Jules and Jim (1962)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Chris W

  
  I liked this movie, and I enjoyed watching it, but I was left expecting more. As part of the French New Wave, I knew to expect this film to be overflowing with style and technique, but I also expected it to be fun. Maybe I shouldn't have been so insistant on that last part. This… More
  I liked this movie, and I enjoyed watching it, but I was left expecting more. As part of the French New Wave, I knew to expect this film to be overflowing with style and technique, but I also expected it to be fun. Maybe I shouldn't have been so insistant on that last part. This film is fun, at times, but it gets serious too, and when it does, I find it harder to swallow. Maybe because it's hard to completely identify with or care deeply about the characters. This story is all about an Austrian named Jules who is friends with a French guy named Jim. They share a mutual love for a (probably bi polar) woman named Catherine. The story takes place over a coupkel of decades from the 1910s to the 1930s, and hops all over Europe (mostly France and Germany). I don't mind love triancgle movie, but the way the story progresses seemed very odd and all over the place and unlkely. Also, this is a period piece, but I never really got that sense. It seemed more like the time it was released than the time it was supposed to be portraying. Because this film is style over substance, and because the characters are nuts, ridiculous, and hard to identify with ocmpletely, I should, by all rights, knock this down a notch or two. However, the film has a gorgeous look, great camera work, wonderful music, good performances, and the aforementioned style, so there. I do recommend this movie, despite it being overrated. Part of its importance and legacy and undeniable and understandable, but this film is a bit of a mess. It's not always apparent though since often this film is light, breezy, and not restricted by a super dense plot. See it, but don't expect it to be the masterpiece that many claim it to be.

• Reid V

  
  Frenetic, fresh, and still fun to watch even as it approaches it's fiftieth birthday. While certainly the most stylish of the New Wave films that I have seen so far, the frequent use of freeze frames, jump cuts, and panning shots, surprisingly isn't distracting. In fact,… More
  Frenetic, fresh, and still fun to watch even as it approaches it's fiftieth birthday. While certainly the most stylish of the New Wave films that I have seen so far, the frequent use of freeze frames, jump cuts, and panning shots, surprisingly isn't distracting. In fact, Trauffaut's use of these devices is very judicious and really elevates the film as a whole. This sets the work apart from films such as Goddard's Breathless where it seemed at times that many of the devices used in the film were used because they were "cool" or different, rather than augment the power of the story. It is a dynamic rumination on friendship, love, war, and the changing nature of femininity, and certainly one not to be missed.

• Elvira B

  
  <p>I'm not sure where to start about Jules et Jim... It's a film about friendship, love, and the passing of time.</p> <p>Jules and Jim have the type of friendship anyone dreams of; understanding, unconditional, exciting, stimulating. They share many things,… More
  <p>I'm not sure where to start about Jules et Jim... It's a film about friendship, love, and the passing of time.</p> <p>Jules and Jim have the type of friendship anyone dreams of; understanding, unconditional, exciting, stimulating. They share many things, even some women. One day, however, Jules meets Catherine, a French girl, and her "serene smile" and freewheeling personality immediately captivate him. Jules tells Jim that he is really interested in her, so Jim does not try anything. Having set the limits, Catherine, Jules, and Jim become a close-knit group. The three of them go on holiday together. There's a complicity to everything they do, along with spiritual curiosity and sexual tension. Catherine seems to be a liberated, poetic, "real" woman and Jim can't help falling in love with her in silence. Jules marries her. After their marriage, Jim reenters the picture.</p> <p>I found the characters well-written and very well acted. Jeanne Moreau's face is one of the most expressive I have ever seen. In the same way, Oskar Werner and Henri Serre deliver great lines and give the film some truly powerful moments of insight. Also, much of the film regards the passing of time. In fact, at moments it passes very quickly, at others, a week seems a century. Truffaut introduces a narrative style that can serve any purpose or style.</p> <p>We are not explained everything about the characters' behaviors, but we have room and clues to try. Unlike whatever or whoever controls their fate, Jules and Jim have to follow the succession to their choices with not a single idea of what awaits them at the end of the line. They don't even care. The moment they surrendered themselves to Catherine, the background went out of focus, and there are only two things that will carry and englobe them: their relationship with Catherine, and with each other. </p> <p>The film takes place before, during, and after WWI. After being face to face with death at the front, after fearing the loss of each other, they don't want to miss out on anything: Jim will pursue Catherine with Jules's blessing, Jules won't leave Catherine and will try not to be jealous of his friend. Catherine, who has become increasingly uncomfortable, capricious and unstable, won't give anything up either. It isn't as easy as it sounds.This all happens during the second half of the film, which transcurs in an uncomfortable ease and is full of beautiful, sad images. Truffaut refrains from passing moral judgement and simply proceeds to take us to the unavoidable tragic finale.</p> <p>The story has so much emotion running through it I found it very engaging. It made me angry at the characters just as much as it made me want to meet them an play a domino match in their empty beach house.</p> <p>Truffaut's camerawork is wonderful. He could uncover different aspects, or unite different aspects, of a scene, with a traveling camera (he used a hand-held camera). He thus amplified the reach of a single scene, and made the entire film move. Truffaut also tried to give it an extra edge with several freeze-frames.</p> <p>Complex, daring, beautiful. Jules and Jim is those three things. It's alive, fast, full of wit and humor, with sudden fits of melancholy. Truffaut's experimentation feels like curiosity and excitement, not pretentiousness, and his subject matter and the delicate way in which he treats it feels audacious, not sensationalist. Once more I admire his storytelling, and the innocence that permeates all of his craft.</p>

