La Marseillaise (1938) watch online HD

This film, despite being directed by Renoir, is largely forgotten today. This is a pity, as there are few films actually about the French Revolution (though it is used as a backdrop for a variety of plot lines), and none that really deal with the birth of the Republic.

It was made at the tail end of the 'Popular Front' government, a coalition of parties (including the communists) formed to protect the Third Republic from right-wing domestic subversion and the baleful influence of the Nazis.

It chose to use the early years of the revolution as a metaphor for this political situation - France was still a (constitutional) monarchy, and the King possessed the power of a constitutional veto. The Queen and her circle were said to be plotting a counter revolution.

Within this context, each city and region of France is requested to send a Battalion to Paris, to defend the government against its domestic enemies. We follow the adventures of some of the ordinary men in the battalion from Marseilles (who sing a new song called the "Marseilles" as they march. We see their experiences in Paris (including a love interest), and their simple and honest defence of what they believe in. Finally, they participate in the coup that leads to the establishment of the Republic and the arrest of the King.

The film is episodic, and some of the scenes are a little melodramatic. But the characterisation is excellent. The King and his court are not one-dimensional villains. The scene of his departure is quite moving.

In short, a film well worth rescuing from obscurity.

Aside from being a brilliant film, at different times humorous and moving, LA MARSEILLAISE is hands down the most accurate film out there when it comes to the French Revolution.

Some have noted it's "one-sided" aspect, but allow me to make an observation: when royalists want to make a one-sided film on the French Revolution, they... make stuff up! Usually utter bilge, such as THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL or A TALE OF TWO CITIES, films (and original books) whose only basis in historical fact can be summed up as, yes, there was a revolution in France in 1789, and yes indeed, Britain and France are on opposite sides of the Channel. Those who support the republic, on the other hand, have typically had the scruples to actually *do their research* before setting out to mold the public's impressions of so momentous an historical event. Such is the case with LA MARSEILLAISE, where a large percentage of the dialog is taken from historical records. (In fact, the only real complaint one could have as far as historical accuracy goes is costuming, but I've yet to see any film from that era--1938, in this case--that had accurate costumes.)

All this is not to suggest that LA MARSEILLAISE is dull. Far from it! As mentioned before, LA MARSEILLAISE is witty and often poignant. In showing the Revolution from the point of view of ordinary citizens instead of aristocrats or well-known revolutionary leaders, the film shows to what point common citizens were dedicated to the ideals of the Revolution, as well as showing a human side to the "mob" so frequently portrayed.

Coming as it does between the much better-known and acclaimed La Grande illusion and La Bête humaine, it's not surprising that this epic story of the French Revolution told mostly from the point of view of several peasant and laboring-class men who find themselves (mostly uneasily) caught up in the events of the early part of the revolt would get glossed over by many film historians. And it's not quite on the level of those masterpieces nor of La Règle du jeu from the following year or for that matter most of Renoir's 40s and 50s output, but it's also hardly worthy of dismissal.

The film begins in the countryside and the Mediterranean port city of Marseilles, as a middle-aged man is about to be tried (and presumably executed) for the killing of a pigeon on his lord's land. He instead escapes into the country, into the mountains, where he meets up with with other like-minded impoverished proto-rebels. Slowly over the course of the first half-hour the struggle takes on political tones rather than just the personal gripe of one man, and it is the genius of the film to keep slowly building to the inevitable climax of "The Nation" versus "The King" while never forgetting to regard participants also as individuals.

By the middle of the film the royal family and nobles have begun to understand the dangers they face, or at least some have -- the king still ignores the growing strife -- and they begin to play a major role in the film. Interestingly, the prime revolutionaries themselves though mentioned never take the stage; the focus is always on the lowest and the highest members of society, with the intellectuals who fomented the events offstage. Renoir is, it seems, trying to tell us that events were inevitable, and the prime movers really aren't all that significant if we look at the lives of those who stood most to gain, or lose.

The final battle sequences are impressively staged, the film as a whole is strikingly well-acted and pretty seamless for all its shifting of focus between the oblivious king and his progressively angrier subjects. Particular acting honors would go to Edmond Ardisson as Bomier, whose growing beginnings of an understanding that revolution is not merely about him, but about the whole world around him are very moving. Pierre Renoir as Louis XVI manages to be foolish, brutal, and sympathetic by turns.

