Cult Review
Senior Film Conservator

If you like movies that feel like they’ve been sitting in a damp basement for eighty years, then sure, go for it. People who love classic French cinema might find some charm here. Everyone else? You’ll probably be bored stiff by the third act.
It’s not a masterpiece. It’s not even really a 'good' movie by most standards. But it has this weird, frantic energy that I couldn't quite look away from. 📽️
There’s a scene early on where the camera just... lingers. It stays on a doorway for way longer than necessary. I kept waiting for someone to walk through it, but no, just a blank wall and some dust motes. It felt strangely honest, like the director just forgot to yell cut.
The pacing is all over the map. One minute we’re in a high-stakes emotional confrontation, and the next we’re watching someone eat soup for an eternity. It’s jarring. I kind of liked it.
It’s nowhere near as polished as The Darling of Paris, which at least knew what it wanted to be. This one feels like it’s making it up as it goes along. It’s got that scrappy, desperate quality that old B-movies often have.
It reminds me a bit of the aimlessness in No Picnic, just with more hats and cigarettes. There’s no big 'lesson' here. Just people being messy. 🚬
I wouldn’t call it a classic. But it feels like a real movie, not a product. It’s uneven, it’s frustrating, and sometimes it’s just plain weird. If you’re tired of everything looking like a shiny, computer-generated toothpaste commercial, you might find this kind of rough-around-the-edges grit refreshing.
Don't look for deep meaning. It's just a bunch of people selling love in a city that doesn't care if they find it. A bit sad, really.
Year
1935
IMDb Rating
—

Editorial
Deciphering the legacy of transgressive cult cinema.
Community
Log in to comment.