• danny d

  
  who would have thought that a story of broken people and broken relationships could be so holistic in its presentation. none of the characters were overly likable and their worldviews were simply defeating at every turn, but the film was directed perfectly, the dialogue was… More
  who would have thought that a story of broken people and broken relationships could be so holistic in its presentation. none of the characters were overly likable and their worldviews were simply defeating at every turn, but the film was directed perfectly, the dialogue was completely revealing, and the acting was excellent by all involved. a wonderful film.

• First L

  
  There is a light and airy quality to Jules and Jim that masquerades the cynical nature of the film. The two title characters, one from Germany the other from France, become friends through an intellectual bond they share. One day, while watching some slides at a friend's house,… More
  There is a light and airy quality to Jules and Jim that masquerades the cynical nature of the film. The two title characters, one from Germany the other from France, become friends through an intellectual bond they share. One day, while watching some slides at a friend's house, they both become enraptured by the smile of an ancient pagan sculpture. When they meet Catherine, they see in her a quality similar to the statue's beauty. First Jules falls in love with, and then marries her. As WWI breaks out the two friends become separated, only to re-connect afterwards. When Jim comes to their villa in Rhine, he finds his friends married in name only. He also falls for Catherine, and Jules resolves to make the best of it, so long as he can still remain with both of them. But Catherine is a Queen, as Jules puts it. She must be adored and served, and never ignored. When she's wronged she takes great pains to "even the score" so that she can once again be on an even playing field with her lover. Jules and Jim are both romantics ever in pursuit of the ideal fantasy of love. When they finally capture it, it's not what they thought it'd be. Catherine is wild and carefree, and it's these qualities that attracts Jules and Jim, and it's these very qualities that Jim and Jules stifle when they (each) marry her and try to settle her down into domestic servitude. Stripped of her freedom, she settles for the only pleasure left to her that she finds in living, and that's the constant attention of others. Is it she who is the villain of this story, or is it Jules and Jim? The two men are users and objectifiers of women who don't necessarily see women as actual people, but rather things to own and collect. That Catherine is neither own-able or tameable is not a sin but a virtue in their eyes, and so everyone seems to get what they really want in the end.

• Stephen M

  
  <I>Jules et Jim</I> seems to me to exemplify both the strengths and weaknesses of the <I>Nouvelle Vague</I>, and it shows how pro and con can often stem from the same root. The bold inventiveness with which these former critics of <i>Cahiers du… More
  <I>Jules et Jim</I> seems to me to exemplify both the strengths and weaknesses of the <I>Nouvelle Vague</I>, and it shows how pro and con can often stem from the same root. The bold inventiveness with which these former critics of <i>Cahiers du Cinéma</i> tore up and rewrote the moviemaking rulebook makes watching their films an exhilarating experience, even today. Unfortunately, the flip side of this is that I sometimes find their movies rather soulless and artificial; I can't see the content for the style. Take <I>Jules et Jim</I>. There's that early scene in which Catherine (Jeanne Moreau) confounds Jules (Oskar Werner) and Jim (Henri Serre) by dressing as a man - that's how the whole film feels to me: like three kids playing with a dressing-up box. As a period piece, I just don't buy it; it covers a period of twenty-odd years without ever managing to escape 1962. I still loved it though. In spite of the title, it's Catherine one remembers, and it's impossible to imagine anyone but Moreau playing her.

• Ken S

  
  I think you need to have dated a bi-polar chick to appreciate this movie, and I think she needed to commit suicide for you to fully appreciate it. I appreciated it.

• Jennifer X

  
  A very beautifully shot, freeform film with a great-feeling atmosphere and fantastic music. But in order for me to rate this any higher I would have to like the characters better, and I'm sorry to say I don't. Catherine is a selfish, narcissistic control freak and I'm… More
  A very beautifully shot, freeform film with a great-feeling atmosphere and fantastic music. But in order for me to rate this any higher I would have to like the characters better, and I'm sorry to say I don't. Catherine is a selfish, narcissistic control freak and I'm surprised either Jules or Jim could be so enamored with her. Jules is lame and pathetic, while Jim is kind of a bastard. I do not see this as a romantic film at all. Nevertheless Truffaut is able to imbue his characters with great individual style representative of the New Wave. I guess this movie is supposed to capture the spirit of free love. It doesn't, but...still beautiful, and still interesting, despite the complete lack of sympathy I have for any of the characters.

