El misterio del cuarto amarillo

Gaston Leroux's "The Mystery of the Yellow Room" ("Le mystère de la chambre jaune") is probably the most famous of all locked room mysteries but also one of the earliest examples of this particular type of "who-dunnits". As the novel was originally published in 1908, it is significant enough to note that the novel has been published few decades before the so called "Golden Age" of detective stories. It is equally worth noting that the story is mostly in accordance with rules of the genre codified by Ronald Knox in 1929. Leroux's story only breaks one of those rules, but this is one of those rare occasions where it simply doesn't matter. The importance of the story is also evident, when we know it has been selected as the best "locked room mystery" by detective story readers on numerous occasions, only alternating places with John Dickson Carr's locked room mystery masterpiece "The Hollow Man" (which amazingly has never been made into film). "The Mystery of the Yellow Room" was interestingly the absolute favourite of John Dickson Carr, who undeniably is the master of the locked room mysteries, and Carr often said that Leroux's novel influenced him the most, always making him to push solutions of the locked room mystery to the limits because of the sheer simple brilliance of the solution in Leroux's novel, even it is far from being "simple".

This 2003 film version is the 6th time the classic mystery novel has been made into film, and by far the best on this reviewers opinion, as long as what it comes to how faithfully Leroux's plot is being followed. The story pace is somewhat slow from the start, and doesn't seem to gather up just enough steam until we get to the end climax, and the long awaited solution - where the pace actually turns into rapid cuts and flashbacks alternating with the past and presence due to the requirements to portray the solution in such way that it maintains the needed undivided attention of the viewer. It's also worth mentioning that a viewer who doesn't know the solution, is during the movie given all the important clues and hints needed to solve the crime by themselves, or at least enables one to have suspicions in the right direction if you are an experienced viewer (or reader) of the genre, however even then, most viewers will still be stunned out of their socks upon learning the solution.

There are number of very perceptive scenes in this movie, setting a lighthearted atmosphere, almost like director doesn't want the viewer taking the story too seriously from the very start. An example of this is the opening title scene, with a toy train going on one incredibly long track for the duration of the opening, only to reach the end of the tracks as the actual movie begins to reveal another hilarious scene with a group of gentlemen passengers reading their newspapers on a train in a synchronised manner as they would in fact being intensely following the narrators voice. Because of these small, yet amusing tidbits, the film does have much lighter feel than Leroux's novel which is in fact quite dark, and reads almost like a horror story.

Director Bruno Podalydès as screenwriter has thankfully chosen to follow the original plot to the letter, which holds this movie together just as it is, somehow distant and elusive at points, but still constantly moving on (like a train indeed), however with slightly inconsistent cinematographic style, which ranges from really good to hastily ill- conceived.

The Director's brother Denis Podalydès plays the lead role as the journalist Joseph Rouletabille in highly commendable way, also doubles in the story as the primary amateur sleuth. His appearance as Rouletabille is curiously close enough to Leroux's description of him being "A small, thin man, endowed with unusually large head". Denis Podalydès manages to pull off his lead role with flying colours, including a charming slight lisp in his french accent. The character of Sainclair (routinely played by Jean-Noël Brouté), slightly dimwitted photographer sidekick of Rouletabille, has remarkable tendency not having any kind of presence in any of the scenes, even he is almost constantly behind, or at the side of Rouletabille. Most of the cast is compiled from some of the best actors that France has to offer, including legendary Michael Lonsdale as the old man Stangerson. But there's not much more really to say about the remaining cast, unless mentioning in the same breath the word "routinely what you would expect".

This movie is well worth watching, not only because of the jaw dropping solution (Interesting even if you don't like "who-dunnits"), but because the movie is just balanced enough, regardless of some minor issues with some of the actors and the earlier mentioned slow pace, which does feel somewhat boring at times, but all together very enjoyable watch and in it's own category a definite must see you just cannot afford to miss.

Gaston Leroux's 'Le mystere de la chambre jaune' is one of the most famous detective novels in the locked-room whodunit genre. Agatha Christie herself considered it the masterpiece of the genre. It has had several screenings, on large and small screens. This one, from Bruno Podalydès, from 2005, has a special charm, because the French director introduced quite a few changes of style and story that at one point but risked diverting the interest from the police intrigue itself. In the end, however, I think he managed to balance cinema with mystery and the result is a pleasant and interesting film.

Many readers and viewers probably know the story, and it is a shame to spoil the pleasure of those who do not know it by telling too much. The intrigue takes place in early 20th century France in a mansion that belongs to an eccentric scientist and to his daughter. A murder attempt takes place and the investigation is entrusted to a famous policeman. A corpse appears a little later. Gaston Leroux aimed to prove that he can write a Sherlock Holmes - like novel and that he can do it even better than Arthur Conan Doyle, so he created the characters of a tenacious journalist and of his photographer who play the roles of private detectives. As most people know the identity of the murderer, the director's attention was more focused on the way the detective story is told than on the story itself.

Bruno Podalydès is an elegant filmmaker, blessed with humor and concerned with style. 'Le mystere de la chambre jaune' (which was followed by 'Le parfum de la dame en noir') was his most ambitious attempt to date in commercial and well-funded cinema. The story in the novel takes place in the first decade of the 20th century, when the book appeared, but the director and screenwriter Podalydès moved it in the 1920s, or at least moved some of the technical and costume details. As in Wes Anderson's films, it is clear that we are being told a story that is not necessarily realistic. Some of the action scenes pay tribute to silent film comedies, and retro-futuristic details such as the solar-powered car add charm. Among the actors I noticed Denis Podalydès, the director's brother, present in almost all his films, and Michael Lonsdale, an actor whom I always enjoy seeing again. 'Le mystere de la chambre jaune' is not a very mysterious film, but it is nice and works quite well in the comic register.

Bizarre mystery crime novel from France

From 1907 onwards, the successful writer Gaston Leroux (1868-1927), who is now best known for "The Phantom of the Opera" (1910), published several crime novels with the reporter Joseph Rouletabille (Denis Poladyles) as a cheeky investigator. "The Yellow Room" is the first case in which Rouletabille's assistant Sainclair (Jean-Noel Broute) is introduced.

The present film by Bruno Poladyles (brother of the main actor) was released in 2003 and was seen in French cinemas by at least 845,693 visitors. Not bad!

The plot itself is very bizarre, tres francais and sometimes lengthy. You have to like that. The spirit of the time in which the events take place is captured well. Great actors from French cinema such as Sabine Azema, Pierre Arditi, Claude Rich, Olivier Gourmet and Michael Lonsdale take part.

Highly recommended for fans of Agatha Christie and Arthur Conan Doyle!

Interesting comical actor direction... But nothing even close to the wit that we can read in the book. Another one of those sad cases where the book, much longer than a 2-hour adaptation would allow, is twice more interesting than the movie. And it's always sad, for someone who read the book before, to notice that they didn't hesitate to remove most of the secondary plot lines, and even change the configuration of the infamous "Yellow Room" (which was very important to the plot).

But my worst worry would be for some of the actors they hired. Father Jacques is played by a man with an accent (what a stupid idea!) and a very bad actor. But even worse is Robert Darzac -- described as elegant and charming in the book, he also wears a mustache... Which he doesn't in the movie. Of course, the movie also forgets to render him as even remotely elegant or charming. And did I mention he's a very bad actor too? Well, maybe he just did what he was asked to do... Then it's probably the director's fault.

Do yourself a favor and read the book. It's excellent (and basically the book that inspired Agatha Christie in her youth), and doesn't need any of these fancy "inventions" that plague the movie.

I saw this movie at a film festival. I had read the book, too. This movie has several qualities: the actors are very good, the setting is typical, and the script is very well done. The storyline is quite good, it's about a journalist trying to outsmart a detective by solving a seemly solutionless crime. The movie added a nice comic touch that the book just didn't have. The clumsy photographer is a good comic relief from the crime/drama part of the movie, and blends well into making the movie so well-balanced. Also, all characters are so unique, so different from each other, that this movie distinguishes itself from many movies where character development is not as important.

All movies have faults though. The plot of this movie is a little far-fetched, and that gets frustrating, because I like to try to guess the outcome of movies when I watch them. Also, some doubts remain at the end about some elements. This could be good, could be bad, depends on what you like to see. So the only person who truly understands everything is Rouletabille, the journalist, and until he tells us, it's virtually impossible to know. It's both suspenseful and irritating.

Overall, pretty good, yet no social involvement or hidden message. Just good old entertainment, for those of you who like crime movies. 8/10