A huge success in France, “one of the worst films” in the United States

Oh Boy... If the film marked an entire generation, it was initially considered humorous and endowed with a certain charm, ending 1994 in 2nd place at the French box office behind Lion King and cashed out $70 million recipes in the world, An Indian in town has received cold welcome in the United States. “Glacial” will even be warm because the critics were so cruel to Hervé Palud’s film. The cast consisted of stars of the time, with Thierry Lhermitte, Patrick Timsit, Miou-Miou and Arielle Dombasle as headliners. Ludwig Briand then plays the adorable Mimi-Siku.

However, the figure of 7 million moviegoers cannot fight the passage of time. This time it’s what makes us grow old very, very fast the film and its gritty tale of an encounter between a cynical businessman and a petty “savage” born in the Amazon. But America did not wait for time to pass to judge him very bad…

“An Indian in town is one of the worst films ever made.

On Rotten tomatoes, An Indian in town showing a Tomatometer of 13% and an Audience Score of 38%. Legendary critic Roger Ebert, writing for the Chicago Sun-Times, did implemented clinically film, opening the text with the final sentence: “An Indian in town is one of the worst films ever made.” The sequel was the same, with killer punchlines, such as:

“An Indian in the City” is a French film (I won’t spoil the good word “comedy” by applying it here. But the film is not in French with English subtitles. It has been dubbed in English, a move that wise, because it is of no interest to anyone who has learned to read.

At the end of his review, he wrote: “There’s a movie called “Fargo” showing in theaters right now. This is a masterpiece. Meet him. If, under any circumstances, you watch “An Indian in the City,” I will forever forbid you from reading my review.” Mass was said. We almost omitted mention of the reaction of his colleague, Gene Siskel, with whom he attended the screening of the truncated final film, due to a missing reel. In their list The 300 worst films of 1996Rogert Ebert and Gene Siskel offer a good second place for the film…

Even if the third reel contained a vein of Orson Welles’ “The Ambersons,” this film would still fall through the cracks.

The American press was unanimous

Same story on the sideAustin Chroniclewhere Marjorie Baumgarten was given a 0/5 and wrote:

Bad idea. Bad movie. (…) If the French hadn’t already invented the word “cliche”, they would have done so for this film.

Janet Maslin, of the prestigious New York Timeshe wrote: “What might have been funny – perhaps nothing – in the French comedy “An Indian in the City” that American audiences could see was disappearing before their eyes. The film is so poorly dubbed into English that it becomes a jarring horror. If the actors, including Thierry Lhermitte, Arielle Dombasle, and Miou-Miou, pretended to display visual signs of kindness and decency, they have now become the rude Americans in the film’s painful audio recording.“

Peter Stacks of San Francisco Chronicle shows itself on a more measured side, overcoming dubbing issues. But he still concluded that “everything goes flat” In the “this incompetent comedy“.James Berardinelli of real reviews diagnosed Hervé Palud’s film as “really stupid” and stated that:

No one, no matter how desperate one is for family entertainment, should accept the indignity of watching this ninety-minute pretend film.

All critics agree on one main point: disastrous English dub. It was done so badly, they even had to sign the death warrant for a film that was considered so bad. This dubbing idea was surprising, and was considered a clumsy public setup for the American remake starring Tim Allen, An Indian in New Yorkfilmed during American distribution An Indian in town and released in 1997. A remake which then ranked first The 300 worst films of 1997 by Ebert and Siskel. When he doesn’t want to…