Given the monumental importance of the French Revolution in history, it is surprising that so few films have been made about it or have even used it as a setting. "The Assassination of the Jean Paul Marat" is probably the most interesting and offbeat film, but it takes place 20 years after the revolution and only debates and argues about it. "Scarlet Pimpernel," "Reign of Terror," and "Tale of Two Cities" just use the revolution as backdrops to tell fun adventure stories. "Danton" is boring, anti-revolutionary and childish, everyone is presented in black and white terms. Griffith's "Orphans of the Storm" has lots of delights and some great action sequences, but is too didactic and anti-revolutionary. "Marie Antonette" (2006) and "Affair of the Necklace" are beautiful and great works, but show little interest in the revolution itself.

Although it deals with only some events leading to the overthrow of the monarchy, "La Marseillaise" is possibly the best film. It shows the complexity of the events and deals with them in an intelligent and reasonable manner. It shows how "the Brunswick Manifesto" led to the arrest of the King and Queen. While Marie and Louis, are not shown in a particularly good light, neither are they caricatured.

The movie is episodic and slow, but there are a number of dazzling shots and scenes. The attack on the King's palace at the end is the dramatic highlight.

There is a fabulous scene in the middle of the film where the aristocrats are singing a song about how they are going to "hang the traitors" and shortly the revolutionaries answer by singing about how they are going to "hang the aristocrats." It shows the most humanistic, balanced and honest presentation of the situation of any film on the subject that I have seen.

Jean Renoir's classic tribute to the glory of the French Revolution, the film captures the personal flavor of the struggle and the philosophical background to the revolutionary upheaval. In a rapid series of vignettes we are introduced to the elegance and nobility of the court of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette... the contrasting plight of French peasants governed by laws they cannot understand...the storming of the Bastille in 1789 by an undisciplined mob...the plotting of France's exiled nobility to return to power...the Republican march on Paris...and the capture of the Tuilleries in 1793, ending the revolution. The film follows the adventures of two young patriots who join the Peoples' army in Marseilles. As their battalion begins its long journey north to Paris to join with the Federate army, they adopt as their anthem a song from the Army of the Rhine. This song was soon to be known all over France as "La Marseillaise" and would lead the newly unified nation to victory.

La Marseillaise takes place during the phase of the French revolution that was the most optimistic and the least bloody. Director Jean Renoir is concerned with how this moment is viewed by both the monarchy in Paris and the everyday people of Marseillaise who march to Paris singing their song (Battle Hymn of the Rhine Army). His presentation is realistic and probably more accurate than most films that have dealt with the subject.

La Marseillaise has been proclaimed as a masterpiece but, while I liked the film, I cannot share in that acclaim. Jean Renoir is considered one of the (if not THE) greatest French directors in film history. I love The Rules of the Game, but have found many of Renoir's other films slow going. This is true of parts of La Marseillaise as well. The running time is 132 minutes; there is (intentionally) no main protagonist; an assumption is made that the audience knows more about the historical events than some viewers (like me) may.

Despite some restlessness on my part, La Marseillaise remains a worthwhile film. Every Jean Renoir film has wonderful moments, La Marseillaise especially. My favorite is Louis XVI's long walk with his family to Parilament. Renoir uses a crane shot to view the pedestrians. The dejected look on the King's face is powerful. He and his son share a reflexive moment over fallen leaves. This scene powerfully contrasts with the buffoonish way Louis was portrayed at the beginning of the film. This is a perfectly made scene. The film has other great scenes as well.

Although it did not affect me as deeply as it has others, I would recommend La Marseillaise, especially to French film admirers, students of Jean Renoir, and history buffs.

"Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle." - Martin Luther King Jr

Like much of director Jean Renoir's work during this period, "La Marseillaise", which offers a romanticised retelling of the French Revolution of 1789, spends much of its time contrasting the lives of commoners with those of the aristocracy. Modern audiences will no doubt find this class baiting tedious, but such angry tracts were common in the lead up to, and wake of, the second world war (everyone from Renoir to John Huston to Rossellini to Pasolini to Pontecorvo etc). By the end of the 70s, cinema's fires of revolution, which Renoir lights here, and which were subsequently passed on from torch to torch for roughly four decades, would completely burn out.

