Falsely accused of a crime, a self-made businessman learns that his possessions are threatened. Having found a loophole in the law, he decides to safeguard his business by recognizing some descendants. With the aid of a friend, he discovers three random individuals (two boys and one girl) born as "fatherless" children. In a record time he now becomes the progenitor of a rich issue...
"Trois enfants..." is a superficial but vaguely amusing comedy in which a middle-aged man declares himself the father of three unrelated minors. The general tone is good-natured, but the plot is rather far-fetched and only a few characters behave and react like people would in real life. The funniest characters, in my opinion, are teenage idol Zoë and her publicity-hungry mother. Their presence allows for a few satirical swipes at the 1960's phenomenon of young nonenties "representing their generation" by warbling silly pop songs.
The comedy must have seemed more ooh la la daring or fanciful in 1966 than is the case nowadays : anno 2020, most people in the Western world have grown used to phenomena such as divorce and children born out of wedlock. Sexual mores have become far more free, too. As a result only a few people will clutch their pearls, say, at the sight of a family where the father raises children born to different mothers or at the sight of a family where various exes discuss the sharing of practical household duties.
In my humble opinion the movie isn't all that interesting. Still, professors teaching law, especially family law, might want to use the movie as a teaching tool. It could be used as material for a discussion about the recognition, by fathers, of descendants born out of wedlock. For instance : what are the effects of a system where a male can recognize a child as his without needing the prior approval, or the prior advice, from mother or child ? And what would be the consequences, on a civil or penal level, of making a declaration one knows to be false ?
"Trois enfants..." is a superficial but vaguely amusing comedy in which a middle-aged man declares himself the father of three unrelated minors. The general tone is good-natured, but the plot is rather far-fetched and only a few characters behave and react like people would in real life. The funniest characters, in my opinion, are teenage idol Zoë and her publicity-hungry mother. Their presence allows for a few satirical swipes at the 1960's phenomenon of young nonenties "representing their generation" by warbling silly pop songs.
The comedy must have seemed more ooh la la daring or fanciful in 1966 than is the case nowadays : anno 2020, most people in the Western world have grown used to phenomena such as divorce and children born out of wedlock. Sexual mores have become far more free, too. As a result only a few people will clutch their pearls, say, at the sight of a family where the father raises children born to different mothers or at the sight of a family where various exes discuss the sharing of practical household duties.
In my humble opinion the movie isn't all that interesting. Still, professors teaching law, especially family law, might want to use the movie as a teaching tool. It could be used as material for a discussion about the recognition, by fathers, of descendants born out of wedlock. For instance : what are the effects of a system where a male can recognize a child as his without needing the prior approval, or the prior advice, from mother or child ? And what would be the consequences, on a civil or penal level, of making a declaration one knows to be false ?
