One Night (2012)

i must have seen a different film!!

A very feeble attempt at affirmatie action

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

In this story, there is no many room for actors to show all their skills. So, on the point of the performance of the actors, the film is rather dull. What is thrilling in this story, is the fact that the community of the neighborhood stays united while everybody lies about having heard the yelling of the woman savagely assassinated and nobody took the initiative of calling the police. That is, it seems that the lie cement the relationships between the members of the community. When truth comes to light, and the members of the neighborhood have to confess to the police that they heard, indeed, the yelling of the victim, each member gets aware of his own cowardice and the cowardice of each of the other members. So, the relationships between the members are severely shaken. And because of this trauma, the community takes Pierre Morvan as a scapegoat and start to abhor him. Also his wife, who during the hole story affirms to support him in any circumstance, his wife quits. The moral of the story seems to be that a lie is stronger than the truth to cement the relationship of a group of people.

This movie is based on a notorious rape-murder case which happened in 1964. Kitty Genovese was stabbed and raped in New York. Two weeks later the "New York Times" published an article titled "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police." Following lengthy investigation, it appears that the headline was incorrect, as nobody witness the whole brutal attack from beginning to the end, because it took place in the course of half hour and in different locations.However, the case sent social psychologists wild, in search for explanations. The conclusion was that contrary to common expectations, larger numbers of bystanders decrease the likelihood that someone will step forward and help a victim.Anyway, I suppose that the movie was set in Le Havre to keep the "city by the sea" background, even if in another continent. But I find it sloppy and disrespectful towards the audience to have used as a plot device horrible murder, which is a classic feature of social psychology textbooks.

I read the other comments for this film. I respect this point of view, but don't share it. That doesn't mean I am right and they are wrong. I consider this film as a brilliant, unusual, daring and powerful drama. One more masterpiece directed by Lucas Belvaux, who already gave us RAPT, in 2009, starring the same Yvan Attal at his peak. His best. The story of a murder committed at night, in a neighbourhood where every one heard or saw the killing BUT without calling the police. Because of their fear, their cowardice. Only one among them, one week later, dares admitting to his wife that he actually heard a long cry in the night. A cry of agony. He goes to the police and tells the truth. But afterwards, a journalist gets the information and each one of the 38 witnesses of the crime is aware of the courageous man's - Attal - behavior which points out their own cowardice...A tense, poignant gripping downbeat film that I won't forget.

In the harbor city of Le Havre, France, a woman is stabbed during the night, just below the windows of her neighborhood. Pierre (Yvan Attal) has witnessed the murder, and heard the wails of the women crying for help. So have the neighbors, certainly. But at the end, nobody called the police. Nevertheless, sorrows are too heavy for Pierre, who feels the need to tell everything to his wife (Sophie Quinton), and to the police. During the investigation, it appears that 38 people witnessed the murdering, and none reacted...I was really appealed by the premises of this plot. That is also why I was really disappointed with the resulting film. Let me enumerate the main caveats I was annoyed with :scripts and acting. The dialogs often sound awkward, unnatural and sometimes I was wondering if I was looking at theater rather than cinema. The acting is not good (especially with the main roles), but I am not sure if actors or director have to be blamed.Le Havre. This city and its harbor is constantly in the picture, but the director does not really use it. Is it metaphor of dehumanization of modern urban life? Is it because the city center was rebuilt with bare concrete after 1945? The effect is wasted.the end. The scenario introduces many story elements which could have be explored and resolved into a powerful conclusion. Contrarily, the actual movie end is coming out of nowhere, unimpressive, and I felt, stupid.