The film jumps around a lot. We start at a German wedding in 1969, but before you know we are elsewhere talking about the French resistance, then watching Maurice Chevalier perform before a French audience of soldiers in 1939, and suddenly we are in the French countryside walking with two framers. Without missing a beat we have an interview the Pierre Mendes (French PM), then German documentaries, including one that focuses on captured black French soldiers that makes fun of the British claim to be defending "civilization". It blames the "Jewish warmongers" and the "British Lords" for starting the war and for escaping with their "suitcases filled with gold". The topic of the resistance comes up now and again, as does the war, but it's difficult to know what this film is about and where it's going.About 30 minutes into the film it seems that the film is about the Vichy Government and the behavior of the French people during the occupation. Anthony Eden poignantly points out to Marshall Petain that there are worse things in life than having your "beautiful cities" destroyed, but to the French, capitulation was the greater need. To the French people it was also an opportunity to settle petty quarrels, and to re-ignite anti-Anglo feelings. Hitler knew that the French of 1939 were not the same people he fought in World War 1, and by 1941 everyone else knew it too. Eden says "If the French can no longer fight, that's one thing. But if they make it easy for the enemy, that's quite another."As the film wanders on and on it gets no better in the focus. Seemingly with neither rhyme nor reason the documentary explores anti-semitism, anglophobia, German influences on French cinema, business practices, German propaganda, etc. Half a century after it was made, and from another country, much of the background is lost, so many of the comments are not easily understood when certain names, dates, and places are mentioned. The lack of focus of the film makes this even more difficult. The translations themselves are random. Sometimes the German is translated into French in the film and then subtitled in English, but often not. Sometimes even the French is not subtitled.All told this is a very poorly done documentary. It lacks focus. The filmed interviews are of poor quality considering it is 1969 and the sound is marginal. Are there pearls of wisdom and fascinating sections within this mess – Yes. Absolutely. It could profit from being redone, shortened, and given a new voice over.

In 1940 the army of Nazi Germany invaded and occupied France. This was done with the collaboration of France's Vichy government and thus the direct or indirect support of the majority of the populace. This documentary uses interviews, archive footage and films released at the time to uncover the truth about what happened at the time and why it happened. In two parts the first looks at the political manoeuvring that led to the occupation and the second looks at the actions of the population during the occupation including the informers and those involved in the underground resistance.Like many viewers, I taped this film and had it sitting for almost a month before I finally got round to just watching it. It wasn't the subject or anything that made me delay it but it was the four hour running time that made it almost impossible to watch on a week night and pretty much required me to be doing little else for the afternoon and evening of a weekend! Girlfriend away I took my chance to spread this film out over most of a Sunday afternoon and evening. Needless to say that the subject of this film is engrossing and shocking but let me just deal with my comment that this is flawed as a film because I know some may be surprised by this description of a film that is listed on this site as the greatest documentary ever made.For my money the film could have been a better film. First off it is too long – even for such a worthy subject it could have lost a half hour or so to make it a little more accessible. A look at the number of people who have voted on this film on IMDb gives you some idea of how inaccessible this film is. The bigger problem though was the structure of the dialogue in terms of presentation. The film is in French but many people being interviewed speak in Germany or English. This is OK but sometimes when the people speak in, say, English they are verbally translated into French while the subtitles turn it back into English. This is a problem because the translator's voice is Ophuls and we therefore hear him ask the question then answer it – and his voice is a little droning, losing the benefit of hearing the person's own voice. Another problem with this is that at times the English and German is delivered without translation or subtitles. Once of twice I was able to hear the English and I noticed that, sometimes, the subtitles are very, very summarised versions of what they were saying.So basically I thought that this film could have been better in these regards. However as a documentary it is utterly engrossing and the subject is delivered with such detail and balance that it is hard not to make it to the end of the fourth hour. The first half of the film is very interesting and manages to do a very good job of reconstructing the political background to the, well, lets call it 'surrender'. It would have been easy for the film to really prejudge those involved or class them as 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys' as many lazy commentators do nowadays, but this film allows everyone to have a say and put their case across. Of course it is easy to be shocked and disgusted by the political actions taken but, as Anthony Eden diplomatically states, it is hard to judge what was done because we have been lucky enough never to be put in that situation. The second half continues to be balanced but, to be honest, some of the stuff in it is practically indefensible and the film is right, I think, when it puts forward the idea that France has not recovered decades later from this very public shame.The level of detail in the film is impressive and it is hard to keep up with the number of interviewees involved at times. However the core seven or eight contributors are very good, detailed balanced discussions that are incredibly insightful and interesting. In fact a lot of the material is shocking – either in terms of being graphically violent or being just surprising that the decisions were made. Whether it be a man talking about how his wife was killed or a politician shamelessly hiding behind statistics of people killed to justify decisions (saying only 5% of French Jews died whereas really this stat didn't include those Jews who had their citizenship revoked – of those 95% died) it is all shocking. For an idea of how shocking the story was thought to be (and still is) consider this – the film was made in the late sixties but was not shown on French television until 1981.However, for all the very easy moral lines to draw, the film doesn't rant (like that supposed documentarian Moore easily does) and it makes interesting viewing for those of us with a basic understanding (all I knew was that the French had given up with only an underground resistance). Any less than a basic knowledge may leave you stranded a little bit with the names and role of the people involved but, to be honest, it is very unlikely you'll plan to watch this four hour film unless you are already interested in the subject.Overall, despite its minor flaws in delivery this is still a great film that is worth the four hours invested in it. It takes the occupation of France and shows it for what it was – morally complex, destructive, wrong, cruel and very hard not to judge. However, despite the fact that it is hard for one not to conclude that their surrender was wrong, kudos to Ophuls for taking a situation that we still make sweeping judgements about (eg jokes about how a French tank has 6 gears – all backwards) and gives it a fair treatment and allows all those involved to reflect on the situation. Not a fun way to spend an afternoon but a memorable, impacting and rewarding one.

