Les scénario sont relativement similaires, sauf sur un point: alors que les Français se contentent de rendre la drogue, les héros Américains eux vont jusqu'à faire le boulot de la police en leur présentant les dealers prisonnier et les preuves qui vont avec. Quand on a regardé la version américaine en classe, il y a eu a ce moment qulques sourires et des remarques du genre "encore une fois, ils ne peuvent pas s'empêcher de sauver le monde!" Est-ce que les films américains doivent avoir un "happy en" complet pour être appréciés? En France, on aurait trouvé cela "trop gros" pour être crédible. Il est vrai que la relation avec les forces de l'ordre ne sont pas les mêmes. Les héros américains veulent rétablir la vérité et rendre justice alors que les garçons français se contentent de sauver leur peau, sans se méler de ce qu'ils considèrent les affaires des autres. Ils bernent la police, tout comme le font les traficants. Mais cela ne nous empêche pas de les apprécier, on les considèrent comme malins et débrouillards. Ils prouvent leur ruse non pas en piégeant les "méchants", mais en trompant la police par une cachette innocente, la couche dans une poubelle. Est-ce que vous les voyez comme des personnes malhonnêtes, et qui ainsi n'attirent pas la sympathie? Une autre remarque concernent la présence des armes à feu. A la première alerte, le dealer sort un flingue, alors qu'il n'est absolument pas en danger et qu'il a en face de lui un homme désarmé et un bébé. Il n'y a pas de trace d'armes dans la version française. Est-ce pour rendre la scène plus dramatique, ou est-ce que ce comportement vous parait compréhensible? de manière générale, il y a plus d'action dans la version américaine (course poursuite en voiture, concierge ligotée, musique dramatique), qui cherche à tenir le spectateur en haleine. Enfin une dernière remarque sur les achats des couches et du lait. Le Français va à la pharmacie pour trouver la personne compétente, alors que l'Américain est sûr de trouver de l'aide en cas de besoin et va donc au supermarché. J'ai déjà évoqué le rôle de conseil et d'écoute qu'ont les pharmacies en France dans le forum sondage. Avez-vous un tel concept aux Etats-Unis?
Quelques différences entre ces deux films rappellent certains points déjà évoqués dans les forums. Ainsi, comme l'a souligné Sophie, l'image qui est donnée de la police n'est pas la même: alors que du côté français, elle était plutôt ridiculisée, du côté américain, les personnages se mettent de son côté pour rétablir l'ordre. Et puis je n'ai pas pu m'empêcher de penser à tous les messages d'américains nous faisant remarquer que les français n'expriment pas leurs sentiments... il n'y a qu'à voir ces deux films pour constater cette énorme différence culturelle. D'un côté, les "papas" ralent parce qu'ils ont "autre chose à faire que torcher un nourisson", ont honte d'être vus en train de cajoler Marie, disent être soulagés de la voir partir... alors que tout dans leur attitude montre qu'ils en sont fous et qu'elle leur manque terriblement. Dans le film américain, par contre, il n'y a aucun ambiguité: ils en sont fous, un point c'est tout, et au cas où on ne l'aurait pas bien compris, les personnages le répètent régulièrement. Un autre élément disparaît dans la version américaine: les trois hommes n'ont pas l'air si traumatisés que ça par l'arrivée du bébé: le chamboulement de leur vie et la nouvelle organisation due à Marie sont plus longtemps observés dans la version française, Jacques y est aussi plus convaincant dans son caractère d'égoïste et met plus de temps à s'intéresser à sa fille. Sinon, j'ai bien aimé les deux concierges: la française était très typée, quant à l'américaine, je ne sais pas, mais on voyait bien qu'il ne s'agissait pas du même pays.
I think that the American version of the film is a lot more dramatic than the French. As Sophie says, the Americans always try to "save the world". For example, the three men, instead of just saving themselves by giving the drugs to the dealers directly without police interference or knowledge, they go about doing the "right thing", exposing the drugs and the men to the police. Another example of a "dramatic" and storybook ending is the final scenes. The Americans added the scene where the men rush to the airport to try and catch Sylvia. Then in the very end, they ask Sylvia to live with them - a very ideal and unrealistic ending.
I agree with sophie about the happy ending of the American film. The three men turned out heros because they caught the bad guys. The French film is more realistic in that they don't go through all that trouble.
I wanted to add that in the American film, Peter is really into excercising. He goes jogging and has a machine to work out at home. In the French film we see nothing like this. This was probalby appealing to the American ideal of a rich successful, character who cares about the way he looks.
Je dois dire que j'ai été assez déçu par la version américaine qui est trop commerciale à mon goût. En effet, on est agacé dès le début par le générique qui met bien 5 minutes alors que dans la version française on entre de plein pied dans l'histoire.
Je trouve de plus que la version américaine fait la part belle à l'action dans un film qui se veut originellement comique. C'est dommage!!! Pas mal de gags présent dans la version française ont été ainsi escamotés.
Je noterai également que la relation des 3 hommes avec l'enfant diverge sensiblement en fonction des versions. Dans la version française, les 3 hommes en ont ras le bol de l'enfant: ils ne peuvent plus sortir ni travailler .... Je n'ai pas vu cela dans la version américaine.
I want to add to the comments that my perception of the american version is that very homogeneous. I didn't find the same difference in personality as in the French version. The characters of the control freek, the naive dumb, and the selfish playboy were really distinguished in the french version, while in the american version the three guys had a little bit of everything.
Another two things that I found very particular in the French version was the screaming, and the cigarrette. I found the scene where Pierre screams to the babysitter very representative of the French culture. And in the french version the characters smoke in their rooms, while in the american version we saw a the characters care for their fitness
Regarding the pharmaceutical help, I think that is one of the pitfalls in the american version. Here people don't talk to you that much, at least not on their own initiative!!
J'ai l'impression que les trois garçons américains sont plus aisés que les français. L'appartement, situé en centre ville est plus grand, plus moderne, plus lumineux. Ils ont des appareils de musculation, un billard, un jukebox, font appel à des serveur pour leur soirée... Dans la version françaises, on a l'impression que les garçon louent l'appart en commun pour ne pas avoir de charges exorbitantes, alors que dans la version américaine, ils pourraient s'en sortir seuls mais préfèrent vivre ensemble.
