I’d heard mixed reports about this film. I’ve seen some but not all of the François Ozon films released in the UK and the last two I saw, Potiche (2010) and Dans la maison (2012), were a hoot. This new film promised something rather different, being adapted from a Ruth Rendell short story. Perhaps it is a cliché but ‘continental’ adaptations of Ruth Rendell often seem much more serious/sophisticated than UK adaptations. I still remember with pleasure Almodovar’s Live Flesh (Spain 1997), Chabrol’s La Cérémonie (France 1995) and Claude Miller’s Betty Fisher and Other Stories (France 2001) – and there are more I haven’t seen.
The promotion of this film seems quite coy in the way it tries to avoid ‘spoilers‘ but to say anything sensible about the film I have to reveal the central issue. (So be warned, if you want complete surprise, DON’T READ ON.) The film begins with a stunning opening sequence, virtually without dialogue, in which we see the funeral of a young woman, Laure, and the eulogy from her best friend Claire (Anaïs Demoustier) who pledges to look out for the widowed David (Romain Duris) and the couple’s daughter Lucie who is only a few months old. The opening also gives us flashbacks to the intense relationship between Claire and Laure that began when they were small children. A few weeks after the funeral Claire visits David and is taken aback to find him dressed as a woman and feeding the baby from a bottle. He explains that by wearing a dress belonging to his wife, he is able to calm the baby. The narrative then begins to explore the relationship between Claire and David – and to deal with the complication of Claire’s husband Gilles. Things don’t quite work out as some audiences might suspect and I’ll leave it there.
Like Pedro Almodóvar, Ozon is a gay man adapting a female novelist who was herself prepared to explore all kinds of characters and relationships. Ruth Rendell is generally thought of as a crime writer but she also explored the psychology of unusual relationships. I wasn’t familiar with the short story ‘The New Girlfriend’ but I’m certainly interested in finding it now. The narrative that Ozon constructs sometimes plays like Hitchcock (especially when the score by Philippe Rombi kicks in). I’ve also seen reviews that reference Douglas Sirk. This is certainly a melodrama and it takes place in the milieu of the upper middle class. All That Heaven Allows (1955) feels like an appropriate reference. At other times the tone is comic and I also found the film to be intensely erotic in parts.
Visiting IMDB, I note both big supporters and major detractors. Two ‘users’ claim this is the worst film they’ve ever seen. I’ll put my cards on the table. I loved every minute of the film. Romain Duris is for me a major star of French cinema. I realise now that I have seen Anaïs Demoustier in several other films but up until now I hadn’t really ‘noticed’ her. Now I feel foolishly in love. What is interesting is that the film places her almost in the masculine role – she’s ‘on top’ in sexual encounters and she generally wears the trousers when David is in drag. Personally I preferred her this way – or at least with her freckles on display when ‘Virginia’ (David) is in full warpaint. You’ll gather from this that Ozon is ‘playing’ with gender identities big time. Sometimes his storytelling teeters on the edge of farce but he is in control and he’s well served by great performances from the three lead actors.
Nuff said. This is a melodrama par excellence.
A good trailer:
This is the film that I have enjoyed most in the cinema this year. I found it compelling entertainment for two reasons. One was the casting of Romain Duris and Déborah François and the other was the use of costume, colour, lighting, graphics and music. Duris and François are my favourite francophone actors of the current crop and that might explain why I am so taken with a film which too many critics seem to have dismissed as simply ‘conventional’. Philip French has announced his retirement from the Observer but in one of his last published reviews he gave the film the full works and found many interesting connections – whereas his colleague on the Guardian, Peter Bradshaw, dismissed it with hardly a second glance. That’s a big mistake because there is plenty to see.
Budgeted at a whopping €14.7 million, Populaire has been inevitably linked with The Artist and Mad Men because of its meticulously presented period detail. It shares The Artist‘s female star Bérénice Bejo (in a small but important role) and its cinematographer Guillaume Schiffman and it’s set in 1958-9 with the same attention to period offered by Mad Men. But that’s where the connection to the TV series ends – and the lazy hype perpetrated by distributors has arguably damaged the film’s box office. Think instead an hommage to the American sex comedies of the 1950s with Duris as Cary Grant or Jack Lemmon and François as an amalgam of all those greats such as Doris Day and before her Judy Holliday – but also decidedly Déborah François. This feeling of borrowing from Hollywood is underlined by the clever use of colours and lighting – like the bright colours of early Technicolor. The music is also well chosen with a mix of French and Anglo-American popular styles. There is a real sense of that keen French interest in American modernity associated with the need for speed – the typing competition is an excellent vehicle for this. Populaire is the first feature by director Régis Roinsard who had the original idea and co-wrote the script. It has its flaws and weaknesses but overall it works extremely well. Of course, a romcom/social comedy set in the 1950s raises questions about gender and we’ll come to those later. First though a brief outline.
