According to the Cahiers Du Cinema theory,Gilles Grangier was a mediocre director ,cause he did not "innovate" .These hackneyed ideas do not stand up to hindsight.Cause Grangier did innovate in this movie: 1)He begins his movie with the end of a play ,with all the actors bowing to the audience! 2) The subject is eternal,still relevant today:a stage actor (Daniel Gelin)who generally plays secondary characters was a witness in a gangland killing.For him,opportunity knocks:he becomes a celebrity overnight and is given the great parts he has always been dreaming of.
3)But this nice guy is perhaps not so nice.Might it be perjury? 4)The lines the actor delivers on stage ,he could as well say them in real life ,now that the gangster he sent to jail escaped and told him he would die within three days.
Essentially a psychological thriller,where the gangsters work behind the scenes,"Trois Jours A Vivre" is a nice little flick.
3)But this nice guy is perhaps not so nice.Might it be perjury? 4)The lines the actor delivers on stage ,he could as well say them in real life ,now that the gangster he sent to jail escaped and told him he would die within three days.
Essentially a psychological thriller,where the gangsters work behind the scenes,"Trois Jours A Vivre" is a nice little flick.