Too bad this superb and suspenseful movie has such an inaccurate synopsis written for it. The wife is not "unbalanced" in the picture; she is driven to madness by a series of seemingly random events, just as her husband's life unravels for the same reasons. This movie has a strong noir element to it with the femme fatal being the seductive air line hostess who attracts the attention of a successful writer/artist by the name of Pierre Lachenay, brilliantly acted by Jean Desailly. Fate is important in the outcome as it is in all noirs. The beautiful music has a driving, fatalistic theme to it that is repeated from beginning to end. Moreover, a series of random events, especially concerning near misses and misses in time, dictates the outcome. Lachenay almost misses his plane to Lisbon, he almost misses the air hostess in her hotel (at first she spurns him), he almost misses her again when they are back in Paris, he goes to the airport again and seemingly misses her only to meet her because her own plans have changed. Tellingly, he later misses calling his wife by seconds because another woman (how revealing is that?) occupies the sole phone booth at the restaurant he's at. He cannot reach her and misses by a few seconds; note the time the director uses on this scene where the wife's maid is called to the phone, asked to check the stairway to see if the wife is still about, and asked to see if the maid can catch her in the car lot. Again fate, destiny. He misses his wife just as she has left on her fatal journey that results in his end too. So too, it is by chance that his wife finds the receipt for some developed film that she then picks up and when she sees the pictures of her husband with the air line stewardess, she goes mad so once again a seemingly random event (the finding of the film) directly results in the husband's death. I concur with other people here who have commented on the director's focus on mechanical items. I think the director focuses on them (the air line cockpit and the gas station dispenser, for instance) as a way of showing the nature of the unfolding of fate: things work a certain way and will determine a certain outcome. Press a button and there is a certain outcome; one that after something is done is not "chosen." Fate or destiny or whatever it might be called, in this movie is very strong, and the driving force here, even stronger than romantic attachments which seem fleeting and ephemeral and even stronger than family attachments, between husband and wife and parents and child. This, I believe, is the central theme of this superb movie, well acted and directed. Some professional film critics wrongly have made comparisons to Hitchcock but I do not see them. For this movie is far more introspective, far more psychological much bleaker than most Hitchcocks where, for instance, a deranged lunatic kills madly (in "Psycho") or again in "Rope" or the even weaker, "Frenzy". So too, there is no focus on discovering or catching the murderer, almost always key in Hitchcock. No, the emphasis in this movie is on why something happens, why a life changes in a major way caused by seemingly small, inevitable changes. Here, unlike in "Psycho" no one is deranged until fate dissolves relationships. The director of this movie, Truffaut, was a big fan of Orson Welles and I believe that Welles--NOT Hitchcock--was a prime source of inspiration to him. For instance, the fate theme is very strong in Welles superb "Lady from Shanghai" where the Welles character, seemingly randomly meets the femme fatale, ends up working for her and her husband, falls in love with her, and finally goes on trial for murder. Another Welles film noir, the even better "Touch of Evil" also goes into similar themes studying the utter disintegration of the corrupt law official, Hank Quinlan, brilliantly played by Welles. To understand "The Soft Skin", I believe, one must understand classic film noir and Welles. Both movies by Welles were made just a few years before this one. Contrast Truffaut's approach here (black and white film; lots of shadows; femme fatale; bleak outcome with death to the lead character) with a contemporary Hitchcock like "North by Northwest" which is playful not bleak, romantic (boy gets girl story) and optimistic throughout and especially in the ending, and is filmed in color. This movie, by contrast, has many of the elements of film noir even though it is made much later than most such films: it is shot in black and white, often with shadows and with night scenes (especially the eerie scenes in Rheims which are pivotal to the story), with a deadly (and eventually, uncaring) femme fatale, with fate decreeing the outcome of husband, wife and family. The male lead, a seemingly powerful force at the opening of the movie, has no real control over his final destiny. Another strong influence appears to be the writing of the brilliant Belgian/French author, Georges Simenon. In his books (not so much the Maigret ones but the far better stand alone novels), Simenon often looks at a turning point in people's lives and how something dissolves relationships which is exactly what happens here. Simenon and Welles, not Hitchcock, are the spring sources of Francois Truffaut's inspiration in this movie. Great acting, great directing, great music, great movie! This movie is a little appreciated gem especially by the professional critics who dwelt on the adultery aspects of the movie to the exclusion of all else.
Review of The Soft Skin