I think it's interesting that the French and English films were strikingly different in that they focused on different elements of the storyline. I think it would be safe to assume that directors and script writers pander to their audience, so the French film is as much of a reflection of French culture as the American film is of American culture.
Since the creation of special effects like in StarWars, I think Americans go to the theaters to see unbelievable and imaginative things. We expect to see the glamor and glory of Hollywood on the big screen. Just by looking at the settings in the two movies, we can easily see that the American movie probably costed a lot more to make, and the setting was much more modern.
Whereas the American film tried to hype up the drug subplot -- the action and adventure we all seek in James Bond movies, the French version emphasized the growing relationships between the three men and the baby. I think this is analogous to Chinese films, too. Chinese films don't have the large sums of money like American films to make extraordinary (special effects-wise) scenes. Hence, they focus more on human interactions rather than explosions and car chases.
I would like to agree with Gary in that the primary motive of each film was very different. The French version focused on the characters, their interrelationships and how they changed as time went by. On the contrary, little or no attention was given to the evolution of the American characters and we see ourselves involved in a ludicrous subplot of normal people going against drug dealers and making a fool of the police.
As Carolina mentioned, it seems that the American audience needs this type of action sequence; otherwise they feel the movie is not up to their normal standards. Too bad because sometimes simple acting can be much more appealing.
I was wondering if anyone knew how popular the American movie "Three Men and a Baby" was here when it came out. I didn't think it to be a particularly funny or moving movie.
One thing I noticed on the video jacket for "Three Men and a Baby" was a summary that noted that the movie had "three of Hollywood's hottest stars." I think this influenced what the movie emphasized: it emphasized action, the hot stars, and the successful lifestyle of the characters. The interpersonal relationships were de-emphasized compared to the French film, in my opinion.
What do you think is the French recipe for a great movie? (In the US it is usually Action + Hot Stars + maybe some Sex or Love Interest.)
So far, I pretty much agree with what has been said about the two movies. The French movie had better acting, more character development, and a more realistic story. The American version had showy actors, fancy sets, and lots of, in my opinion, stupid action scenes.
I found the American movie very disappointing, especially since the French movie was pretty good. It is all the more surprising that (if I can remember properly) "Three Men and a Baby" was very popular here when it came out. I was very young then, but I remember people talking about it, so I assume it was pretty popular (the kind of thing everyone saw even if they didn't all like it).
I disagree with Sophie when she says that the French characters didn't appear wealthy. While they were not the opulent, showy, obvious millionaires found in the American movie, their appartment was still rather large, and they hosted small, but formal dinner parties. Perhaps this is more common for the upper middle classes in France, but in the US, such parties are thought of as a thing for the rich. Not all of the characters were individually wealthy, but the French men seemed to spend what they earned on parties and a nice appartment, and their lifestyle was certainly above mere middle class. Jacques, obviously, didn't have much money. He was a steward worried about paying next month's rent. Pierre, however, was a lawyer, and thus probably somewhat rich, and Michel didn't complain much about financial worries, so I made the assumption that he was at least comfortable.
Are the dinner parties shown in the French movie something that middle-class people may host? The American parties were certainly the kind only thrown by rich megalomaniacs. What are social gatherings like for working people in France? Are dinner gatherings common? Do they often require formal dress (or at least suits and dresses)?
J'ai préféré le film français, j'ai trouvé qu'il était beaucoup plus amusant que le film américain. Par leurs simples gestes et mouvements, les acteurs réussissent à faire rire les spectateurs. J'ai aussi l'impression que le film américain était plus cher, c'est-à-dire, qu'ils ont utilisé plus de moyens. Ce que j'aime bien avec les films français est qu'avec très peu de moyens, ils réussissent à faire de très bons films(voir dîner de cons, où l'intégralité du film se joue dans une seule pièce pratiquement et qui a connu un succès fou). Je crois qu'on général, les Américains aiment les grandes productions et le spectaculaire. Je ne dis pas que je n'aime pas ça, mais dans ce cas particulier, j'ai préféré le modèle français.
L'histoire, en français ou en américain, est irréaliste comme tout, ça c'est hors de discussion.
I believe the main difference between the events in the story occur because of changes made by American Hollywood. In the American version, the Jack, Michael and Peter help the police catch the drug dealers for an added moment of action and excitement, typical of American films. Whereas in the American version, the lady staying with Peter leaves when she hears the three men singing to the baby, but in the Amercian version the women is Peter's semi-girlfriend Rebecca, and she laughs whole-heartedly. In the Ameican version, there is an interlude with music after the drug dealers are arrested and the baby is saved. The men take the baby to the park and the women chase after the men and then to the swimming pool for lessons. This is all very dramatized for American made Hollywood movies.
I agree with you. I believe the French version of the film is much more funny than the American version. It seems that Hollywood chose to make the film more dramatic and visual than humorous. Many American films are very expensive and have very little dialog. Fortunately there are enough film producesr outside of Hollywood. I believe America does make many very good, intelligent, smaller budget films.
I pretty much agree with all the points that have been made in this forum. The French movie is definitely superior to the American movie in many ways.
Although I enjoyed watching the French movie, I was very upset with how irresposible the parents of the baby were in both movies. In fact, we never see Jacques and Sylvie sit down and have a frank and serious discussion about Marie. This upset me greatly because I think that parenting is one of the most important tasks anyone can have in life. I know that this movie was supposed to be a comedy, but the irresponsibility of the parents was so appalling to me that it prevented me from laughing at the funny scenes.
For instance, why didn't Sylvie notify Jacques immediately that she was pregnant with his child? If I were Jacques, and Sylvie had not notified me immediately that she was pregnant with my child, I would have been infuriated with her. I think that in this situation, the father has a right to know. Also, I was flabbergasted when I saw that Jacques was trying to drop the baby off with his mother in the south of France.
It's not that I am appalled by every character that has personality flaws. On the contrary, I always laugh when I watch the American sitcom Seinfeld. However, it was tough for me to laugh while watching this movie because of the fact that Jacques and Sylvie treated affairs pertaining to their child with such neglect.
I was wondering if this aspect of the movie struck the same negative nerve with any of you. I suspect that it didn't, but would any of you agree that the movie would have been more complete and satisfying if Jacques and Sylvie had a serious discussion about Marie's future and discussed what role they would each play in it? I believe that this enhancement could have been made without changing the genre of the movie from comedy to drama.
Allan: you raise a very interesting point. I think in both movies Jacques/ Jack is struggling in his relationship with Sylvie... he doesn't quite know what he wants or should do about Marie, but he obviously still cares about both of them.
(In the French film we see Jacques stopping by Sylvie's appartment to give her flowers and getting enraged at the babysitter's treatment of Marie... perhaps it was also his intention then to try to talk to Sylvie about Marie's future.)
I agree, to sit down and talk to one another and have a serious discussion would have been the mature and responsible thing to do. But I think it's part of the storyline that the characters of the parents are not quite grown up and they're confused... they don't know how to handle the situation or communicate fully with one another.
I can definitely understand your being shocked by the neglect portrayed by Sylvie. However, I think both versions of the movies are, in a large part, trying to communicate to their audiences exactly what you were feeling: the sense that parenting is not a small task to be brushed off. By showing how much work it is to care for a child, how much knowledge and patience the men had to learn just to begin to take care of the baby, both movies are demonstrating to their audience the immensity of the task of parenting. I think that by making light of it and showing it in a satirical way, the movies are able to address the serious issue and really make the point in a way that appeals to most people. I personally felt, at the end of both films, an overpowering feeling that I am NOT prepared to take on the responsibility of parenting at this point in my life, and that it really showed me that while parenting is probably the most rewarding experience one can have in life, it can also be the most difficult. I kept thinking to myself every time Marie started crying again, "Oh man, I am so glad that it's not me taking care of that baby, it's just SO much work!"
Reading Jen's post made think of an scene in the american version, that does not happen in the french version, which is very good (something positive for the american version, at last). When Peter asks his girlfriend, whose name I don't remember at this moment, to take care of the baby, she looks surprised and says something like "not because I am woman I have to know instantaneously how to take care of babies, you know as much as I do".
This stereotype shows up more in the american version, and I was trying to link it with the little I know about birth rate in France, which is sort of low, and the ads from the government that I once saw trying to incentivate people to have children. Do woman in France find that taking care of a baby interfere in their careers? Can they smoothly go back to work after a few months?
According to the IMDB (imdb.com) was THE highest grossing film in the US during 1987, taking in over 160 million. I remember seeing it in the theaters, actually.
At the time, the three main actors in the American version were the biggest names around. Tom Selleck was wrapping up the very popular TV series, "Magnum, P.I.," while Ted Danson's show, "Cheers," was in its prime. Steve Guttenberg was a natural comic pick, as he had been doing "Police Academy" and other similar films at the time.
As a final note that you may have missed, the film was directed by Leonard Nimoy, a.k.a. Dr. Spock from Star Trek.
As for the French version, I could not find any numbers, but one of the reviews mentioned it was the highest grossing French film in 20 years. According to our prof, the actors in this version had some fame, but acted primarily in art films.
Does anybody have any more info on the French actors?
I agree with most of the commentry so far. The main difference in the storyline was how the American guys try to deal with the drug dealers. There were lots of differences I think between the two films in how the characters treated each other. I also really like the excitement and energy of the French characters.
Allen: Moi aussi je me suis posée quelques-unes de tes questions. Je me disais que les personnages prenaient tout à la légère et ne pensaient pas vraiment aux conséquences. Car ce n'est pas vraiment une situation normale qu'un petit enfant change de 'parent' toutes les semaines selon l'humeur des adultes.
Le fait qu'ils n'aient jamais vraiment discuté de leur enfant, est à mon avis parce qu'ils n'avaient rien à se dire. Je pense que Sylvie et Jacques, dans les deux films, n'ont pas eu une relation sérieuse qui durait quelque temps. Quand tu les vois dans le film tu as l'impression qu'ils ne se connaissaient même pas avant, que surtout Jacques a du mal à se souvenir d'elle. Vu le nombre de femmes qu'il a eu, c'est pas vraiment étonnant...
Je me suis demandé si ce film essayé vraiment de faire passer un message. Quelques personnes ont déjà dit que le but était peut-être de faire comprendre aux gens que tout n'est pas si facile avec un bébé, que tout le monde n'est pas prêt d'assumer. Mais je trouve que tout a été montré d'un côté assez positif, embelli de façon assez naïve et irréaliste.
Je me suis dit, qu'après tout, ce n'était qu'un film qui devait faire sourire plutôt que réfléchir. Car montrez moi l'enfant un enfant 'normal' élevé de cette manière-là...
Hi, Personally, I enjoyed both movies. I am not the most critical person when it comes to movies. Although the scope and focus of both movies were different, they were both fun to watch. I know they tried to dramatize the American movie and tried to make it funnier, but that is what the American audience is looking for in movies. I think we shouldn't lose track of that. The fact that it was highest grossing film in 1987 shows that it was a major success in the US. After all, films are made to make money, and the directors of the movies will do whatever it takes to make more money and I think they succeeded.
I think the biggest difference between the movies is that in the American movies, everything is idealized. Everything goes smoothly as planned without any distractions. For example, the three men didn't miss a day in work as a result of the baby. The movie showed that they went to work and took the baby with them. Therefore, they didn't really lose anything with the presence of the baby. On the other hand, in the French movie, they missed so many days of work as a result. This also goes back to the previous forum when we talked about an "ideal job" and how it is different between the US and France.
Another difference I thought was important is that when the baby left the three men in the American movie, they ran after her on the following day. In the French movie, they partied for a few days before really missing her and agonizing over her. This also goes back to the idealism the American movie portrays.
I want to comment on the music in each of these films and how I think it reflects some of the differences between the French and American versions. I think the American version of this film does not exist outside the storyline. We don't get to know the characters at all, and we don't really care. The movie is meant to be amusing, not to have any substance. Like the movie, the music also lacks substance. The 80's music in this movie was barely popular in the 80's. Listening to it now makes scenes, which are not intentionally humorous seem like a complete joke.
