Jan 29: Barocco (1976--Andre Techine)

* *

OK…I’ll say it. I didn’t like this movie. I didn’t get engaged in it because it felt so deliberate, almost schematic. As I watched the predictable, contrived plot crank though with its bookend parallel scenes, I wanted even a small surprise. This is early Techine, so I have to think he was working from some kind of theoretical prescription – why else the flat, uninvolving delivery by Isabelle Adjani? the casting of Depardieu as both killer and victim? (a Brechtian gesture?) the paired bad sets of guys? the flat secondary characters?

Despite the occasional visual quotes from other crime movies, Barocco isn’t Chinatown, which oddly enough, I kept thinking of. In fact, I came away with more appreciation for the Polansky film.

This film is nearly ten years from Rendez-vous, the film I first saw some character focus, and 15 years from his great run of mid-90s movies. Barocco helps me see those films in better perspective. Thanks to Barocco, I grasped the range of Techine’s evolution in filmmaking, from contrived, intellectual filmmaker here to the later, greater humanist; always skilled in his technique, Techine gradually develops the art of depicting life in rich, overabundant complexity. The best thing about Barocco is the perspective it gives on how far Techine traveled afterwards.

Jan 27: The Kids are All Right (2010--Lisa Cholodenko)

* * *

I thought this was a good movie with better-than-average acting. It's about a family that is threatened when an interloper tries to usurp the head-of-the-family role and fails.....but rather than the head of the family being a man, it's Annette Benning. If the film had been about a heterosexual family, and had some of the lesbian elements been reinterpreted as straight elements, it would have been a much more typical movie.

But that's what's interesting: this film is about a lesbian family. And that's enough to keep it from being cliche as it portrays -- in a very understated way -- tensions like those between lesbian partners, straight men/butch lesbians, straight men/femme lesbians. How often do you see THAT in a movie? I liked the way you Nic stomped down her analytical, controling, bossy path while the more sensitive Jules responded to what she encounters. That relationship is good writing.

I also think All Right is an interesting American film because as the viewer seeks a center of authority, that center becomes the kids. I felt ambivalent about Paul, who gives good advice to Laser and recognizes that Joni has grown up at the same time he is seducing Jules and undermining Nic; in fact, I half-felt sorry for him as an aging dilettante until I realized that his affair with Jules had hurt the kids. The kids' pain and anger gave me the moral center to judge (and ultimately forgive) Paul. In many ways, his is one of the more interesting characters. And his is the one that's left with the least closure in the film.

That's not to say the film doesn't seem a bit clunky at time. I thought I could reduce most scenes to a particular (and obvious) narrative or character purpose, and Moore was occasionally flat in her delivery. There were some nice editing flourishes, though, as when we had the departure to the second dinner nicely condensed. Overall, the film seemed more deliberate and controlled than rich in detail that might or might not be relevant to the main flow, detail that might have given us more uncontrolled depth. It felt more like Philadelphia than Brokeback Mountain to me.

But all the specificity about lesbianism aside, The Kids are All Right is about love and family, and that's enough for anyone to be able to enjoy this film. I loved the part where Nic finally tells Paul to piss off and find his own family rather than stealing hers; I could see myself in that role. As for the lesbian specificity of script, I enjoyed seeing a portrayal of the pressures a same-sex couple might face, done in its detail. This is the kind of insight that cinema can provide so abundantly. The film doesn't have the range or emotional depth of Techine at his best, but it's still a worthwhile watch.

And it made me wonder what other national cinema would be capable of producing a similar film.

Jan 22: Rendez-vous (1985--Andre Techine)

* * *

Of Techine’s 80s films, the other ones I've seen are Le lieu du crime and Hotel des Ameriques, and Rendez-vous is at the high end of that gamut.

I remember how Lili’s personality in Lieu swings from one orientation to another and how Gilles’ personality suddenly veers off into far left field in Hotel; the personalities in Rendez-vous have a similar volatility to them and can seem unmotivated, unexpected or out of proportion.

I feel this a little in Paulot, who starts the film as a noodle-y assistant to an overbearing female boss. He falls in love with Nina and wants to have sex with her, but he’s the only person in the film she won’t accept; she’s aware that she uses sex to get her way with men and protests that she loves him and doesn’t want to manipulate him with sex. However, rejection alters Paulot, and his love first becomes obsession and then anger and then rejection. Both Quentin and the usher boyfriend have had Nina, and losing at that male completion makes Paulot even more aggressive and angry. Nina ultimately offers herself to him, but that’s the end of the relationship; not only does her act imply her need overcoming her love, but the rape-like quality of the scene shows that Paulot’s real concern at that point is power more than love. There are two pairs of scenes which, (perhaps heavy-handed) measure of the change in Paulot. Nina offers herself to Paulot twice, and he reacts differently at each invitation, declining out of shame or love the first time and accepting out of a need to exert power the second. In the second pair, Nina gives Paulot theater tickets twice. The first time, he gratefully accepts and attends; the second time, he tears up the tickets and throws them away. Such parallels are a little contrived, but they serve as indices of change in Paulot’s character. Like in the other two 80s films, the character tangent here is somewhat fast. But at least it has some motivation.