It astonished me to read the comment of a reviewer who said that four and one-half hours was too long to spend in learning about one of the saddest chapters in 20th Century history. I saw this move over 30 years ago, and it still haunts me. It is a painstaking examination of the temporary debasement of a proud, freedom-loving nation. In context it is to remember that at the time of the Nazi invasion of France, the French had still not recovered from the Great War of 20 years earlier. Over one million of its young men had been killed. The nation had not recovered physically or psychologically. Still, the film showed stories of great courage, great cowardice and great indifference in the face of great evil. It is the non-polemic story of a low point in the 20th Century. The movie provides excellent insight into the depths of human experience and the resurgence of a national spirit. It's a wonderful documentary. In two days it will be Bastille Day 2004. Vive la France!

I just saw this film on TCM and was pretty impressed. I've been a big fan of The History Channel (which could be called the World War II channel) for about fifteen years, which has given me a great deal of information about WWII that I did not get in school. But this movie went to depths I'd not seen before on how the French behaved in the war.It's commonplace nowadays to hear about how the French hate us (Americans) or how France is filled with "cheese-eating surrender monkeys." But I was really unprepared to learn just how badly France caved in to the Germans. A great deal of the country turned into German collaborators, and worse. The French anti-Semitism almost outdid the Germans.It's interesting to note that no French companies would finance this film. The filmmaker had to go to Switzerland, and, ironically, Germany to get funding. It's easy to see why when you watch this film. I don't know how well this film was accepted in France, but I can imagine there are many French folks who would just like to forget that whole portion of their history. Amazingly, to me, the same people that caved so quickly, then became fervent nationalists upon liberation and started publicly hacking off the hair of French women who dated Germans and put collaborators on trial with gusto. Damned if I can figure their actions out. Then again, I've never had a Nazi tank in my front yard.This movie is not for every taste. I myself am not a fan of films that require subtitles, although The History Channel has broken me down in that area when it comes to documentaries. At four hours long, I taped it and watched it in two chunks. It was very interesting to get an inside look at what happened from a diverse group of people that lived it. That included the resistance. (Yes, there were some that stood strong against their enemies.)For anyone that would like an insider's view of that portion of French history, this movie is a must see.