In contrast, the French version is not so much about plot as it is about questioning the way one lives life and about admitting to faults. I think these are timeless issues, and they are appropriately paired with timeless music. The opening music for the party scene is Jazz and the rest is Classical. In a conversation with Michel, after Marie has left, Jacques, seemingly the most shallow of the three, asks, "What do you live for because, I don't know what I live for anymore." And in another scene with Jacques and the x-policeman, Jacques says that if he had to start all over again, he would make Adam from Eve's rib, not the other way around. Jacques, for as much of an egocentric pig he was at the beginning of the movie, has become someone who is reevaluating his life, and admitting to his flaws. While the film is still a comedy, it deals with serious issues and I think these are better accompanied by music, which is more heartfelt than popular.
pour en revenir à la question de Suzanne, je voudrais dire ici qu'un bon film français est généralement un film comique et parle de questions existentielles avec beaucoup d'humour. Pas etonnant que Trois Hommes et un couffin soit un des plus gros succès français de tous les temps!!! Les français ne sont pas comme les américains : ils ne cherchent pas l'action et les effets spéciaux. Le récents flops de l'échange avec Russell Crowe en est une illustration flagrante.
Pour revenir sur les réactions un peu "immatures" et irresponsables des deux parents de la petite Marie, je pense que c'est un point qui a été délibérément accentué par le réalisateur et ce pour plusieurs raison. Déjà, il ne faut pas oublier que c'est une comédie et que donc c'est complètement irréaliste. Si Sylvie n'abandonnait pas sa petite fille (ce qui serait plus que probable dans la "vraie vie"), il n'y aurait plus de film. C'est justement le manque de crédibilité de ce point de départ qui fait que le film est drole. En plus, dans la version française, le coté "célibataire endurci" des trois personnages masculin est très exagéré. Je pense que le réalisateur a voulu monter que tous les hommes, à un moment ou à un autre de leur vie, ont envie d'être père, de fonder un famille, même s'ils n'osent pas se l'avouer.
Il ne faut pas oublier que le filme français n'est pas très récent, et que jusqu'à il n'y a pas si longtemps, le rôle du père n'était pas très valorisé. S'occuper d'un petit bébé était sensé être un travail de femme et le père n'intervenait que plus tard dans l'éducation de l'enfant. Je pense que cela explique les réactions assez négatives des trois hommes lorque le bébé arrive ("j'ai autre chose à faire que m'occuper d'un nourrisson") ainsi que le fait de ne pas vouloir montrer aux autres leur affection pour le bébé (parce que ça ne ferait pas très viril). En fait les trois personnages sont montés comme des machos typiques (un peu caricaturaux même). Maintenant c'est beaucoup plus courant et mieux accepté pour un homme de s'occuper d'un bébé. Probablement que si le film était refait de nos jours, la scène de la pharmacie serait supprimée. Cela paraîtrait un peu "gros" qu'un homme ne sache même pas ce qu'on donne à manger à un nourrisson ou quelle taille de couche il faut prendre. J'aimerais savoir si aux Etats-Unis le fait qu'un père s'occupe de son bébé, le change, lui donne son biberon etc était considéré comme tout à fait normal lorsque "Three Men and a Baby" a été tourné. Et maintenant ? Est-ce que le fait que les personnages américains soient moins machos (dans la façon dont ils parlent des femmes, par exemple, ils sont moins vulgaires que dans la version française) reflète la réalité?
Thank you for your anwer. I really enjoyed _Trois Hommes et un Couffin_. In agreement with what you said, that movie and other French movies I've seen tend to make me reflect more deeply about some aspect of life.
A few comments I think it's really interesting that you mention the French view of the role of the father changing noticeably since the mid-eighties. I have to say that I think the American view of a father's role changed most somewhere in the late 60's or 70's,
maybe
into the early 80's. I doubt, however, that it has changed much since 1987, so the American movie originated from a time with a fairly current view. I think it's particularly interesting because some of us in this French class thought that the French version was much older than 1985! Perhaps to some extent we thought the French version was older because the view of father parenting in the French version (that seemed to be expressed particularly in the French dinner scene) reflected the American view from decades prior to 1980.
Je voudrais répondre à Prune en ce qui concerne le rôle du père. C'est complètement vrai qu'il tend à se valoriser au fil des ans avec l'apparition effective d'une vraie égalité des rôles dans la famille. Et aussi que la scène de la pharmacie est largement exagérée, sans doute dans un but comique. En revanche, il me semble assez logique que le personnage qui va à la pharmacie (je crois qu'il s'agit de Pierre), étant célibataire endurci pas du tout prêt à assumer un enfant, sache à peine dans quel sens prendre le bébé dans ses bras... Je me souviens avoir lu sur ce forum un commentaire d'une fille disant "ce n'est pas parce que je suis une femme que je sais m'occuper d'un bébé". Un homme n'a aucune raison de savoir s'occuper d'enfants en bas-âge, sauf s'il l'a déjà vu faire auparavant (petits frères et soeurs, etc...) . Surtout que la responsabilité est énorme ! Si j'avais du aller à la pharmacie, je n'aurais pas fait de cirque pour les couches, mais pour le biberon, je me serais renseigné avec attention...
Bonjour, J'arrive avec un peu de retard mais je tenais juste à dire qu'il ne faut pas être hostile au remake : Je trouve que c'est une idée préconçue !! Si il arrive que cela soit parfois vrai comme on peut le constater amérement avec "l'adpation" américaine des Visiteurs ! Cependant d'autres fimls on étaient d'aprés moi bien réutilisé sur le fond et la forme(un exemple qui ne doit pas tenir lieu de référence est pas exemple le remake du film "la Totale") En ce qui concerne les deux films je préfére la version française : je trouve que les effets comiques sont meilleurs peut être à cause des acteurs ?? Salut Yoann
Like Yoann, I actually preferred the French humor. It was the laid back, I-think-of-it-again-and-I-chuckle-to-myself type humor, rather than the uproarious which was characteristic of the american version.
Talking about subtle humor, did anyone notice how the men were all topless when Sylvie brings Marie back to the men? There was something about the expression on their faces and their bare chests that makes one feel like cracking up...or maybe it's just me :)
Discussion
Salut à tous les étudiants du MIT!
