Review of Judex

Judex (1963)
6/10
Incredibly Slow and Dull Compared to the Original
30 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
***note - may contain spoilers ***

The one redeeming sequence in this 1963 remake is the Masked Ball scene. Judex appears as a guest, with a large pigeon's head covering his own. He produces bird after bird as entertainment for the masked guests. This scene serves as a prime example of how the rest of the film should have been staged i.e. heavy on music and visuals, and light on dialogue.

But, the bulk of the film has a boring, unimaginative soundtrack of silence, or words, and more words. Semi-closeups of people talking, talking, talking. Give me the silent version of JUDEX any day.

Even the framing of the shots cut down on the entertainment value.

Example: In the original Louis Feuillade JUDEX, a woman, walking across a bridge, is captured by two men. They throw a hood over her head, wrap it tight with a rope around her neck. Cut to shot of them tossing the body into the river. This is CLEARLY seen, no confusing close shots cutting out valuable information. You SEE a body fall off a high bridge into a river. CUT TO: Two kids fishing in a boat on the river. One kid catches something, starts reeling it in - it's some unidentifiable sack. They pull it ashore. Looks like a body. "Licorice Kid" removes the rope around the victim's neck - pulls off the hood, and realizes - in shock, that it is his sidekick's mother.

That's from the original - the sequence is amazing, and unforgettable.

The 1963 remake has it like this. Two guys nicely dressed, lean over the edge of a bridge. (There is no water visible in this shot) "I don't know - it doesn't look like she'll sink into the river. She's still floating." The two men exchange a look of concern. Cut to close shot of blonde actress floating in water. We clearly see her face, eyes closed. She appears quite relaxed - one presumes she is in the river the two men were talking about. Cut to shot of two kids in a boat. One ribs the other, pointing to woman floating in river. She's brought to shore.

See the difference? There's intrigue and mystery and a real sense of danger in the original silent, which is just not there in the 1963 version.

The 1963 version plays like a Vanity Fair advert in motion. Yes, it's all very slick, like Jules Dassin directing an episode of "The Avengers." What drives me insane are the 1960's hairstyles in a movie supposedly set in 1917.

Whatever.

The 1916/1917 silent serial is a masterpiece. See it. And if you're still hungry for more, catch this (1963) version.

(NOTE - "JUDEX34" is a 1934 remake that's supposedly quite good - directed by Maurice Champreaux, the son-in-law of Louis Feuillade. Unfortunately, "JUDEX34" is not available on video at the moment.)
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed