Purely Joyful Movie!

A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

I could grumble about the missing elements in this episode: how there is very little suspense (the shooting of the jeweller's wife is so cursory, so hurried that we barely register it), how the plot gets mangled in the course of the story--it's a major flaw to omit the Paris scene, or Andersen's flight to Belgium, the mediocrity of some of the actors. Still, the decors look pretty good--those Hungarian technicians are capable of recreating French country scenes--and Atkinson is settling down in his part. The Bruno Cremer version is the one to see; it has far better acting and the action is more convincing.

Lucyrfisher : "The production team have got everything right down to the last detail." Almost. The stories plays in 1930 or there abouts. I clearly see a peugeot 403 from 1956 driving out of the frame somewhere during the movie. But maybe they changed the time period for this episode

Another wonderful story from Georges Simenon. The production team have got everything right down to the last detail. The garage full of old cars, the unmade roads, the shabby kitchen of the decaying mansion. The bizarre inhabitants, the girl who has to be locked in her room "for safety". But ultimately it's disappointing. Rowan Atkinson is a good Maigret, but he lacks the character's humour (which Michael Gambon had in spades). Atkinson is too solemn, and - fatally - the writers and director have made him soft-centred. He twinkles slightly at the girl, when she tries to seduce him, but in a melancholy way. Gambon would have flirted back. She is impressed that he doesn't respond, but merely treats her burned fingers. I feel this incident is not in the book (the writers needed a pretext to bring them closer), even though Simenon is always concerned about what characters eat and drink. (Maigret decides the girl needs some poached eggs – but surely Maigret can't cook?)Madame Maigret is given a plonkingly 21st-century speech about the difficulty of being married to a policeman. Anachronistic, and also Cop Show Cliché No. 794. And finally: the director loves filming characters in long shot while they are making a long speech full of plot exposition. And many young actors think that naturalism means keeping your face immobile. I turned on the subtitles.

I was certainly very excited, and from the get-go, at the prospect of Atkinson playing Maigret. At least to me, it seemed like a perfect match. And at last, here was a chance to see a Maigret of my generation.Certainly, they've put a lot of effort into this production, it's beautifully shot and acted. But maybe they've tried to hard to impress with the stories. There's certainly always another twist and turn, but my credulity was always stretched very quickly beyond breaking point.And it certainly was a challenge for the thespian of usually hyperactive, hyperverbal and hyperphysical role to turn out a pokerfaced observer of the human theatre, but I often had the Impression that Maigret was somehow recovering from a debilitating stroke: "Tell her ... that ... in this country ..." It reminded me less of Maigret and more of that wheezy wheelchair kid in Malcolm In The Middle.