Les scénario sont relativement similaires, sauf sur un point: alors que les Français se contentent de rendre la drogue, les héros Américains eux vont jusqu'à faire le boulot de la police en leur présentant les dealers prisonnier et les preuves qui vont avec. Quand on a regardé la version américaine en classe, il y a eu a ce moment qulques sourires et des remarques du genre "encore une fois, ils ne peuvent pas s'empêcher de sauver le monde!" Est-ce que les films américains doivent avoir un "happy en" complet pour être appréciés? En France, on aurait trouvé cela "trop gros" pour être crédible. Il est vrai que la relation avec les forces de l'ordre ne sont pas les mêmes. Les héros américains veulent rétablir la vérité et rendre justice alors que les garçons français se contentent de sauver leur peau, sans se méler de ce qu'ils considèrent les affaires des autres. Ils bernent la police, tout comme le font les traficants. Mais cela ne nous empêche pas de les apprécier, on les considèrent comme malins et débrouillards. Ils prouvent leur ruse non pas en piégeant les "méchants", mais en trompant la police par une cachette innocente, la couche dans une poubelle. Est-ce que vous les voyez comme des personnes malhonnêtes, et qui ainsi n'attirent pas la sympathie? Une autre remarque concernent la présence des armes à feu. A la première alerte, le dealer sort un flingue, alors qu'il n'est absolument pas en danger et qu'il a en face de lui un homme désarmé et un bébé. Il n'y a pas de trace d'armes dans la version française. Est-ce pour rendre la scène plus dramatique, ou est-ce que ce comportement vous parait compréhensible? de manière générale, il y a plus d'action dans la version américaine (course poursuite en voiture, concierge ligotée, musique dramatique), qui cherche à tenir le spectateur en haleine. Enfin une dernière remarque sur les achats des couches et du lait. Le Français va à la pharmacie pour trouver la personne compétente, alors que l'Américain est sûr de trouver de l'aide en cas de besoin et va donc au supermarché. J'ai déjà évoqué le rôle de conseil et d'écoute qu'ont les pharmacies en France dans le forum sondage. Avez-vous un tel concept aux Etats-Unis?
A bientôt, Sophie
Quelques différences entre ces deux films rappellent certains points déjà évoqués dans les forums. Ainsi, comme l'a souligné Sophie, l'image qui est donnée de la police n'est pas la même: alors que du côté français, elle était plutôt ridiculisée, du côté américain, les personnages se mettent de son côté pour rétablir l'ordre. Et puis je n'ai pas pu m'empêcher de penser à tous les messages d'américains nous faisant remarquer que les français n'expriment pas leurs sentiments... il n'y a qu'à voir ces deux films pour constater cette énorme différence culturelle. D'un côté, les "papas" ralent parce qu'ils ont "autre chose à faire que torcher un nourisson", ont honte d'être vus en train de cajoler Marie, disent être soulagés de la voir partir... alors que tout dans leur attitude montre qu'ils en sont fous et qu'elle leur manque terriblement. Dans le film américain, par contre, il n'y a aucun ambiguité: ils en sont fous, un point c'est tout, et au cas où on ne l'aurait pas bien compris, les personnages le répètent régulièrement. Un autre élément disparaît dans la version américaine: les trois hommes n'ont pas l'air si traumatisés que ça par l'arrivée du bébé: le chamboulement de leur vie et la nouvelle organisation due à Marie sont plus longtemps observés dans la version française, Jacques y est aussi plus convaincant dans son caractère d'égoïste et met plus de temps à s'intéresser à sa fille. Sinon, j'ai bien aimé les deux concierges: la française était très typée, quant à l'américaine, je ne sais pas, mais on voyait bien qu'il ne s'agissait pas du même pays.
Hi.
I think that the American version of the film is a lot more dramatic than the French. As Sophie says, the Americans always try to "save the world". For example, the three men, instead of just saving themselves by giving the drugs to the dealers directly without police interference or knowledge, they go about doing the "right thing", exposing the drugs and the men to the police. Another example of a "dramatic" and storybook ending is the final scenes. The Americans added the scene where the men rush to the airport to try and catch Sylvia. Then in the very end, they ask Sylvia to live with them - a very ideal and unrealistic ending.
Genevieve
Hi there,
I agree with sophie about the happy ending of the American film. The three men turned out heros because they caught the bad guys. The French film is more realistic in that they don't go through all that trouble.
I wanted to add that in the American film, Peter is really into excercising. He goes jogging and has a machine to work out at home. In the French film we see nothing like this. This was probalby appealing to the American ideal of a rich successful, character who cares about the way he looks.
Carlos
Je dois dire que j'ai été assez déçu par la version américaine qui est trop commerciale à mon goût. En effet, on est agacé dès le début par le générique qui met bien 5 minutes alors que dans la version française on entre de plein pied dans l'histoire.
Je trouve de plus que la version américaine fait la part belle à l'action dans un film qui se veut originellement comique. C'est dommage!!! Pas mal de gags présent dans la version française ont été ainsi escamotés.
Je noterai également que la relation des 3 hommes avec l'enfant diverge sensiblement en fonction des versions. Dans la version française, les 3 hommes en ont ras le bol de l'enfant: ils ne peuvent plus sortir ni travailler .... Je n'ai pas vu cela dans la version américaine.
A bientôt, Joel
Salut a tous
I want to add to the comments that my perception of the american version is that very homogeneous. I didn't find the same difference in personality as in the French version. The characters of the control freek, the naive dumb, and the selfish playboy were really distinguished in the french version, while in the american version the three guys had a little bit of everything.
Another two things that I found very particular in the French version was the screaming, and the cigarrette. I found the scene where Pierre screams to the babysitter very representative of the French culture. And in the french version the characters smoke in their rooms, while in the american version we saw a the characters care for their fitness
Regarding the pharmaceutical help, I think that is one of the pitfalls in the american version. Here people don't talk to you that much, at least not on their own initiative!!
A bientot
Carolina
Bonjour à tous!
J'ai l'impression que les trois garçons américains sont plus aisés que les français. L'appartement, situé en centre ville est plus grand, plus moderne, plus lumineux. Ils ont des appareils de musculation, un billard, un jukebox, font appel à des serveur pour leur soirée... Dans la version françaises, on a l'impression que les garçon louent l'appart en commun pour ne pas avoir de charges exorbitantes, alors que dans la version américaine, ils pourraient s'en sortir seuls mais préfèrent vivre ensemble.
A bientôt, Sophie
Hi,
I think it's interesting that the French and English films were strikingly different in that they focused on different elements of the storyline. I think it would be safe to assume that directors and script writers pander to their audience, so the French film is as much of a reflection of French culture as the American film is of American culture.
