Friday, February 17, 2006

Cahiers du Cinéma presents Jacques Doillon

This was the first series at the Brattle for their month-long "movie watch-a-thon" in November, creating in me a fervent wish that they had started with the samurai movies instead. This was pretty dry stuff, artistically interesting but also indicative of why American audiences assume French films are crashing bores.

It was also one of the least exciting examples of having the director present I can remember. To be fair, I missed what was probably the most interesting segment, where a film was rescheduled so that the guests could talk about the rioting going on in the Paris suburbs. Doillon only appeared to answer questions about the films he directed, and only some of those - he was apparently severely jet-lagged throughout his whole stay in Cambridge, and left before the end of the series. Personally, I think it might have been more interesting to have him talk about the films he chose. Filmmakers can answer questions directly about their own works, but the answers are seldom as exciting as expected, and often they don't want to go into much detail for fear of "spoiling the magic" or making definitive in the audience's mind what had deliberately left ambiguous (which is fair - was anyone really happy when Ridley Scott came out and said "Deckard is a replicant"?). But when talking about a favorite film, ah, that's different. Then they could engage in an actual discussion with the audience, because they are one of us, only with more knowledge about how films are made.

And, of course, the audience (when not speaking in French and leaving us guys with a very rusty high-school command of the language in the dark) was kind of annoyingly obsequious. Guys - when you feel compelled to start a question with "though some may claim the film is boring"... The film is boring.

And speaking of La Vengence d'une Femme...

La Vengence d'une Femme

* * (out of four)
Seen 11 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

Actors love shit like this. At least, a certain type does. They receive a long screenplay that's almost all dialogue, between just a few a characters, with obviously complicated backstory and a contentious relationship beneath the civility, and they're like, oh, wow, this is my chance to look good. And the type of actor who is attracted to this sort of project - they generally can pull it off. Here's my question, though: Is a film packed to the rafters with fine and subtle acting but little else have any more value than any other type of unbalanced film? Is this really better than a gimmick screenplay or two hours of empty eye candy?

I tend to think not. I think that in part as a reaction to people touting performance-heavy pieces which bored me over flashier movies that provided real entertainment, no matter how simple. I understand the feeling; of all the pieces that go into a movie, the acting is the most human. If how Isabelle Huppert says a word makes you cry, she does it without mechanical or electronic tools. It's an accomplishment that can't be denigrated or explained away. We want it to be most important, because we can see people doing it. But even when it is the most important thing, it can't be the only thing. And as fine a showcase as La Vengence d'une Femme is for its two leading actresses, it's not much more than that.

Read the rest at HBS.

A Man Escaped (Un condamné à mort s'est échappé ou Le vent souffle où il veut)

* * * (out of four)
Seen 12 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

The title doesn't leave much doubt about the outcome of this film, though I suppose there's the possibility that it's metaphorical, that Lieutenant Fontaine frees himself of fear or guilt or some other emotional prison. Writer/director Robert Bresson may have been feeling philosophical when making this film, but not so much that he feels the need to obscure events. The title (at least, the English translation) is straightforward, and the movie is truth in advertising: The ticket says "A Man Escaped", and the events of the movie are never far from that.

The film begins with an escape attempt, as Fontaine (François Leterrier) attempts to jump from the car while the Germans transport him to prison. Once he arrives, he is just as single-minded in his purpose. He examines the grounds, taps messages to people in the next cell, and takes inventory of the raw materials in his cell. From there, it is time to put his plan in action - and that's when the Nazis saddle him with a new cellmate. He can't escape without adding the kid to the plan, but everything about him screams "informer".

Read the rest at HBS.

Day of Wrath (Vredens Dag)

* * ¾ (out of four)
Seen 12 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

There were no credits on the print of Day of Wrath that screened at the Brattle, and if that's the way it originally played in 1943, well, that makes a certain amount of sense. If you were a European filmmaker who had made a film about the evils of intolerance and persecution, it's probably a good idea to keep a low profile.

Day of Wrath opens with an old woman being hunted for witchcraft. She has, of course, been doing nothing more dangerous than dispensing some herbal remedies, but it's not a tolerant time and many people in this small village are willing to use the church as a way to lash at out those who have angered them. Presiding over what passes for a trial is the Reverend Absalon Pedersson (Thorkild Roose). Pedersson has a young second wife, Anne (Lisbeth Movin), who is attractive and good-natured; she aided the old woman, hiding her in Pedersson's basement. Pedersson also has a harpy of a mother, Merete (Sigrid Neiiendam), who doesn't much like Anne, and a good looking son, Martin (Preben Lerdoff Rye), just back from sea and meeting a stepmother several years his junior for the first time. I suppose there are movies where this sort of family dynamic does not lead to trouble, but Day of Wrath isn't one of them.

