notorious for marrying the fringe psycho-analyst Jacques Lacan) she is a very wooden actress and lacks the charm and innocence needed for the role.

What will concern some is that the film is morally subversive in that the seducers are portrayed in a largely positive light and hints that Henriette did the right thing, given how her fiancé turns out. In fact, its morals are the inverse of those found in so many didactic novels of the 19th Century, despite being based on a story written in that time period.

Though some complain about the film's short length and there is much conjecture about how unfinished it is, it is satisfying in that it conveys the story efficiently and ends on a believable note.

To summarise, less buffoonery from the two male family members and a much better actress than Bataille as the lead would have been needed to lifted this film to the level of a classic. Therefore, ultimately, this film cannot be considered essential for art-house fans and Renoir himself would go on to do much better things. However one can witness the genesis of his style here and revel in the beauty of the countryside in his cinematography and also the wonderfully French light touch on display.

---

---

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history