User Reviews

Claude Chabrol's "Docteur Popaul" aka. "High Heels" of 1972 is a fun little black comedy starring Jean Paul Belmondo, Mia Farrow and Laura Antonelli, and although it is certainly no masterpiece, the movie is well worth seeing. As far as I am considered Belmondo is always worth the time, and "Docteur Popaul" has enough black humor to remain entertaining throughout its 100 minutes.

Paul Simay (Belmondo), a student of medicine and player who prefers ugly women since he doesn't trust the beautiful, makes a bet with his drinking buddies: They are to meet again after a year, and the guy who has managed to sleep with the ugliest woman in the meantime is the winner. Paul wins the bet, and decides to go on a journey. In Tunisia he runs into shy Christine (Mia Farrow, with 'ugly'-make up), who has a handicap - she limps, and seduces her. When they run into each other again in France, and Paul finds out that her father is the head of a local clinic, he proposes to her. But Christine has a sister, the gorgeous Martine (Laura Antonelli), and Martine has a bunch of idiotic adorers...

If you like dark humor, you should give "Docteur Popaul" a try. The movie remains entertaining from the beginning to the end and has some hilarious moments. Belmondo is cool as always, and beautiful Laura Antonelli is a treat for the eyes. A quite original little black comedy, "Docteur Popaul" is an amusing film with a fine portion of black humor, that should not leave its viewers bored. Recommended. 6/10

Another odd choice for this director (by the way, the English title makes no sense – much better is the alternate SCOUNDREL IN WHITE), an eccentric character comedy that generally misses the (dubious) mark but is redeemed by a thriller-type twist in the last half-hour which turns it into a Chabrol movie after all! Apparently, he intended it as a disservice to leading man Jean-Paul Belmondo since his own meticulously-crafted films were pretty much ignored by audiences whereas they would indiscriminately lap up anything the star chose to turn his hand to!

Although I had disliked its theatrical trailer – that I caught when I rented a Belmondo DVD collection a couple of years ago – I decided to acquire it regardless as part of my ongoing comprehensive tribute dedicated to its director. Incidentally, I had to watch this in French without the benefit of subtitles – since my only other option was an Italian-dubbed version with superimposed Russian narration!

Anyway, Belmondo (roguish as ever) makes a bet with a number of his card-playing pals that he can hitch up with the least attractive woman around. Meeting up a year later, many of them produce photos of their 'conquests' but, obviously, our hero makes off with the prize money – which he opts to spend vacationing in Tunisia where, running into mousy Mia Farrow (sporting buck-teeth, glasses and a leg-brace!), Belmondo decides to keep up the game! For the record, I had seen both Chabrol (presenting his latest film THE BRIDESMAID) and Farrow (introducing Giuseppe De Santis' neo-realist disaster movie ROMA ORE 11 [1952]) at the 61st Venice Film Festival in September 2004.

But to get back to the film under review: Belmondo and Farrow marry and he takes a job at her eminent father's clinic (the protagonist happens to be a medical student) but, then, her luscious sister – Laura Antonelli – turns up. Obviously smitten with her, Belmondo drugs his wife in order to spend the nights with the younger woman and even Fate lends him a helping hand when the latter's husbands expire repeatedly in freak accidents (the first, involving a tractor, is especially hilarious).

So far, so mediocre – or, at least, not particularly rewarding apart from Pierre Jansen's jaunty score. What is doubly disappointing here is that, in spite of the handiwork of Chabrol's long-time screen writing collaborator Paul Gegauff (a notoriously misogynist individual), the film does not have the courage of its intriguing convictions and makes commercial compromises by nevertheless peppering the whole with beautiful girls like Farrow, Antonelli and Marlene Appelt (as Belmondo's luscious nurse)…not to mention that afore-mentioned surprise ending that comes totally out of left field!

In fact, Farrow's character is revealed to be not quite as naïve as her hubby (and the audience) had been led to believe as she smoothly turns the tables on Belmondo (with the help of a doctor – her lover, played by Daniel Ivernel – who, until then, had been our hero's best friend!). Here, too, we realize that the car accident which had opened the film was merely the first step in the protagonist's systematic emasculation. Speaking of Ivernel, he is perhaps best known for his appearance in Luis Bunuel's 1964 version of DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID which, incidentally, also features repressed bourgeois Michel Piccoli getting it on with his frumpy maid Muni! By the way, at the same time that Chabrol was involved in this occasionally amusing but ultimately thankless movie, his wife Stephane Audran's career was reaching its non-Chabrolian zenith via her participation in Bunuel's THE DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE (1972)!

At the time ,Chabrol was producing movies at an alarming speed .And that period is still looked upon as his very best:"la femme infidèle" "le boucher" "que la bête meure" "la rupture" and "les noces rouges" are unqualified musts for any Chabrol fan.Two works took a divergent road in this golden era: "la decade prodigieuse " was a failed (but not completely wretched) attempt at transferring one of Ellery Queen's absorbing books to the screen .And then "Docteur Popaul" which is from Hubert Monteilhet's "meurtres à loisirs" .Monteilhet writes thrillers which sometimes recall Boileau-Narcejac ("Diabolique" "Vertigo" )but he introduces a sense of humor and a certain bad taste not present in the works of the writers I mention above.Chabrol has given a totally true rendering of Monteilhet atmosphere:the set up,the grotesque characters (particularly a made look ugly Mia Farrow :why her anyway?The director had to dub her in French ).The conclusion ,like in any Monteilhet's book, is immoral to a fault.But deliciously immoral.

Jean-Paul Belmondo is a very good acteur: he can play roles of thief,policeman, adventurer, swindler, but also roles of seducer.In this dark comedy about seduction,marriage and family life he speaks of the moral beauty of the ugly women: the seduction play in his meeting with Christine is quite fine.But the things will change when in his marriage in the church he sees his sister -in-law.Then we have some comic black events (how to eliminate the lovers of Martine). I am not an uncondicional fan of Claude Chabrol: Docteur Popaul,who had a good commercial success, doesn't convince me very much: there are better films of Claude Chabrol such as "La ligne de démarquation","Le Boucher","La femme infidèle" or "Avant que la bête meure".

At the time ,Chabrol was at the height of his powers ;the 1967-71 is now generally considered his heyday ; but there was a critical backlash circa 1971: what's the point of depicting the bourgeois life in "la femme infidèle" or "juste avant la nuit" , what's the point of making his characters fight this privileged class in such works as "que la bête meure" or "la rupture" ?.....when you are a bourgeois yourself; the director never denied it anyway. And who ,with the staggering exception of Bunuel , gave a better picture of the French bourgeois milieu in those years?

There was another "rupture" (breach) in 1971: Chabrol had always wanted to adapt Ellery Queen's murder mystery "ten day s wonder" ; bourgeois life was still here,but it took a back seat to the plot , a riddle based on the Bible no less; "la décade prodigieuse " ;one of Chabrol's own biggest disappointments ,it is better than its bad reputation,though.

"Docteur Popaul " aka " Doctor Casanova" continued in that vein, the murder mystery,but it took it to peaks of crudeness and bad taste;Hubert Monteilhet , whose novel was adapted, is closer to Rabelais than to Ellery Queen's finesse and dandiesque elegance .

With hindsight, "docteur Popaul " has not aged that much bad ; Chabrol wanted to dismantle the classic thriller plot , the set up , the final unexpected twist (which is so trendy today) is present ; black humor makes up for bad taste and Belmondo overplays with delight :he had just founded his own film company ,"Cerito". Dominique Zardi ,a Chabrol habitué , was cast as the bishop and wrote the awful ditties -he had already written the lilting "Capri Petite Ile" in "le boucher ",probably the director's masterpiece -.

Two thirds of the movie is a flashback (it was the first time the director had used this technique),the last third is some kind of "set up ,explanation and deus ex machina ",in the shape of a cleaning lady played by another habitué ,Henri Attal , Zardi's pal)

A wholesale slaughter ,in which Claude Chabrol destroys the world he created in the precedent years;lambasted by an unanimous press, it was nevertheless ,probably because of "Bebel" , the director's biggest commercial success in his whole career.

I've watched this film about thirty years ago and it stuck in my mind until now. When I came across it on DVD, I didn't hesitate too long, even more, because I have a predilection for early Belmondo flicks. But what a bad surprise! Some movies should be allowed to resign from public exposure, to preserve a certain memory, and not to shock audiences.

Widely hailed as one of Chabrol's rare cynic works, the only lasting impression I got from re- watching it is... boredom. Some movies really do not age in style. But what about movies which didn't have any sense of style at all?

The flaws in the script, uninspired acting - presumably due to the lack of direction -, a sort of production design, which doesn't deserve its name, less than mediocre photography and, last but not least, the worst editing job I've seen in ages, make this one truly hard to stand.

My impression was, that there was a bunch of people with too much money and equipment but obviously, no idea or any skills at all. It really comes as a surprise, that this one didn't abruptly end Chabrol's career. Don't blame it on the overall bad taste of the 70s, this one is crap in its own right and a worthy contender for the most useless waste of celluloid ever.

I generally can't understand what people see in Chabrol. His films are boring and predictable. Take The Butcher. One suspect, he did it and the clue is in the title. The film is very cynical, it's not even dark humour. For me it wasn't homour at all. The overall concept is deeply mysoginist. I can't really laugh about women being degraded. And all that bourgeoisie bashing in the late 60s / early seventies is hardly original. Most of all the film is very boring because there are no characters the viewer can relate to and the narrative doesn't really get going. Apart from some sexy scenes with Laura Antonelli this is a total waste of time.

A delightful black comedy which is quite unlikely ever to be re-made by Hollywood, it is just too cynical about beauty and love and marriage and family and medicine and murder. Jean-Paul Belmondo plays the title hero, ever in pursuit of ugly women (which incidentally furthers his career) until the sight of his sister-in-law, played by Laura Antonelli, make him change his priorities. It is amazing how Belmondo manages to stay likable while his character's actions are thoroughly objectionable throughout - it probably helps that his adversaries are not such terrific people themselves.