Read the rest at HBS.

Rendez-Vous

* * (out of four)
Seen 13 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

I can't say that there weren't warning signs. The description of this movie in the Brattle's program was not the thing I usually go for, and I didn't much like the previous three films I'd seen in the Caihers du Cinema series that weekend. But the Watch-a-Thon was on, so by seeing this, I would raise another ten bucks to keep the Brattle open. It's not so tough to sit through a bad movie for charity, right? And then Olivier Assayas's name appeared in the opening credits. I looked left, I looked right, and I realized enough other people were feeling charitable that I was blocked in.

Assayas is only the co-writer for André Téchiné, who also directs. They tell the story of Nina Larrieux (Juliette Binoche), a young actress who regularly bails out after her one scene in a play to have sex with her boyfriend/roommate. After leaving him, she meets Paulot (Wadeck Stanczak) at a rental agency while looking for a new place, but though he falls for her, she has eyes for his roommate, Quentin (Lambert Wilson). Quentin's a virile, unstable sort who used to be an actor and now works in live sex shows; after he leaves the scene, his former director (Jean-Louis Trintignant) appears to offer Nina a role.

Read the rest at HBS.

La Puritaine

* * ½ (out of four)
Seen 14 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

That theater people are crazy and self-important is a sweeping generalization, but one that apparently contains enough truth that people can watch a film like La Puritaine and say "you know, as insane as that is, I bet it might actually happen. Friggin' weirdos." It's the sort of movie that makes sense only if you presume a certain amount of individual and institutional insanity.

Renowned theater director Pierre (Michel Piccoli) has just received a letter saying that his daughter Manon (Sandrine Bonnaire) is coming home and will meet him at the theater the next day. His next move, therefor, is obviously to call in all the actresses in his troupe, assign some representation of his daughter to each of them ("you will be Manon's eyes... you will be her voice... you will be her hand...") so that he can figure out how to speak with her upon her return. In the meantime, Manon arrives at the theater, lets herself in the back way, and observes this whole exercise, occasionally talking to one of the actresses or her father's assistant Ariane (Sabine Azéma) before finally speaking to her father.

Read the rest at HBS.

Mon Oncle

* * * ¾ (out of four)
Seen 14 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

I saw my first film with Jacques Tati as his signature character, Monsieur Hulot, as part of a series spotlighting him along with Charlies Chaplin and Buster Keaton. Tati initially seemed like the odd man out in that group, making his movies a generation after the others, with sound, and in Paris rather than Hollywood. It is, however, immediately clear after watching Mon Oncle that Tati certainly resembles that group more than his contemporaries.

However, M. Hulot is uniquely Tati's. He's an older gentleman, at least middle-aged, though still possessed of a childlike delight in the world around him. Here, he's the title character, the much-adored uncle to Gerald Arpel (Alain Becourt) who buys him ice cream and teaches him how to use a slingshot, in contrast to the boy's bourgeois parents (Jean-Pierre Zola and Adrienne Servantie). They live in an ultra-modern house with all the bells and whistles, and try to convert Hulot to their way of life, fixing him up with women and getting him a job at the plastics factory where M. Arpel is a manager.

Read the rest at HBS.

Raja

* * * (out of four)
Seen 16 November 2005 at the Brattle Theater (Cahiers du Cinema Presents Jacques Doillon)

During the Jacques Doillon series at the Brattle, I found time to see four three of the director's favorite films and three he'd directed himself. By the time the end of the series came around, I had to admit, I was less than enthused about the whole thing. His films were well-acted and grappled with some interesting emotions, but were so focused on observation and performance as opposed to story that I found them quite dull. I was pleasantly surprised, then, by how much I enjoyed Raja. It may not actually have more plot than his other films, but the environment he's observing is less familiar, so there's not quite the same sense of having seen it before.

The title character is a teenage girl from Marrekesh, played by Najat Benssallem. She has ideas about escaping poverty, which involve tagging along with her friend Nadira (Ilham Abelwahed) to find work on the estate of a French expatriate (Pascal Greggory). Her plan succeeds; Fred notices the pretty girl and gives her work inside the house. Once there, she teases and pulls back, trying to find ways to work less and spend more time by the pool, while also juggling her boyfriend Youssef (Hassan Khissal).

Read the rest at HBS.

No comments: