HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

DipitySkillful an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

MARIO GAUCI From what little I've watched of Vadim's work, this is his most consistently satisfying effort (though the best overall film would still be his famous horror compendium SPIRITS OF THE DEAD [1968], co-directed with Federico Fellini and Louis Malle).Based on a novel by Emile Zola (curiously enough, the very next day I watched THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA [1937], a superb Hollywood biopic!), the film deals with a bourgeois family disrupted when the ageing patriarch's second and much younger bride falls for her husband's son from his earlier marriage (who is her peer); while the script isn't especially deep, the film is absorbing all the way. Impeccably shot by Claude Renoir, its garish style is very typical of 60s European Art-house cinema and the sitar-tinged score even gives it a psychedelic vibe! The three main roles - Jane Fonda (married to Vadim at the time and therefore still in her "sex kitten" days), Peter McEnery (a surprising choice but a good one) and Michel Piccoli (effortlessly hypnotic, he's simply one of the finest - if largely unsung - actors of his generation) - are splendidly filled. The ending is somewhat abrupt and unresolved but, again, it's totally in keeping with the times in which it was made!

shepardjessica-1 Jane Fonda at her sexiest along with THE CHASE released the same year plays a young wife fooling around with her stepson (who is approx. the same age). I don't think Vadim was a great director, but Thespis probably one of his better ones, although not up to the level of AND GOD CREATED WOMAN. Ms. Fonda is great in this - beautiful, talented, intelligent.I gave this a 6 out of 10. Best performance = Ms. Fonda. Michel Piccoli was always a commanding presence and Mr. McEnery looks right in an easy role. Tina Aumont - cute with apparent talent. I just watched Mr. Vadim's CIRCLE OF LOVE (LA RONDE) and this is better. Jane Fonda elevated this one!

dbdumonteil If you are curious enough to know how abysmal French post nouvelle vague cinema can turn,this is the movie to choose.Adapting the second volume of Emile Zola's Rougon-Macquart saga and transposing the action to the sixties -complete with pop art,rock music and sitar!!!-Roger Vadim completely makes a fool of himself:the dialogue is so ridiculous that it's involuntary funny:(Piccoli to his wife who wants to get a divorce "i can't give you your money back;I have invested it in my business.Fonda(the wife):but it's robbery! )Fonda wants to get divorce because she's in love with her stepson,Piccoli's offspring.Jane Fonda ,after "Barbarella" ,will turn around from these Vadim disasters and come back to making great movies with "they shoot horses don't they?"(1969)Of course,Claude Renoir's cinematography is astounding as ever and redeems this laughable soap opera a bit.So does Piccoli's desirable mansion:the conservatory and the bedrooms where Fonda and her lover play around while avoiding prying eyes,que c'est chic!

moonspinner55 Just when you think you've got a handle on this picture, it tosses in a curveball. Flirtatious Jane Fonda, married (but bored) to an older millionaire, has a tricky relationship with her 20-ish stepson which leads to a steamy secret affair. Director Roger Vadim shows off an amusingly twisted sense of humor (odd for a director who, with "Barbarella" two years later, showed no sense of humor at all!); Fonda, at the time Mrs. Vadim, has a marvelous, wicked gleam in her eyes--she's determined to have not just her slice of the cake but the entire dessert! There are problems here, but only minor ones: the voice-dubbing of the actor portraying Fonda's husband is bad (he sounds like Thurl Ravenscroft, the ride-narrator at Disneyland) and the role itself is sketchy--he schemes on the side, off-camera, so we only see the results. Also, the background music is a tiny bit excruciating and repetitive. But Fonda and Peter McEnery (as the handsome kid she becomes obsessed over) are first-rate, as is the chilling ending. A most peculiar concoction, multi-layered and often devastating, with terrific production design, art direction (with subtle mod overtones) and cinematography. Well worth-seeing for grown-up audiences. *** from ****