Since the creation of special effects like in StarWars, I think Americans go to the theaters to see unbelievable and imaginative things. We expect to see the glamor and glory of Hollywood on the big screen. Just by looking at the settings in the two movies, we can easily see that the American movie probably costed a lot more to make, and the setting was much more modern.
Whereas the American film tried to hype up the drug subplot -- the action and adventure we all seek in James Bond movies, the French version emphasized the growing relationships between the three men and the baby. I think this is analogous to Chinese films, too. Chinese films don't have the large sums of money like American films to make extraordinary (special effects-wise) scenes. Hence, they focus more on human interactions rather than explosions and car chases.
Gary
I would like to agree with Gary in that the primary motive of each film was very different. The French version focused on the characters, their interrelationships and how they changed as time went by. On the contrary, little or no attention was given to the evolution of the American characters and we see ourselves involved in a ludicrous subplot of normal people going against drug dealers and making a fool of the police.
As Carolina mentioned, it seems that the American audience needs this type of action sequence; otherwise they feel the movie is not up to their normal standards. Too bad because sometimes simple acting can be much more appealing.
Hi everyone,
I was wondering if anyone knew how popular the American movie "Three Men and a Baby" was here when it came out. I didn't think it to be a particularly funny or moving movie.
One thing I noticed on the video jacket for "Three Men and a Baby" was a summary that noted that the movie had "three of Hollywood's hottest stars." I think this influenced what the movie emphasized: it emphasized action, the hot stars, and the successful lifestyle of the characters. The interpersonal relationships were de-emphasized compared to the French film, in my opinion.
What do you think is the French recipe for a great movie? (In the US it is usually Action + Hot Stars + maybe some Sex or Love Interest.)
Suzanne
So far, I pretty much agree with what has been said about the two movies. The French movie had better acting, more character development, and a more realistic story. The American version had showy actors, fancy sets, and lots of, in my opinion, stupid action scenes.
I found the American movie very disappointing, especially since the French movie was pretty good. It is all the more surprising that (if I can remember properly) "Three Men and a Baby" was very popular here when it came out. I was very young then, but I remember people talking about it, so I assume it was pretty popular (the kind of thing everyone saw even if they didn't all like it).
I disagree with Sophie when she says that the French characters didn't appear wealthy. While they were not the opulent, showy, obvious millionaires found in the American movie, their appartment was still rather large, and they hosted small, but formal dinner parties. Perhaps this is more common for the upper middle classes in France, but in the US, such parties are thought of as a thing for the rich. Not all of the characters were individually wealthy, but the French men seemed to spend what they earned on parties and a nice appartment, and their lifestyle was certainly above mere middle class. Jacques, obviously, didn't have much money. He was a steward worried about paying next month's rent. Pierre, however, was a lawyer, and thus probably somewhat rich, and Michel didn't complain much about financial worries, so I made the assumption that he was at least comfortable.
Are the dinner parties shown in the French movie something that middle-class people may host? The American parties were certainly the kind only thrown by rich megalomaniacs. What are social gatherings like for working people in France? Are dinner gatherings common? Do they often require formal dress (or at least suits and dresses)?
-Dina
Hi dear MIT students!
J'ai préféré le film français, j'ai trouvé qu'il était beaucoup plus amusant que le film américain. Par leurs simples gestes et mouvements, les acteurs réussissent à faire rire les spectateurs. J'ai aussi l'impression que le film américain était plus cher, c'est-à-dire, qu'ils ont utilisé plus de moyens. Ce que j'aime bien avec les films français est qu'avec très peu de moyens, ils réussissent à faire de très bons films(voir dîner de cons, où l'intégralité du film se joue dans une seule pièce pratiquement et qui a connu un succès fou). Je crois qu'on général, les Américains aiment les grandes productions et le spectaculaire. Je ne dis pas que je n'aime pas ça, mais dans ce cas particulier, j'ai préféré le modèle français.
L'histoire, en français ou en américain, est irréaliste comme tout, ça c'est hors de discussion.
A bientôt. Maud
I believe the main difference between the events in the story occur because of changes made by American Hollywood. In the American version, the Jack, Michael and Peter help the police catch the drug dealers for an added moment of action and excitement, typical of American films. Whereas in the American version, the lady staying with Peter leaves when she hears the three men singing to the baby, but in the Amercian version the women is Peter's semi-girlfriend Rebecca, and she laughs whole-heartedly. In the Ameican version, there is an interlude with music after the drug dealers are arrested and the baby is saved. The men take the baby to the park and the women chase after the men and then to the swimming pool for lessons. This is all very dramatized for American made Hollywood movies.
Dear Maud,
I agree with you. I believe the French version of the film is much more funny than the American version. It seems that Hollywood chose to make the film more dramatic and visual than humorous. Many American films are very expensive and have very little dialog. Fortunately there are enough film producesr outside of Hollywood. I believe America does make many very good, intelligent, smaller budget films.
Ashley
Bonjour,
I pretty much agree with all the points that have been made in this forum. The French movie is definitely superior to the American movie in many ways.
Although I enjoyed watching the French movie, I was very upset with how irresposible the parents of the baby were in both movies. In fact, we never see Jacques and Sylvie sit down and have a frank and serious discussion about Marie. This upset me greatly because I think that parenting is one of the most important tasks anyone can have in life. I know that this movie was supposed to be a comedy, but the irresponsibility of the parents was so appalling to me that it prevented me from laughing at the funny scenes.
For instance, why didn't Sylvie notify Jacques immediately that she was pregnant with his child? If I were Jacques, and Sylvie had not notified me immediately that she was pregnant with my child, I would have been infuriated with her. I think that in this situation, the father has a right to know. Also, I was flabbergasted when I saw that Jacques was trying to drop the baby off with his mother in the south of France.
It's not that I am appalled by every character that has personality flaws. On the contrary, I always laugh when I watch the American sitcom Seinfeld. However, it was tough for me to laugh while watching this movie because of the fact that Jacques and Sylvie treated affairs pertaining to their child with such neglect.
I was wondering if this aspect of the movie struck the same negative nerve with any of you. I suspect that it didn't, but would any of you agree that the movie would have been more complete and satisfying if Jacques and Sylvie had a serious discussion about Marie's future and discussed what role they would each play in it? I believe that this enhancement could have been made without changing the genre of the movie from comedy to drama.