• Michael G

  
  I'd use the phrase "steaming pile of dogshit" to describe Jules and Jim but I somehow feel those words would be too kind. Far too kind. Maybe if it was titled "A Pussy, a Douchebag and a Stark Raving Lunatic Bitch" I might not be so angrily annoyed as I would… More
  I'd use the phrase "steaming pile of dogshit" to describe Jules and Jim but I somehow feel those words would be too kind. Far too kind. Maybe if it was titled "A Pussy, a Douchebag and a Stark Raving Lunatic Bitch" I might not be so angrily annoyed as I would have avoided this turd altogether. In the plus column some of the camerawork was nice as was the scenery. But the characters were completely unengaging, unlikable and had no redeeming or interesting qualities at all--especially Moreau. This is easily one of the most overrated movies in existence. The only thing that could've saved this one is if Truffaut showed France getting occupied and executing these characters in the street. Instead you're given an ending that Cameron Crowe would rip off for Vanilla Sky. I never thought I'd say there's a movie that would make White Chicks seem appealing but I've got some words I've got to go eat now.

• Tim S

  
  One of the best love stories ever told.

• William S

  
  I'm not sure I really like the characters Jules and Jim that much. They have never left that lasting an impression on me. For me, it's totally Jeanne Moreau's film. Everything I love about this film is Moreau as Catherine - running across the bridge dressed as a boy;… More
  I'm not sure I really like the characters Jules and Jim that much. They have never left that lasting an impression on me. For me, it's totally Jeanne Moreau's film. Everything I love about this film is Moreau as Catherine - running across the bridge dressed as a boy; singing the Brassiak song; laughing and mugging in freeze-frame; her trademark down-turned smile; cycling through the countryside. Each time I watch it she makes me breathless and happy!

• Sarah G

  
  I have seen half of this movie but lost interest, might catch it again soon

• Megan S

  
  It was rather boring, and it was all in black and white, which probably made it more boring. Plus the ending was stupid, it made me yell at the TV.

• Mike T

  
  François Truffaut structures this movie ideally, finding a precise turning point that shifts the dynamic and alters the characters altogether without betraying them. This is an audacious piece of filmmaking full of feeling and beautiful images, played out wonderfully by the entire… More
  François Truffaut structures this movie ideally, finding a precise turning point that shifts the dynamic and alters the characters altogether without betraying them. This is an audacious piece of filmmaking full of feeling and beautiful images, played out wonderfully by the entire cast. Although the movie is vibrant, funny and vividly sexual, it ends things on a tragic note that seems unavoidable. A stunning masterwork.

• Quinto W

  
  I really enjoyed this movie because there was a lot I felt I could share with these characters, but at the same time - or probably because of it - I had a hard time creating a bigger connection with them than what I was hoping.

• Tom S

  
  Da-da da-da da da da da, da-da-da da da. (That was me humming the theme). You can't write about this movie, you gotta feel this shit. Hum with me: Da-da da-da da da da da...

• Sarah B

  
  This story of a love triangle is boring, annoying and frustrating, yet because it's French it becomes a form of art, which makes it even more annoying.

• Doctor S

  
  'Jules et Jim' and One Crazy Lady Very enjoyable until WWI starts, then drags a bit in places. Moving ending. Sixpence None the Richer made their excellent "Kiss Me" video as a scene-by-scene homage to this classic.

• Emily B

  
  Fantastic. My favourite of Truffaut's films and Jeanne Moreau's finest role.

• Krystle C

  
  Truffaut's critically acclaimed adaptation of a semi-autobiographical novel has some amazing moments, but the rest of the movie feels like the self-indulgent, selfish movie he never intended it to be. Jeanne Moreau's portrayal of the flawed, restless Catherine is… More
  Truffaut's critically acclaimed adaptation of a semi-autobiographical novel has some amazing moments, but the rest of the movie feels like the self-indulgent, selfish movie he never intended it to be. Jeanne Moreau's portrayal of the flawed, restless Catherine is spectacular, especially in the scene where she tells the two friends that she never laughed before meeting them, and the camera pauses as if to capture her capriciousness, and in the famous race on the bridge where she cheats shamelessly and exuberantly. The village idiot scene is amazing also, as well as the famous steam-engine scene with the vivacious Therese. However, I found the movie too congratulatory of the characters' flaws and too accepting of the hurt they inflict on each other, much like another critically adored movie which I disliked (<i>Closer</i>). Nonetheless, it reminded me also of a lot of movies I loved including <i>Amelie</i>, and the story itself is a fascinating one esp. because it is based on truth. Interesting. UPDATE: This movie's been kicking around in my mind for a few months now and I really think I should give it a second chance because the few scenes that stick with me are absolutely fabulous. Gotta watch it again sometime. Stay tuned.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings