Why would anyone find it "endearing"? I'd have thought the only criterion here was usefulness.

As luck would have it, I also have a copy of the booklet, and can confirm that Moullet's namechecks either refer to other films on which members of the production team on La Signora di Tutti also worked (especially Ophuls' own later output), or to other, usually later, films that make use of similar motifs. Both seem to me to be entirely legitimate, and indeed very useful in tracing how the same generic motifs (both visual and thematic) appear in other films on both sides of the Atlantic.

Seriously, does anyone else actually find this approach annoying? Here's a sample:

I must admit I'd find it annoying if it carried on like that. I think it's because I'm unfamiliar with the films he's talking about and the effect is quite alienating. He namechecks films in such a throwaway manner as though there's no doubt that his readers have seen them.

If he was talking about If... and brought in Zero De Conduit, O Dreamland and The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner, I personally would not find that as problematic as I have seen all those films and could see the link. I suppose it depends on who he thinks his audience is: newcomers who need to have their interest aroused, or people who already have a good grasp of the subject. It's probably possible to address both types by expanding on the references rather than just tossing them into the mix.

Disclaimer: The above is based purely on the quoted paragraph, not the whole booklet.

If that paragraph is truly indicative of the whole booklet, that could get tiresome fast. If you can make your point without bringing up other films, especially mostly unrelated Ford westerns, than do so. Otherwise things could become needlessly incomprehensible or Armond white-ish. Those sentences could make their point equally as well even if you had erased the references, like so:

Well, I've just filed a review of A Serbian Film, and make no apology for namechecking a couple of other contemporary Serbian films, even though it's overwhelmingly likely that most readers won't have seen them (and probably won't even have heard of them before) - because how else do you encourage them to seek them out? Granted, I restricted my citations to just two, as I only had 600 words total, but I make no apology for trying to broaden people's horizons. Not least because it's easy enough to tune this stuff out if you're not interested.

Using bold letters, Moullet's essay mentions the following films (besides La signora di tutti): Liebelei, La Tosca , Ballerina [Ballerine], Acciaio [Steel], Condottieri [Leaders], The Blue Light [Das blaue Licht], Leave Her to Heaven, Sensualidad [Sensuality], Ruby Gentry, A Star Is Born, Una donna librera [A Free Woman], Mildred Pierce, Stella Dallas, The Strange Woman, The Life of Oharu, The Legend of Lylah Clare, The Star, The Power and the Glory, The Man Shot Liberty Valance, Lola Montes, Madame de..., Gone with the Wind, The Exile, Open City, The Four Hundred Blows, Rebecca, La Ronde and Letter from an Unknown Woman.

With a few exceptions, those films seem to me about ten or twenty times better known that La signora di tutti, so it seems quite reasonable to describe a relatively obscure film by reference to much better known ones (even if, personally, I might find some of the references, like the Liberty Valance one, gratuitous, as I can't see any meaningful relationship between the two, just plot coincidence).

There can't be many people in RossyG's position of having seen La signora di tutti but not Ophuls' two most famous films or Liberty Valance. What audience are we talking about exactly?

Oddly enough, I'm in this position (though I will certainly go through the rest of Ophuls at some point).

I actually saw this on the RHV Italian disc earlier this year (before the MOC edition was announced) and thought the film was a masterpiece. The girl is beautiful. The guys are beautiful or dashing. Everyone is dressed in tux & tie. And poor Gaby--scandal everywhere she goes & she gets nothing of what she wants. Fame & money are empty lies. People want her and . Scene after scene, shot after shot, gesture after gesture are just perfect. Gaby getting excited & walking up the stairs when she's allowed to leave home & attend a party. Gaby in the rowboat. Gaby in the opera box. Gaby freaking out from guilt over Alma when she returns home with Roberto's dad. Gaby & Roberto meeting at the airport & walking & talking. There's just a tremendous beauty in nearly every shot of this film.

It really is a one of a kind movie that could only come out of Ophuls, the 30s, and Italy. Though whether the world it depicts is real or false I don't know. The film itself has this same question at the heart of it: can life live up to our cinematic, commodified dreams of it? Of course not, but is saying that also just another cinematic, commodified dream? Hmmm... and so it goes, round & round like the opening phonograph record until the printing press stops.

As much as the world would want her to be everybody's woman, she can only comply by becoming a celebrity, not by actually fulfilling anybody's real dreams of her.

And how about that final shot:

Watched it a couple of nights ago, although I'll have to give it another go as I was quite tired watching it and dozed off every now and then.
I doubt though that when I do get to watch it, uninterrupted, I'll love it as much as my favourite Ophuls, such as 'Madame De', but its still a film to treasure.
It featured many wonderful trademark Ophuls shots, I particularly loved the scene where she was rowing a boat and he was driving alongside; the car seemed to be gliding on water, and the scene prompted a 'how did he do that', because of the beautifully fluid way it was unveiled.
Theme-wise it reminded me somewhat of Antonioni's underrated 'La signora senza camelie' which, admittedly, is no bad thing

I re-watched this recently and came back to this thread to re-read the discussion and was very, very surprised to see just one post since my initial praise two+ years ago (yojimbo, did you ever go back and watch it in its entirety?). So here I am to bump this up in the hopes that others check it out.

A really, really, really amazing film - a big glossy tragedy among beautiful celebrities. It's like The Carpetbaggers only written by Shakespeare. It's just transcendent. And every single shot is beautiful.

But it seems to have fallen through the cracks. Not that Ophuls has. He certainly has a following but this film isn't on the radar. I mean where is the domestic DVD of it?

Hi Dylan; no, I haven't watched it, since: "so many film, so little time,....etc, etc..."
Its been a while since I've watched any Ophuls, so I might put this one to the head of the Ophuls queue, but I won't be fitting in a re-watch in for another few days, at least