Rose is a young woman bored by live in her Normandy village where her father owns the village store. When insurance agent Louis advertises for a secretary in a nearby town she applies for the post and gets it – because she is pretty and Louis is a letch, we assume. In fact she is hopeless as a secretary but she can type like a whirlwind. Louis keeps her on and begins to train her for the typing speed contests which were apparently all the rage in the late 1950s. From then on the narrative structure is highly conventional with Rose going on to contest the ‘World Championship’ in New York. Along the way there are a couple of innovations and some tricky decisions over what to show/hint at in terms of offering what might be seen as nostalgia to a contemporary audience. (The ‘Populaire’ is a model of typewriter manufactured by the Japy company of Paris who become Rose’s sponsors when she wins the national title.)
The romcom demands that Louis at first doesn’t recognise his own desire for Rose, allowing him to be quite determined and distanced in his ‘use’ of her typing skills to achieve the success as a trainer that eluded him as an athlete himself. He is that familiar figure, the man in his late thirties running the family business but feeling that he has not succeeded. Rose loves him from the start but is too proud to show it, going along with his madcap training schemes to please him. The narrative material that Roinsard attempts to work with here includes a backstory that involves Louis as member of the Résistance in the latter stages of the war – which in turn led to his separation from his childhood sweetheart (Bejo), now married to an American who parachuted onto her parents’ farm in June 1944. For me, none of this worked, partly I think because despite his many talents I just couldn’t see Duris in the Résistance – but perhaps the fault is mine, there is no reason why a man looking good in a sharp suit in 1958 shouldn’t have a wartime past. But the back story does lead into some potentially darker sides to the drama. Allied to this the sudden appearance of Louis’ family at Christmas provides one of the highlights of the film.
In the end, the film stands or falls for me on the performance of Ms François and she is formidable. She has the ability to move convincingly from village shop assistant to flirtatious romcom heroine, from childlike student to steely contestant and from clumsy office worker to assertive and confident young woman. In all of these roles she is convincing and she dominates the screen. The criticisms of the film’s ‘sexist’ and ‘gendered’ view claims that the film is conservative and backward looking and this is linked by some commentators to the inclusion of one sex scene and one ‘gratuitous’ ‘wet blouse’ moment – see the image at the head of the post. In the UK the film was given a 12A certificate which seems about right – but in the US it seems to be heading for ‘Restricted’. The sex certainly is an issue for a film which I’ve suggested is attempting to work like those 1950s Hollywood comedies with their Hays Code approved scripts. A similar problem comes up when characters appear to be speaking ‘out of time’ – e.g. with references to smoking and when Rose cries “but this is 1959” (and therefore she can be a ‘liberated’ young woman). I think, on balance Populaire gets these decisions right. I also think that, like Doris Day and Judy Holliday before her, Déborah François is capable of taking the script away from its ideological implications of a submissive and restricted female underclass. Rose is a strong woman who works hard to get what she wants, standing up to whoever gets in her way. The narrative does validate the skills of the typist and it underlines the fact that secretarial work was one of the ways by which women were able to become independent and to establish themselves in the office before moving into a wider range of white collar jobs. The film has suffered because of some of the negative reviews. I hope more audiences are able to see it and enjoy it for what it is – a conventional romcom with great performances that recalls some of the under-rated popular films of the 1950s. It has already created a buzz among the collectors of antique typewriters!
And if you do enjoy this, can I recommend Déborah François in the generically very different La tourneuse de pages (The Pageturner) which nonetheless has some narrative similarities?
Watching this film was an unusual experience. At times it felt like a character-driven drama and at other times a high quality genre film. It wasn’t until later that I realised that I’d seen the previous film by director Eric Lartigau, an interesting twist on the romcom Prête-moi ta main (France 2006) titled I Do in English. I enjoyed that film and I think I enjoyed The Big Picture – certainly I was engrossed by it and was surprised when the ending came.
It is difficult to outline the plot without spoilers, but I’ll try. The English title isn’t immediately helpful. The French title translates as something like the ‘The Man Who Wanted to Live His Own Life’ and this is more useful. Paul Exbon (Romain Duris) is a highly successful lawyer running a top practice in Paris with his older partner Anne (Catherine Deneuve). He has wealth, an attractive wife and two small children who he adores – but all is not well at home or in his head. Then a series of events overturns his comfortable world. The only way out seems to be to flee France for the Adriatic and to adopt a new identity. The ‘instigator’ of all this trouble is a man Paul detests, an unsuccessful professional photographer who taunts Paul because the lawyer only takes photographs as a hobby – he doesn’t have the guts to go out and try it as a living even though he has the talent to do so. So when Paul flees he attempts to become a ‘real’ photographer. But his talent shines through and when journals and galleries start to take an interest he knows his identity will be uncovered – thus the English title, I guess. (The photographs used in the film were taken by various Magnum photographers I think.)
The main factor that attracted me to the film was the presence of Romain Duris in the lead and as usual he gives a great performance, more than justifying his billing. I don’t really understand how he does it. This time he is in curly hair, stubble and generally dishevelled chic mode – but still with the Cuban heels. Why is that chipmunk-like face with its cheesy grin so manipulative? I don’t know, but Duris is a natural talent and you can’t really keep your eyes off him.
The film is an adaptation of a novel by Douglas Kennedy. He appears to be an American writer domiciled mainly in Europe where his reputation is high in France. His 2007 The Woman in the Fifth has also been adapted as a thriller, this time by Pawel Pawlikowski with Kristin Scott-Thomas and Ethan Hawke and scheduled for its première at Venice in September. I think that we are going to hear a lot more about him. (His earlier novel The Dead Heart was adapted as Welcome to Whoop Whoop, a British-Australian comedy which suffered from the injury to its director Stephan Elliott in 1997.) Kennedy has also written travel literature, something of an advantage for writers of ‘international thrillers’. The Big Picture (which was the original title of the novel) introduces the coastline of Montenegro and in particular the heritage city of Kotor and the ship repair yards at Bijela. I found these fascinating and they give this film a different feel.
I think what marks this film out as something more than another generic ‘international thriller’ is a tight script, effective cinematography and editing and the performance of Romain Duris. It’s a thriller in the sense that an unsettling tone runs throughout and I was genuinely concerned about what the central character was going to do. I didn’t read too much about it beforehand and the two moments of violence are both handled well – I found them unsettling and shocking. Critics are referring to it as an ‘existential thriller’ and this is where the confusion arises. In this interesting review, the British trailer for the film is accused of making it look like an art film. Overall The Big Picture is definitely worth exploring for an evening’s entertainment and the kind of well-made film that boosts the reputation of the French industry. In France it opened at No 2 in the chart grossing over $3 million but failing to dislodge the blockbuster Little White Lies – that’s a shame because it’s a far better film than Guillaume Canet’s ‘comedy’. If I have one complaint about The Big Picture it’s that Catherine Deneuve is on screen for only a few short scenes and Neils Arestrup similarly has only a brief time to impress. The other factor that’s getting some interest is the score by Evgueni and Sacha Galperine. I wasn’t sure that his worked in the early part of the film, but by the end I was on side. A final piece of trivia – the director looks a little like Duris as he’s presented in the film and he’s married to Marina Foïs who plays Sarah Exben, Paul’s wife.
The hit of the year in France, Heartbreaker is slowly dying in UK cinemas on a limited release (around 60 prints). The same audiences who have shunned it in multiplexes, presumably because they would have to read subtitles, will no doubt flock to the inevitable Hollywood remake. C’est la vie as the English character in the film says – the loss is theirs. I would be very surprised if Hollywood can serve up anything as funny and sexy as this. There is no American actor I can think of who could compete with Romain Duris.
It’s a compliment of sorts that Hollywood couldn’t make anything more glamorous or more slick. This is a very conventional romcom. Duris is Alex, who works as a professional to break up engagements that somebody (usually a parent) doesn’t want to see reaching the altar. Supported by his sister and her husband, Alex sets up extravagant cons that seduce the women targeted. But he has principles – he only works on women who are unhappy in their relationships (although, of course, they don’t always know that they are unhappy). Then one day he meets Juliette (Vanessa Paradis) and you can guess the rest.
I’ve written about Romain Duris in the romcoms of Cédric Klapisch and in dramas such as The Beat That My Heart Skipped. I wasn’t totally convinced by the Klapisch roles, but I rate him highly. The real surprise in the film was Vanessa Paradis who I thought was excellent – very beautiful, sexy and smart. Life with Johnny Depp can’t be too stressful. The other two principal cast members are also very good (Julie Ferrier as the sister Mélanie and François Damiens as her husband Marc). Monaco (and Morocco) look great. I laughed a lot and even cried at the end – perfect entertainment.
The UK trailer:
In the week that sees the UK release of the first of two French films about Jacques Mesrine, the French gangster figure from the 1970s, it seems opportune to explore the concept of the polar or crime thriller in French Cinema. French crime cinema now exists in an interesting relationship with Hollywood and Hong Kong Cinema in a seemingly endless flow of influences between the three. I’ve just watched the slightly disappointing Public Enemies in which, as some commentators noted, Johnny Depp tries hard but can’t really nail being as cool as Alain Delon in a Jean-Pierre Melville film. Eventually, I hope we also get to see the latest Johnnie To crime flick with French legend Johnny Halliday in Vengeance (2009).
Here is an update of some notes I used for a day school in 2006.
The thriller and crime fiction
In any film culture, the ‘thriller’ is likely to be one of the main broad generic categories. In France, as in Britain during the later studio period from the 1940s to the 1960s, the crime thriller was arguably second only to comedy as a popular format. France has a long history of ‘crime fiction’ – the first ‘detective story’ could be said to be Edgar Allan Poe’s Murders in the Rue Morgue in 1841 with a character perhaps modelled on Eugène François Vidocq, a real life crook turned thief catcher who became the first head of the Sûreté in 1811 (and the basis for a feature film in 2001). Poe offers an early American connection with French crime fiction which was to become more important in the 20th century.
But the police were not the heroes of early French crime fiction. More important were ‘super crooks’ such as Fantômas and Arsène Lupin who were defeating clod-hopping policemen in films from the 1910s. It was not until the 1920s that the French police found their hero in the form of (Belgian) Georges Simenon’s Maigret.
The roman noir, ‘dark stories’ of doomed characters began to appear in the 1940s and soon set up a kind of dialogue with ‘hard-boiled’ American fiction, both being published in France under the famous ‘Série Noire’ label. In the 1950s psychological mystery/crime novels gained a higher public and critical profile through the works of writers such as ‘Boileau-Narcejac’ and Sébastien Japrisot. The former is a pseudonym for a pair of writers, Pierre Boileau and Pierre Ayraud, perhaps best known outside France for the original novel used as the basis for Hitchcock’s Vertigo (1958) and for Clouzot’s Les Diaboliques (1955). Japrisot’s books have also been used for films, most recently for the story which became Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s A Very Long Engagement (2004).
It isn’t difficult to make the links between French novels and films and American novels and films, with various French film directors turning to the work of ‘hardboiled’ writers of the 1940s, e.g. Truffaut turning to the work of William Irish/ Cornell Woolrich in The Bride Wore Black (1968) and La sirène du Mississipi (1969) and to David Goodis for Shoot the Pianist (1960). Goodis was also the source for Jean-Jacques Beneix’s The Moon in the Gutter (1983).
The term polar seems to have been coined in the 1970s. Like many terms in idiomatic French, it’s a corruption or slang term, perhaps deriving from film policier. It now has a fairly loose meaning which covers films that may include ‘police procedural’ work or which may focus on the milieu of the criminals. It has also sometimes been widened to include spy thrillers and more action-orientated films. In critical usage, various French Cinema scholars have referred to the polar as a means of tracing how representations of crime, criminals and police work have changed over time. This is one of the important aspects of genre study. Because genre films are composed of elements mixed together in patterns of ‘repetition and difference’, we can use genres to log changes in references to issues of gender, race and class and to broader changes in French society. This is neatly set out by Phil Powrie (1997) in his book on 1980s French Cinema, a period when the polar was again popular. Powrie suggests three aspects of the polar that could form the basis for study:
- its use as a ‘vehicle’ to carry comments on contemporary society;
- an indication of the state of French-American cultural exchange;
- the focus on a hero who is ‘marginal’ to mainstream society.
Although the term ‘polar dates from the 1970s, we can trace it back at least as far as the 1930s when Jean Gabin was the major star of French cinema.
Pépé le Moko (1937)
Pépé (Jean Gabin) is a Parisian gangster (originally a ‘moko’ – ‘from Marseilles’) exiled in Algiers where he is holed up in the Casbah and supported by a network of people all dedicated to making sure that the police can’t arrest him. He is doomed because he can’t stop himself being attracted to beautiful women and because his network is vulnerable through the naivety of his ‘surrogate son’ and the sly manipulations of a local police officer.
The Casbah is carefully constructed and photographed in a Parisian studio – so effectively that in some ways the film looks like an early rehearsal of the famous scenes in Battle of Algiers, shot on location in 1965. Gabin/Pépé is a recognisable character in a category of films given the title of ‘poetic realism’ in which a romanticised hero from the working class is shown to be ultimately defeated. Surprisingly perhaps, most of these pessimistic films were made by supposedly ‘left-wing’ directors. In this case, the director was Julien Duvivier, not generally seen as of the left. Gabin continued to be a major star into the 1970s, dying in 1976. He set the standard for the masculine hero, rugged and brutal, but also romantic and well-dressed.