The film is divided into five chapters (The Court, The Civil and The Military Authorities, The Aristocrats, The Marseilles Locals, and The Ordinary Citizens), but essentially takes the structure of a grand march from Marseilles to Paris, a battalion of 500 volunteers arriving in time to capture The Tuileries Palace, leading to the publication of the Brunswick Manifesto and the overthrowing of Louis XVI's monarchy. With this march came "La Marseillaise", the song of the peasants, which later becomes France's national anthem.

Renoir's direction is impeccable, the director adopting a naturalistic, semi-documentary tone. The film's well-choreographed battles and crowd scenes are particularly impressive. Today, its marriage of scope and sensitivity means "La Marseillaise" is still the best film to directly document the French Revolution. Martin Scorsese calls it "one of the finest and richest historical films ever made", and would borrow from it heavily for his stylish but strangely vapid pulp-revolutionary movie, "Gangs of New York".

Renoir himself considered "La Marseillaise" one of his favourite films. Fittingly, it was partially sponsored by the Popular Front government of France (a coalition of leftists in power at the time) and was also financially backed by the French trade unions and the public.

In terms of flaws, the film fails to get us to actually "care" about the revolution, has too much speechifying during its first hour (it eventually becomes quite stirring) and possess a brand of 1930s melodrama which modern audiences will no doubt turn their noses up to. Ironically, the most touching scene in the film is of a tortured King Louis XVI surrendering his power to the National Assembly. Visconti would be proud.

What dates the film most, though, is the fact that we now firmly live in post-revolutionary times. Renoir rallies against aristocrats and their crimes against humanity, he champions for the revolution as a call to the rights of man, he reminds citizens to always be vigilant in defending liberty against tyranny, he advocates against both monarchy and nationalism, he demands that commoners be given an equal voice in government...bunch such things have a quaint, almost naive tinge nowadays.

In our era of "diversity", "devolved power", "anticentralizen", "digitized capitalism", "mobilized local creativity and self organisation", there is simply no head to strike. Revolution is an art. It is an art of realising and "seizing the moment". Today, in which context is near impossible, in which moments and time itself seem increasingly fleeting, in which "culture" is one of continuous flux (or rather, the continuous rapid movement of commodities, which creates the illusion of change, of progress) and perpetual confusion, traditional revolution, as Renoir sees here, seems impossible. This is what another French director, Robert Bresson, realised with "The Devil, Possibly", and what Godard spends his career wrestling with.

8/10 – Worth one viewing.

This film was an opportunity to view the French revolution from the view of the common people. Most viewers have only seen, perhaps, A TALE OF TWO CITIES or THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL, so this film does offer fresh insights. However, to me, some of the dialog and one-sidedness of the film seemed as one-dimensional as the other two movies I just mentioned.

The film deals with events from 1789 to 1792 and so it really doesn't delve into the bloodier years of the Reign of Terror. It is understandable that these abuses aren't covered in depth, but to omit the be-headings completely seems rather dishonest. I'd really like to see a film that gives a balanced view of this period, but have yet to see it--and that's a shame, as it's a fascinating and tumultuous period.

FYI--From my point of view as a history teacher, it does seem amazing that within only two years of the completion of this very rousing and patriotic film the French capitulated to the Nazis.

La Marseillaise depicts lesser known stories attached to the events in Versailles in 1789 which led to the downfall of the monarchy. Renoir continues with a consistent stylistic system - great depth of field, two-shot closeups, framing of crowds, mobile framing, polyvocal (accents). In fact, aristocrats and citizens receive the same treatment from the camera. The exception is with the King and Queen who receive one-shot closeups, however, this seems more in the service of a dialectic regarding the Brunswick Manifesto than it being about psychological identification. This story is symbolic and likely the symbolism and abstraction is what led to the film not being as popular as was expected. There is also a confusion for the spectator because of Renoir's humanist treatment. Bumpkins are charming, aristocrats are accepting and armies more or less fight together instead of against each other. Renoir often spoke out against violence in film and this might be another disappointment for audiences at the time. Most violence is dissuaded through crafty acts of oration. The brains over brawn theme certainly lacks something of the 'common touch'. The breaking down of the song into parceled quotations reminds of the French New Wave's often lyrical and intellectual modes of expression. There is a monarchist rhetoric that runs through the film regarding order versus anarchy... yet there is little example of anarchy but also no false reprisal by monarchists against citizens. The treatment of war is tepid, but it just goes to show that Renoir was never comfortable representing hardened political positions.