Allan.
Hi,
Allan: you raise a very interesting point. I think in both movies Jacques/ Jack is struggling in his relationship with Sylvie... he doesn't quite know what he wants or should do about Marie, but he obviously still cares about both of them.
(In the French film we see Jacques stopping by Sylvie's appartment to give her flowers and getting enraged at the babysitter's treatment of Marie... perhaps it was also his intention then to try to talk to Sylvie about Marie's future.)
I agree, to sit down and talk to one another and have a serious discussion would have been the mature and responsible thing to do. But I think it's part of the storyline that the characters of the parents are not quite grown up and they're confused... they don't know how to handle the situation or communicate fully with one another.
Suzanne
Hi Allan,
I can definitely understand your being shocked by the neglect portrayed by Sylvie. However, I think both versions of the movies are, in a large part, trying to communicate to their audiences exactly what you were feeling: the sense that parenting is not a small task to be brushed off. By showing how much work it is to care for a child, how much knowledge and patience the men had to learn just to begin to take care of the baby, both movies are demonstrating to their audience the immensity of the task of parenting. I think that by making light of it and showing it in a satirical way, the movies are able to address the serious issue and really make the point in a way that appeals to most people. I personally felt, at the end of both films, an overpowering feeling that I am NOT prepared to take on the responsibility of parenting at this point in my life, and that it really showed me that while parenting is probably the most rewarding experience one can have in life, it can also be the most difficult. I kept thinking to myself every time Marie started crying again, "Oh man, I am so glad that it's not me taking care of that baby, it's just SO much work!"
-Jen
Hi all,
Reading Jen's post made think of an scene in the american version, that does not happen in the french version, which is very good (something positive for the american version, at last). When Peter asks his girlfriend, whose name I don't remember at this moment, to take care of the baby, she looks surprised and says something like "not because I am woman I have to know instantaneously how to take care of babies, you know as much as I do".
This stereotype shows up more in the american version, and I was trying to link it with the little I know about birth rate in France, which is sort of low, and the ads from the government that I once saw trying to incentivate people to have children. Do woman in France find that taking care of a baby interfere in their careers? Can they smoothly go back to work after a few months?
Carolina
RE: #10
According to the IMDB (imdb.com) was THE highest grossing film in the US during 1987, taking in over 160 million. I remember seeing it in the theaters, actually.
At the time, the three main actors in the American version were the biggest names around. Tom Selleck was wrapping up the very popular TV series, "Magnum, P.I.," while Ted Danson's show, "Cheers," was in its prime. Steve Guttenberg was a natural comic pick, as he had been doing "Police Academy" and other similar films at the time.
As a final note that you may have missed, the film was directed by Leonard Nimoy, a.k.a. Dr. Spock from Star Trek.
As for the French version, I could not find any numbers, but one of the reviews mentioned it was the highest grossing French film in 20 years. According to our prof, the actors in this version had some fame, but acted primarily in art films.
Does anybody have any more info on the French actors?
I agree with most of the commentry so far. The main difference in the storyline was how the American guys try to deal with the drug dealers. There were lots of differences I think between the two films in how the characters treated each other. I also really like the excitement and energy of the French characters.
Hi Dear MIT students!
Allen: Moi aussi je me suis posée quelques-unes de tes questions. Je me disais que les personnages prenaient tout à la légère et ne pensaient pas vraiment aux conséquences. Car ce n'est pas vraiment une situation normale qu'un petit enfant change de 'parent' toutes les semaines selon l'humeur des adultes.
Le fait qu'ils n'aient jamais vraiment discuté de leur enfant, est à mon avis parce qu'ils n'avaient rien à se dire. Je pense que Sylvie et Jacques, dans les deux films, n'ont pas eu une relation sérieuse qui durait quelque temps. Quand tu les vois dans le film tu as l'impression qu'ils ne se connaissaient même pas avant, que surtout Jacques a du mal à se souvenir d'elle. Vu le nombre de femmes qu'il a eu, c'est pas vraiment étonnant...
Je me suis demandé si ce film essayé vraiment de faire passer un message. Quelques personnes ont déjà dit que le but était peut-être de faire comprendre aux gens que tout n'est pas si facile avec un bébé, que tout le monde n'est pas prêt d'assumer. Mais je trouve que tout a été montré d'un côté assez positif, embelli de façon assez naïve et irréaliste.
Je me suis dit, qu'après tout, ce n'était qu'un film qui devait faire sourire plutôt que réfléchir. Car montrez moi l'enfant un enfant 'normal' élevé de cette manière-là...
@+
Maud
Hi, Personally, I enjoyed both movies. I am not the most critical person when it comes to movies. Although the scope and focus of both movies were different, they were both fun to watch. I know they tried to dramatize the American movie and tried to make it funnier, but that is what the American audience is looking for in movies. I think we shouldn't lose track of that. The fact that it was highest grossing film in 1987 shows that it was a major success in the US. After all, films are made to make money, and the directors of the movies will do whatever it takes to make more money and I think they succeeded.
I think the biggest difference between the movies is that in the American movies, everything is idealized. Everything goes smoothly as planned without any distractions. For example, the three men didn't miss a day in work as a result of the baby. The movie showed that they went to work and took the baby with them. Therefore, they didn't really lose anything with the presence of the baby. On the other hand, in the French movie, they missed so many days of work as a result. This also goes back to the previous forum when we talked about an "ideal job" and how it is different between the US and France.
Another difference I thought was important is that when the baby left the three men in the American movie, they ran after her on the following day. In the French movie, they partied for a few days before really missing her and agonizing over her. This also goes back to the idealism the American movie portrays.
I want to comment on the music in each of these films and how I think it reflects some of the differences between the French and American versions. I think the American version of this film does not exist outside the storyline. We don't get to know the characters at all, and we don't really care. The movie is meant to be amusing, not to have any substance. Like the movie, the music also lacks substance. The 80's music in this movie was barely popular in the 80's. Listening to it now makes scenes, which are not intentionally humorous seem like a complete joke.