Plein soleil (France/Italy 1960)
This version of Patricia Highsmith’s novel, The Talented Mr Ripley, starred Alain Delon in one of his first roles as the cold-blooded killer Tom Ripley. Delon went on to become a major star of both auteur films and popular polars, later appearing in the films of Jean-Pierre Melville. It was directed by René Clément, one of the directors who perhaps suffered by association with la tradition de qualité attacked by the critics of Cahiers du cinéma. Plein soleil refers to at least two of the polar’s features in the early 1960s – an origination in American crime writing and and to some extent Hollywood filmmaking in colour, on location in Italy. The Italian setting also refers to the sense of the new environment of the ‘periphery’ (i.e. ‘not Paris’) which began to appear as a locale at this time.
À bout de souffle (1959)
Now famous, alongside Truffaut’s Les 400 coups, as the films that heralded la nouvelle vague for cinephiles around the world, À bout de souffle shows director Jean-Luc Godard taking the elements of the polar and the American crime B-picture and creating something new. In the opening of the film, we see Jean-Paul Belmondo ‘playing’ with the image of Humphrey Bogart and then moving into an exciting drive from the Cote d’Azur to Paris and trashing the conventions of the ‘well-made’ film along the way.
Belmondo was both the male star of the New Wave and the heir to Gabin’s role. In À bout de souffle he is a charming young thug who dies on the street in a scene at once ‘romantic’, futile and ‘marginal’. He appeared in other polar-related films for Truffaut and Chabrol and for the ‘mentor’ of the New Wave, Jean-Pierre Melville. He also appeared in more commercial films, e.g. alongside Alain Delon in Borsalino (France/Italy 1970) a 1930s set Marseilles gangster movie which refers perhaps to both the Warners films of the 1930s and to contemporary ‘buddy movies’ such as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (US 1969).
Le Samuraï (France/Italy 1967)
Delon again, for Melville and playing the ultimate hitman ‘Jeff Costello’. Melville had developed a highly individual style in his earlier polars, which were both ‘popular’ (i.e. commercially more successful than the New Wave films) and attracted cinephiles intrigued by his commentary on the crime film, American cinema, existentialism etc. Costello is clearly ‘marginalised’ and seemingly anachronistic in the Paris of the mid 1960s.
Subway (France 1985)
Writer-producer-director Luc Besson is one of the figures associated with the cinéma du look of the 1980s. Powrie argues that the polar was revived in the 1980s and filled an ‘ideological gap’ left by the dramas drawing on left-wing ideas in the 1970s. Other auteur directors of the period (e.g. Beneix, Leos Carax) also made polars, but Besson has always been interested in popular genre cinema and the American connections which saw his Nikita (France 1990) re-made in Hollywood and Léon (France/US 1994) set in America, are an integral part of the history of the polar.
Other polars released in the UK include Bertrand Tavernier’s ‘realist’ study of the Parisian drugs squad in L.627 (France 1992) and Maurice Pialat’s Police (1985), a classic polar with Gérard Depardieu as a police officer falling for a mysterious woman. Depardieu could be seen as the 1980s successor to Belmondo/Delon as a polar hero.
References and further reading
Susan Hayward (1993) French National Cinema, London: Routledge
Susan Hayward and Ginette Vincendeau (eds) (2000) French Film: Text and Contexts, London: Routledge
(Includes papers on Le Samouraï, À bout de souffle and Nikita)
Phil Powrie (1997) French Cinema in the 1980s: Nostalgia and the Crisis of Masculinity, Oxford: OUP
Useful sites giving background on French crime fiction:
De battre mon coeur s’est arrêté (The Beat That My Heart Skipped, France 2005)
Jacques Audiard (born 1952)
Audiard’s father, Michel, was a prolific writer/director of thrillers/polars, responsible for over 100 scripts between 1949 and his death in 2000. Jacques Audiard also became a screenwriter and in 1994 directed his first feature Regarde les hommes tomber. Unlike his father, Jacques began as an editor, before moving to writing and finally to directing. He has spent much longer fashioning his scripts and has directed just five features to date. All have been widely praised and each represents a form of commentary on the history of the thriller. The first two films both feature Jean-Louis Trintignant and Mathieu Kassovitz.
In Regarde les hommes tomber (See How They Fall, 1994), the veteran Trintignant (himself a star of crime films, alongside other genres and auteur films of the 1960s and 1970s) is an ageing hitman who takes on a younger partner (Kassovitz) with learning difficulties. The film is more of a character study than a straight thriller. In Un héros très discret (Self-made Hero, 1997), one of the best French films of the 1990s, Trintignant and Kassovitz return as older and younger versions of the same man, a successful politician of the 1990s recounting his own bizarre story from the Occupation in the 1940s. This isn’t a thriller as such, but again it features a rather weak character who is taught how to behave and who discovers a talent for inventing himself as a new personality. Sur mes lèvres (Read My Lips) in 2001 certainly was a thriller. A working class criminal released from prison meets a thirty-something woman with a hearing impairment who is being cold-shouldered in her work as a secretary for a building company. She hires him as her assistant and gradually they are drawn together to form a an unusual partnership which benefits from her skills as a lip-reader. The relationship strengthens as they become enmeshed in a thriller narrative.
Audiard’s films all feature partnerships. Regarde les hommes tomber is perhaps most clearly related to the polartradition, with its surrogate father-son relationship. Un héros très discret offers several different relationships all involving the central character, but all in some way based on a deceit – fitting for a story set in the context of exposing the ‘myth’ of resistance in the 1940s. Sur mes lèvres is unusual in focusing primarily on the woman, but creating through the partnership a kind of amalgam figure related to the polar hero. De battre mon coeur s’est arrêté returns in a way to the (real) father/son relationship.
Putting aside the ‘special case’ of Un héros très discret, Audiard’s three polars all take place in a world that is recognisably the ‘real France’ of the 1990s/2000s, but which also makes reference to the generic locations/mise en scène of earlier polars. They are mostly set in Paris, but more in the suburbs than the centre and, in Sur mes lèvres, the kind of industrial/residential sprawl with its clubbing and high rises that features in many European cities. There are strong elements of realism in the depiction of Paris in a range of polars – marking the genre as aesthetically removed from the quirky fantasy world of Amélie or the earlier ‘heritage’ films set in the ‘glorious’ past.
The two most recent Audiard films are interesting in terms of their central characters. Vincent Cassel plays against type in Sur mes lèvres. Cassel has all the qualities that would make him a modern counterpart of the Belmondo/Delon characters from the 1960s/70s. He has the same physical beauty and presence and the skill to suggest the peculiar mixture of intelligence, brutality, coldness and tenderness that they display. But in Sur mes lèvres, he becomes the object of attraction for Carla (Emmanuelle Devos), who herself displays a similarly complex array of personal traits. Carla is the lonely and isolated figure, drawn into criminal activity through her repressed sexual desire. For some audiences, the move into the thriller territory is something of a disappointment after the slow build of the first half of the film which carries a strong sexual charge.
Perhaps the clearer generic narrative in De battre mon coeur s’est arrêté has enabled it to become a bigger commercial success. The film is a remake of Fingers, the 1978 American ‘independent’ film made by James Toback and starring Harvey Keitel. Bizarrely produced by Brut “the great smell for men”, the plot outline sees a young man who is caught between the demi-world of his criminal father and the more gentile world of his mother a concert pianist.
Thomas Seyr (Romain Duris) in the remake really does seem to be the Belmondo/Delon hero. His dark good looks and stylish, if casual, clothes, his mix of brutality and delicacy are all suggestive of the earlier characters. Duris is some thing of a throwback in this performance with his longish hair, leather jacket and cuban heeled boots. He has entered his father’s business as an unscrupulous property developer who buys up apartment blocks after evicting squatters with violence and threats. He wearily beats people up for his ailing father, but refuses to endorse his parent’s new relationship (with Emannuelle Devos). His chance meeting with his dead mother’s agent/impresario prompts him to take up the piano again and to seek out a piano tutor, Chinese conservatoire student Miao-Lin.
Duris is fantastic and manages to be brutal and sexy, immoral and honourable. Audiard makes excellent use of the mix of classical piano with ‘techno’ and edits the film tightly so that it is a tense thriller even if the actual narrative incident is relatively slight. This is possibly the best polar of recent years – at least before Audiard’s next film which did so well at Cannes in 2009.
Here’s the trailer:
1. Think about the ending of De battre mon coeur s’est arrêté. How does it compare with the traditional polar? What do we think of Thomas and his situation at the end of the film?
2. Is Thomas the ‘marginalised figure’ alluded to by Phil Powrie? If so, in what ways?
3. What kind of environment does the film inhabit? If you have been to Paris recently, is it a ‘realist’ environment? Does the film feel like it is dealing with a recognisable society in 2005?
4. Should we take anything from the fact that Audiard has ‘remade’ a (relatively obscure) American film? Does the film have anything to say about that unique French/American/crime connection?
I don’t watch Hollywood films that often, but sometimes I do get to see a romantic comedy. I do find, however, that many of them are just not attractive in terms of theme or they have stars I would usually want to avoid. It’s in this context that I watched two ‘alternatives’ – a French/UK co-production and a genuine American independent.
I’ve already posted on Pot Luck and I did get to see the sequel Les poupées russes (Russian Dolls) (France/UK 2005). I thought the original film was interesting as well as enjoyable in the way that it exploited the phenomenon of the Erasmus scheme that brings together young graduates from across Europe in Barcelona. Unfortunately, I don’t think that there was enough in the possible narrative extensions of the first story to warrant a second. That isn’t to say that there isn’t plenty here to entertain audiences.
Although the sequel was made only three years later, the characters have aged five years or more and the central character, Xavier, is now coming up to 30. He is still struggling to become a writer and is not in a long-term relationship (but still close friends with Martine, the Audrey Tautou character from the first film). The main thrust of the narrative is to propel Xavier through a series of sexual encounters, including one with Wendy, the Englishwoman from the Barcelona flat. There is a wedding (one of the staple features of the romcom), but it involves Wendy’s brother and a Russian ballerina.
The film is well made and I particularly enjoyed the St. Petersburg sequences, which seemed less touristy than those in London (but that’s probably because I know London well, but haven’t been to St. Petersburg). Ironically, the film seemed to be like a Eurostar ad with Xavier shuttling between Paris and London. Eurostar have actually put money into the new Shane Meadows film, marking the move to St Pancras as the London terminal – but Xavier alights at the temporary terminus built at Waterloo.
In the modern style, this romcom is upfront about the sexual encounters of its late twenty-somethings and overall is less coy and childish than Hollywood. I thought that the playing was generally good and Kelly Reilly turned the rather gauche character from Barcelona into a sexy woman – she was well dressed by the costume department and wore the clothes with real panache. This was emphasised by a scene in which Xavier obsesses about a model whose ‘autobiography’ he has to ghost-write. The model is objectified by a tracking camera shot which focuses on her legs as she walks in front. Kelly Reilly wears a similar dress much more successfully.
I’m not sure what I made of Romain Duris as Xavier. Since he is so good in everything else I’ve seen him in, I have to conclude that he is brilliant at playing a character who is really rather silly (perhaps this is how French audiences see Hugh Grant type characters in British films?) Xavier is never convincing as a writer and although he is still potentially a good-looking man, here he often grins like a demented hamster.
I’m not the target audience for this film and it may well be that twenty-somethings today will respond to the film and identify with the characters. It’s worth noting that romcoms now seem to assume a younger audience (whereas the classic Hollywood films from the 1930s and 1940s were for a general audience). For me, Xavier’s behaviour would be understandable for someone in their early twenties, but not approaching thirty. But I know I am out-of-date, so, a change in society generally is followed by filmmakers keeping up with trends. A posting on IMDB asks if this film is similar to some of the Antoine Doinel films made by François Truffaut. This is an interesting observation and I can see that it is similar to Love on the Run (France 1979). As a young man, I enjoyed the the first three Antoine Doinel films, but not the late 1970s one, by which time I thought Truffaut had lost it. (See the post on Anne and Muriel for more on Truffaut.)
Director Cédric Klapisch continues the use of split screens and tricksy editing from Pot Luck – possibly increasing the overall effect. I’m not sure it works, but again I think it probably serves to alienate older audiences in an attempt to be fresh and young? I think, however, that I preferred the approach of a recent American independent, In Search of a Midnight Kiss (US 2007).
Written and directed by Alex Holdridge, In Search of a Midnight Kiss feels like a genuine low budget independent. The pitch is very simple, Wilson (Scoot McNairy) is virtually broke and due to be alone on New Year’s Eve. His housemates in LA (a couple) persuade him to post on Craig’s List as a ‘misanthrope’ in search of a midnight kiss. He does and meets Vivian (Sara Simmonds). Will they hit it off and stay together through the New Year celebrations?
As the image shows, Holdridge chose to shoot on High Def video and print it as black & white on 35 mm film. I thought the film looked terrific and I really enjoyed the scenic tour of downtown LA and the city that we don’t usually see (including a peek inside an ornate theatre). I was particularly interested in the sequences on the LA rapid transit system. It doesn’t usually feature in Hollywood films, but it gives a completely different feel to the city – making it more like New York and European cities. Overall, I thought the film prompted memories of a host of Hollywood films from the 1950s, partly because of the black & white images and partly because of the way in which the city was presented.
As in Russian Dolls, the film utilises the conventions of modern Hollywood romcoms (and television) in its depiction of sexual embarrassment and potential ‘gross-out’ moments. The difference is that because there are no stars, I did warm to the central characters as real people. I cared about them and by the end of the film I could even forgive the lead character his haircut. I’d recommend this film to anyone jaded by mainstream Hollywood.
Film titles can be important for audiences. When French director Cédric Klapisch showed his film at festivals he is said to have wanted to call it Europudding (see this Guardian interview). This title has a very unfortunate meaning in the UK, where it is a term of abuse (a bit like ‘mid-Atlantic’) implying a film made simply to qualify for various forms of co-production funding and lacking any sense of coherent identity or artistic purpose. That isn’t what Klapisch meant of course and it eventually emerged as Pot Luck, which in English refers to a meal for visitors or travellers produced out of whatever ingredients are available – “I’ll take pot luck”. I’m not sure this is a better title, but at least it does relate to the plot. The French title, explained in the film, refers to the practice in a ‘Spanish inn’ when travellers brought food with them which was cooked in the inn. I missed the film on its cinema release and my memory is that it was still being described in the UK as a ‘europudding’. I’m not sure if this put me off, but since I’d seen (and enjoyed) the two previous comedies by Cédric Klapisch, I suspect not. I was probably just busy. Recently, I rented the DVD, spurred on by the lead role for the excellent Romain Duris and a support role for Cecile de France, so good in Un secret.
I enjoyed the film and I think it would work well with film students – the subject matter is relevant and the film benefits from sparky performances. I suspect that some of the quirky special effects which seem to irritate critics might work with younger audiences. Most of all, it offers a case study in using national stereotypes and transcending them. It’s also an interesting film in terms of American v ‘European’ understanding of the issues. (However, the reviews are mixed.)
The basic narrative idea draws on the Erasmus programme which offers exchange possibilities for European university students. Romain Duris is Xavier, a high-flying Parisian student who joins the programme to gain a postgraduate qualification for entry into the civil service and finds himself on an economics course in Barcelona. He gets to spend his year with a Brit, a Belgian, a Dane, a German, an Italian and a Castilian. The DVD no doubt confuses audiences outside France by promoting Audrey Tautou who plays a minor role as the girlfriend Xavier leaves behind in Paris. When the film was being made, Audrey Tautou had not achieved her high profile via Amélie.
Barcelona has been one of the most attractive cities in Europe for some time and Klapisch makes the most of its possibilities (although I’m surprised that more isn’t made of the waterfront and the Nou Camp). The intelligence in the film for me is highlighted by a subplot which sees Xavier making love to a beautiful young French woman he meets on the plane to Catalonia.
The woman is a newly-wed with an older husband (also French) who is the kind of boring guy that Xavier would usually ignore. However, when his accommodation falls through, Xavier is forced to look up the newly weds and plead for a chance to sleep on their couch. When the husband neglects his young wife because of work commitments, he persuades Xavier (now in a student flat) to take her out sightseeing. We know the young woman is distressed and attracted to Xavier (she had seen him crying on the plane), but when she criticises Barcelona as ‘dirty’, we know that Xavier is justified in upbraiding her. But later, when the couple have got together very successfully, Xavier lets himself down by boasting about his new sexual prowess. I recognised much of Xavier’s behaviour as typical of the awkward process of ‘growing up’ and I think that this is the strength of the film. It deals with national types and familiar instances of language/culture splits (relating the Flemish/Walloon split to that of Catalonia/Castile) in a light and witty way and concludes that all the different students are warm human beings rather than comic ‘cut-outs’. The director’s interests clearly lie with the French and English characters, but I thought that they were presented in the same clear-eyed way as the others.
The IMDB comments are interesting in that there is an obvious awareness about how different this is to a Hollywood ‘fraternity comedy’ with several commentators noting that American films in this genre are usually far less subtle. On the other hand, it is quite strange to see negative comments about the sexual behaviour of the students (including Xavier) – plenty of mileage in discussing societal attitudes here.
Of course, L’auberge espagnole is a ‘popular film’ and comparable to the ‘brat pack’ films from Hollywood in the 1980s. Romain Duris and Cécile de France have since become stars and Kelly Reilly and Judith Godrèche were already established. The film has been enormously successful across Europe, clocking up nearly 5 million admissions across the ‘Europe of 36’ since 2002. Not surprisingly, France saw nearly 3 million admissions. Perhaps surprisingly, the US saw over 600,000 and Quebec 170,000. Spain, Germany and Italy were other big markets, but the UK was pathetic with admissions below Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary and many other European countries. Was the title really a problem or is it a bad case of Europhobia? I’m amazed (and saddened). I hope some UK schoolteachers will take a chance on the film. I’m off to find the sequel, The Russian Dolls from 2005, and I look forward to local screenings of the latest Klapisch, Paris (starring Romain Duris and Juliet Binoche).