Watch The Sorrow and the Pity For Free

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

As with many films that feature in it, I probably would never have known about or seen this French film if it did not feature in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, and that is the only reason I probably would watch it. Basically this documentary focuses on the German Nazi invasion of France during the Second World War, 1940 to 1944, due to the French Vichy government collaborating. Throughout the film director Marcel Ophüls interviews the politicians involved with the situation, the former resistance fighters, the former German Nazis who were involved, the religious types and other people affected by the invasion. The film is split into two parts, both two hours, "The Collapse" and "The Choice", including many stock footage moments made during the time, and it concludes with the important interview with France's Prime Minister. I will admit that I did not understand all of what was being talked about during the interviews, and I did doze off a little bit in certain parts that were a bit boring, but the stock footage stuff is interesting enough, and the opinions of what was happening was alright, so overall it is a worthwhile political documentary. It was nominated the Oscar for Best Documentary, Features for Ophüls, and it won the BAFTA for Best Foreign TV Programme. Very good!

This, of course, is the documentary film that Woody Allen's character goes to time after time in Annie Hall. It chronicles the German occupation of France during World War II. It creates a patchwork of people who were affected on all sides by the presence of the Nazi's on the streets. What is remarkable is how simply some of them lived and how "congenially" many absorbed the invaders. It isn't an expose but rather a slice of life about a country that quickly buckled under to oppression. Of course, the overtones present tell the story of all the evil that was going on but because it was covered so well, it went unnoticed. The Holocaust was going on, but the anti-Semitism was so rampant, many of the French people just said c'est la vie. We get to know common people, people in the resistance, politicians, former Nazis and a host of others. What could be dull and tedious, is four hours of absolutely amazing storytelling. While no-one is shouting or emoting, the story gets told beautifully. It would be easy to be incredibly angry with the French while their British and American counterparts were dying, but it is so matter of fact and so human, I didn't get there.

I've just seen this at the National Film Theatre.I concur with most of the comments from the other users. Certainly Ophuls' directorial hand is evident throughout, the editing, cutting, juxtaposition, reaction shots etc are all part of the construction of his argument, although his interviewees are obviously allowed to account for themselves at some length.What I found most surprising was the amount of humour in the film. Because of Woody Allen's use of it in "Annie Hall" I thought it would be gruelling, but there were a number of laugh out loud moments, starting with the resistance leader whose main stated reason for fighting the Germans was that they were monopolising the best meat.Emmanuel d'Astier de la Vigerie was also a total star. His comment about the sociological make-up of the Resistance - essentially misfits and malcontents, people with nothing to lose - was very telling. A number of other interviewees made similar points - the main collaborators were the bourgeoisie - the resistance was mainly based on workers, peasants, communists, youth and weirdos of various sorts. Compare that with the sitation in the '60s when the film was made and with the situation now in the western democracies.Anthony Eden was another major surprise. The popular image of him now is of a buffoon, the man who screwed up Suez, but in the extended interview here he displays immense charisma, intelligence and humanity. And if they make a film of his life Jeremy Irons is a shoo-in for the role.The Nazis, meanwhile, are clearly cut from the same cloth as the neo-fascists presently enjoying something of a resurgence in most of Europe. All the same arguments made in exactly the same way by the same sort of people. This (plus the smugness of the former Wehrmacht officer still wearing his medals) was probably the most chilling thing about the film.The final obvious resonance is with Iraq. From the German soldiers baffled and outraged by the fact that some French were trying to kill them, to the French establishment referring to the Resistance as terrorists, (yes that was the exact word they used), to the initial acceptance of the Occupation turning to hatred as reprisals against the Resistance grew, many testimonies throw a radically new light on the present situation. To draw direct parallels would be a mistake - even the Gaullists were not as reactionary as Zarqawi or Muqtada al Sadr - but nonetheless there is a lot to learn from then about now, and about the difference between how events are perceived at the time and by History.Another user comment complains about the amount of politics in the film. It's true that some knowledge is presupposed and the film would obviously mean more to those who lived through those times. However Ophuls has said that one of his main motivations was to show that the idea that you can divorce politics from everyday life is exactly what made collaboration possible.These are just a few of the thoughts provoked by the film, which holds many more insights and surprises and I am sure repays as many viewings as Alvy Singer gave it. It's perhaps not as shocking or affecting as "Shoah" (on which it's surely the strongest influence) but then it's a different story. It shows us the best of humanity as well as the worst and neither are always where you might expect to find them.Incidentally, it looks like the reportedly poor quality of the DVD may be down to the original film stock rather than the transfer.

I just saw this film on TCM and was pretty impressed. I've been a big fan of The History Channel (which could be called the World War II channel) for about fifteen years, which has given me a great deal of information about WWII that I did not get in school. But this movie went to depths I'd not seen before on how the French behaved in the war.It's commonplace nowadays to hear about how the French hate us (Americans) or how France is filled with "cheese-eating surrender monkeys." But I was really unprepared to learn just how badly France caved in to the Germans. A great deal of the country turned into German collaborators, and worse. The French anti-Semitism almost outdid the Germans.It's interesting to note that no French companies would finance this film. The filmmaker had to go to Switzerland, and, ironically, Germany to get funding. It's easy to see why when you watch this film. I don't know how well this film was accepted in France, but I can imagine there are many French folks who would just like to forget that whole portion of their history. Amazingly, to me, the same people that caved so quickly, then became fervent nationalists upon liberation and started publicly hacking off the hair of French women who dated Germans and put collaborators on trial with gusto. Damned if I can figure their actions out. Then again, I've never had a Nazi tank in my front yard.This movie is not for every taste. I myself am not a fan of films that require subtitles, although The History Channel has broken me down in that area when it comes to documentaries. At four hours long, I taped it and watched it in two chunks. It was very interesting to get an inside look at what happened from a diverse group of people that lived it. That included the resistance. (Yes, there were some that stood strong against their enemies.)For anyone that would like an insider's view of that portion of French history, this movie is a must see.