In contrast, the French version is not so much about plot as it is about questioning the way one lives life and about admitting to faults. I think these are timeless issues, and they are appropriately paired with timeless music. The opening music for the party scene is Jazz and the rest is Classical. In a conversation with Michel, after Marie has left, Jacques, seemingly the most shallow of the three, asks, "What do you live for because, I don't know what I live for anymore." And in another scene with Jacques and the x-policeman, Jacques says that if he had to start all over again, he would make Adam from Eve's rib, not the other way around. Jacques, for as much of an egocentric pig he was at the beginning of the movie, has become someone who is reevaluating his life, and admitting to his flaws. While the film is still a comedy, it deals with serious issues and I think these are better accompanied by music, which is more heartfelt than popular.
Salut tout le monde!!!
pour en revenir à la question de Suzanne, je voudrais dire ici qu'un bon film français est généralement un film comique et parle de questions existentielles avec beaucoup d'humour. Pas etonnant que Trois Hommes et un couffin soit un des plus gros succès français de tous les temps!!! Les français ne sont pas comme les américains : ils ne cherchent pas l'action et les effets spéciaux. Le récents flops de l'échange avec Russell Crowe en est une illustration flagrante.
A +
Bonjour à tous,
Pour revenir sur les réactions un peu "immatures" et irresponsables des deux parents de la petite Marie, je pense que c'est un point qui a été délibérément accentué par le réalisateur et ce pour plusieurs raison. Déjà, il ne faut pas oublier que c'est une comédie et que donc c'est complètement irréaliste. Si Sylvie n'abandonnait pas sa petite fille (ce qui serait plus que probable dans la "vraie vie"), il n'y aurait plus de film. C'est justement le manque de crédibilité de ce point de départ qui fait que le film est drole. En plus, dans la version française, le coté "célibataire endurci" des trois personnages masculin est très exagéré. Je pense que le réalisateur a voulu monter que tous les hommes, à un moment ou à un autre de leur vie, ont envie d'être père, de fonder un famille, même s'ils n'osent pas se l'avouer.
Il ne faut pas oublier que le filme français n'est pas très récent, et que jusqu'à il n'y a pas si longtemps, le rôle du père n'était pas très valorisé. S'occuper d'un petit bébé était sensé être un travail de femme et le père n'intervenait que plus tard dans l'éducation de l'enfant. Je pense que cela explique les réactions assez négatives des trois hommes lorque le bébé arrive ("j'ai autre chose à faire que m'occuper d'un nourrisson") ainsi que le fait de ne pas vouloir montrer aux autres leur affection pour le bébé (parce que ça ne ferait pas très viril). En fait les trois personnages sont montés comme des machos typiques (un peu caricaturaux même). Maintenant c'est beaucoup plus courant et mieux accepté pour un homme de s'occuper d'un bébé. Probablement que si le film était refait de nos jours, la scène de la pharmacie serait supprimée. Cela paraîtrait un peu "gros" qu'un homme ne sache même pas ce qu'on donne à manger à un nourrisson ou quelle taille de couche il faut prendre. J'aimerais savoir si aux Etats-Unis le fait qu'un père s'occupe de son bébé, le change, lui donne son biberon etc était considéré comme tout à fait normal lorsque "Three Men and a Baby" a été tourné. Et maintenant ? Est-ce que le fait que les personnages américains soient moins machos (dans la façon dont ils parlent des femmes, par exemple, ils sont moins vulgaires que dans la version française) reflète la réalité?
Merci
Prune
Dear Joel,
Thank you for your anwer. I really enjoyed _Trois Hommes et un Couffin_. In agreement with what you said, that movie and other French movies I've seen tend to make me reflect more deeply about some aspect of life.
Suzanne
Hi Prune,
A few comments I think it's really interesting that you mention the French view of the role of the father changing noticeably since the mid-eighties. I have to say that I think the American view of a father's role changed most somewhere in the late 60's or 70's,
maybe
into the early 80's. I doubt, however, that it has changed much since 1987, so the American movie originated from a time with a fairly current view. I think it's particularly interesting because some of us in this French class thought that the French version was much older than 1985! Perhaps to some extent we thought the French version was older because the view of father parenting in the French version (that seemed to be expressed particularly in the French dinner scene) reflected the American view from decades prior to 1980.
-Jen
Bonjour à tous,
Je voudrais répondre à Prune en ce qui concerne le rôle du père. C'est complètement vrai qu'il tend à se valoriser au fil des ans avec l'apparition effective d'une vraie égalité des rôles dans la famille. Et aussi que la scène de la pharmacie est largement exagérée, sans doute dans un but comique. En revanche, il me semble assez logique que le personnage qui va à la pharmacie (je crois qu'il s'agit de Pierre), étant célibataire endurci pas du tout prêt à assumer un enfant, sache à peine dans quel sens prendre le bébé dans ses bras... Je me souviens avoir lu sur ce forum un commentaire d'une fille disant "ce n'est pas parce que je suis une femme que je sais m'occuper d'un bébé". Un homme n'a aucune raison de savoir s'occuper d'enfants en bas-âge, sauf s'il l'a déjà vu faire auparavant (petits frères et soeurs, etc...) . Surtout que la responsabilité est énorme ! Si j'avais du aller à la pharmacie, je n'aurais pas fait de cirque pour les couches, mais pour le biberon, je me serais renseigné avec attention...
A bientôt,
Clad
Bonjour, J'arrive avec un peu de retard mais je tenais juste à dire qu'il ne faut pas être hostile au remake : Je trouve que c'est une idée préconçue !! Si il arrive que cela soit parfois vrai comme on peut le constater amérement avec "l'adpation" américaine des Visiteurs ! Cependant d'autres fimls on étaient d'aprés moi bien réutilisé sur le fond et la forme(un exemple qui ne doit pas tenir lieu de référence est pas exemple le remake du film "la Totale") En ce qui concerne les deux films je préfére la version française : je trouve que les effets comiques sont meilleurs peut être à cause des acteurs ?? Salut Yoann
Hello,
Like Yoann, I actually preferred the French humor. It was the laid back, I-think-of-it-again-and-I-chuckle-to-myself type humor, rather than the uproarious which was characteristic of the american version.
Talking about subtle humor, did anyone notice how the men were all topless when Sylvie brings Marie back to the men? There was something about the expression on their faces and their bare chests that makes one feel like cracking up...or maybe it's just me :)
Chidinma