Watch Two Men in Manhattan For Free

i must have seen a different film!!

The acting in this movie is really good.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

As a native New Yorker, I found the movie a bit creepy, Melville's image of Manhattan is too perfect, a city where the streets are seamless, glistening ribbons of asphalt, where the ashtrays have smoked cigarette butts stacked neatly in them with no sign of ash, where even the glass in telephone booths on the streets are spotless. When a French diplomat disappears and reporter Jean-Paul Melville in his first credited screen role -- clearly he must have impressed the director -- is set on his trail, he doesn't realize he himself is being followed. Meanwhile I was looking for a scrap of litter on the street, a straphanger on the subway whose hat and soul have been battered by a tough day.... nothing. Everyone is perfectly dressed, everything is perfectly clean, everyone dresses like a serious adult. You should have seen the motley assortment on the E train this afternoon.Finally, about a quarter hour in, Melville goes to the apartment of his cameraman, Pierre Grasset, and the wallpaper outside his apartment was poorly hung. Aha! I thought, a creature of the demi-monde, someone who cuts corners, was looking out for himself, who had pictures of the young women that the diplomat.... associated with. Off they went into the night, still followed by a mysterious trailer, Melville, the moral reporter, and Grasset, the corrupt guide. I knew they would find their prey; but how moral would Melville be and how corrupt Grasset? And who was following them and why? Who was the hero of this story and exactly what was the Great White Whale they were following?This movie is Melville's own personal fantasy, set in a fantasy New York glamorous beyond belief to anyone who has dwelt in the real one. He had been born Jen-Pierre Grumbach, and had adopted a new surname in admiration of Herman Melville. He had played Bartleby and written and directed his own movies and now was going on his own voyage to find out if he could be the hero of his own tale.

At the UN today, the French representative didn't show though few made much notice of it. However, a French reporter is given the assignment to look for the guy and see why he disappeared. To help, he gets the help of a super-sleazy photographer, Pierre, and the pair bounce about New York following leads. They think this well respected man might have a mistress--and several photos of him with ladies might help them locate the guy. Eventually they locate the man and then comes an important decision- -what to do with this information. The photographer, naturally, wants to make the most of it and spread sensationalistic photos everywhere. The other guy is decent and tries to get his new partner to do the right thing. I love the films of Jean-Pierre Melville--at least up until this one. It's not a terrible film but nothing like the great film noir features Melville made (mostly in the 60s and 70s). But it did have a homemade feel--cheap and definitely more French New Wave than his usual more polished work. Lots of cheap stock footage of New York was used and so many of the English-speaking actors sounded anything but like New Yorkers. French audiences probably wouldn't have recognized this, but to an American the accents often don't fit or sometimes sound like foreigners TRYING to sound American...and failing. Mildly interesting and clearly the last portion is by far the most interesting. Plus, being a French film it has some nudity, lesbianism and other plot elements you just wouldn't have found in an American film of the time.

Two Men in Manhattan pushes the envelope on everything but quality. Sure, it has lesbians, bare breasts and loads of sex references, but does it help? Say hello of Jean-Pierre Melville's cheap and signature-less alter-ego.The master of French crime goes to what might be the noir capital of the world. We see New Yorks streets at night, and our entertainers throw in a heave jazz score as well - the making of a masterpiece? I wish.From the moment the first credit popped on screen I got the feeling that something was wrong. I shrugged it off, but just as soon as I was ready to embrace yet another great Melville film we are thrown into a whirlpool of disfigured English. Apparently it's only purpose is to show as that we are at the UN. The dialog was clearly not of any importance, and the sound department sure made that clear.I'm sure this introduction isn't as long as it felt like, but that's hardly no excuse. To make things worse we get to spend our first few scenes with the most unimaginative and unimportant small talk. For the next 30 minutes or so I wasn't even sure if there was a plot. Sure, they are looking for a guy but beyond that it felt so empty and devoid of any real direction.And did you expect great visuals? This whole deal feels like a cheap 40's docudrama after it had a stroke. One possibility is that Melville was testing out some new wave aesthetics, another is that he got drunk and let his assistant do the film for him.Not to say it's entirely bad. The cinematography is more or less there, despite the fact that the compositions couldn't be blander. Had it been some unknown director who was behind this I'd just brush it off as the mediocrity it is - but despite the fact that it isn't really bad it almost feels like a stab in the back from Melville. He had everything he needed, but decided to go to autopilot. All I can say is that there's most certainly a reason why this is his least known.

Melville is clearly enjoying himself in this picture. As director, there is a virtuosic flourish to many of the extended shots and the night-time cinematography. As actor, the constant smirk on his character's face is surely that of Melville himself, playing out his personal fantasy as a film noir character in his favourite city.When the story arrives, it's revealed to be an ethical dilemma: our two principals (Melville as an Agence France Presse journalist and Pierre Grasset as his photographer buddy) discover a French diplomat and ex-Resistance hero dead of a heart attack in an actress's apartment. Do they report the truth, cover it up to preserve the guy's reputation or sensationalise it even more to make a fortune from the exclusive?Melville was by no means a great actor, but his baleful eyes, bland smile and spiffy bow tie in this film give him a kind of sleazy charm that brings to mind Peter Lorre. His character's name (Moreau) is a pun on "moraux", which means moral, and indeed he is intended to be the moral centre of the film. There are moments, though, when he seems genuinely sinister: when he peeps on a bare-breasted dancer in her dressing room (the scene was censored in the UK), and when he looms threateningly over another girl who has just attempted suicide."Deux hommes..." is the most New Wave of all Melville's films. The raw, documentary-style shots, the improvised feel to some of the scenes (Melville makes frequent mistakes when speaking English), the use of real locations and untrained actors (including Melville himself), were jarring to audiences and critics at the time. In the light of Godard and Truffaut we can now better appreciate the type of film-making that Melville helped to inaugurate. Nevertheless, Melville regarded "Deux hommes..." as a failed experiment, returning in his subsequent films to a more classical approach.