I wasn’t able to fill in all the gaps in Nina’s character at all, and the info in those gaps would have been important. First, I don’t understand why Nina “loves” Paulot. He’d done nothing to inspire love in her when she first turns him down, and having sex would not have been a major deal to Nina. I also found her sudden love of Quentin unmotivated, even unconvincing. Maybe she wants to rescue him from his problems despite his protestations about not wanting help. But I saw nothing in the suddenness of that love that would make it deep enough to lead to her having visions of him after he dies or of her fixation on playing Juliette. And I didn’t get why she wants Paulot in her life so badly in the latter part of the film. Perhaps her (unconvincing) love of Quentin had shaken her and she wants Paulot as a crutch. Nina is the center of this film, and she is the part that holds together the least for me.

I like Lambert Wilson as Quentin. He is a perfect Heathcliff -- enigmatic, disturbed, threatening, tortured, self-destructive. His psychology isn’t much of a question here because he doesn’t change. He’s another of these major characters like Manu in Temoins and the boyfriend in RER who drops out in the middle of the movie, setting up the character theme of how to deal with loss; it’s a brave plot structure and theme that Techine uses several times. I like it.

Since I never got the Nina-Quentin love, the last part of the film about the production of Romeo and Juliet wasn’t very compelling or satisfying. Nina’s role as Juliet certainly takes a toll on her non-professional life, but her motivation is so unclear to me that this section of the film falls flat. Perhaps both Nina and Scrutzler are working through their grief by using the play to conjure their lost loves. In any case, it was interesting to discover here a film that looks at some of the same issues as Aronofski’s Black Swan,. The artistic project in both films soon begins to creep beyond the performance an into the performers' daily lives, and in both films, the performance is a sort of therapy or enactment of a desire. But while the motivation of Aronofski’s Nina is evident, I just didn’t get why Techine’s Nina is doing Romeo and Juliet. (hmmmm...two Ninas?….it might be worth pondering whether Romeo and Juliet informs the structure of Rendez-vous the way the structure of Swan Lake informs Black Swan…..)

Jan 21: Les voleurs/Thieves (1996--Andre Techine)

* * * *

Right after Ma saison preferee and Wild Reeds is Les voleurs, and it’s part of that great run Techine had in the mid-90s. There are so many things that are engaging in this film. While this is a crime movie….and you gotta love the way the French do them….it’s mostly another humanistic view of personalities and relationships. Marie and Alex love Juliette, and when Juliette vanishes from the movie midway through, they’re left to cope with their loss. It’s another example of the Techine plot structure where we get to like an important character and then lose the character half way through the film. I think of Temoins as the archetype of that style in Techine.

This verson is a little different from that in Temoins, though, because the shifting perspectives of the story give us, temporally, different focuses. We don’t see a group of people move forward in time here. In Voleurs, the first part of the film shows us Alex, his brother and his family. We get more on Alex as Juliette enters the story and we learn about that relationship; we start to settle into a story about the jaded, aloof detective. The story then takes an unexpected turn when we meet Catherine Deneuve’s Marie half-way through and Marie becomes a major character as we lose track of Juliette. I like this irregular plot structure that won’t fit the intro-rising action-climax-denouement story we’re so used to. It's fresh, and it works.

Like in Saison preferee, the relationship of Deneuve and Daniel Auteuil becomes the central focus of the film, and Deneuve, if anything, is better here than in Saison. She has great range this film, and she tempers every emotional swing into the creation of the academic Marie, who is cracking under the stress of losing her unexpected, intense love of Juliette. Likewise, Saison and Voleurs have put Auteuil on my map as an actor. His is a consistent, underplayed, inscrutable character who, like Marie, has a hard shell that is penetrated by Juliette. We see more of Alex than Marie in the film, so we understand that his emotional repression comes from his family history and his job, and we get his interior as we watch his frank sexual relationship with Juliette. And we come to see that he’s lying to us (and to himself) about it. Soon after Juliette left the film, I was caught a little off-guard when Alex began to take an interest in Marie, but that interest makes sense now after my having seen the whole film. Alex feels; he has heart. I missed that because I’m so used to buying into the surface I see in a film that I don’t question enough. Alex’s inviting Marie to dinner – and seeing the pains he’s gone to in order to dress it up – would have surprised Marie as much as it did me. Richly realistic character that she is, Marie blows the evening because she has her own issues to deal with and doesn’t really care about or look into Alex much either. That dinner is a seminal moment in the film to me.

And there is the character range and richness here I like so much in Techine. We see the family in detail, and all that info makes us care about them even though they are outside the main flow of the film. The same is true of the surplus we get around Juliette with her brother and their friends. And I enjoyed the opening and closing focus on the little boy. The story here reminded me slightly of As I Lay Dying, with the perspective of the film shifting among characters; AILD shifts into unusual points of view like Jewel’s and even the dog’s, while here we get the perspective of an angry, repressed child, trying to cope with the loss of a parent; he may become an Alex. And there's a little French play with Barthesian suspense as this kid hides a gun early in the movie…..but never returns to or uses it.

This is a deep, warm, thoughtful movie and deserves more attention than it gets.

Jan 20: La fille du RER/The Girl on the Train (2009--Andre Techine)

* * * *

A lot of things to like in this film. La fille du RER has the engaging, off-center storyline I see often in Techine, oblique social observation, interesting film technique, a view of daily Paris and some of its ordinary residents, and the wonderful excess that I enjoy in so many of Techine’s films.

Once again, Techine starts his film in one direction with characters I like (the love story of Jeanne and Franck) then drops one of the characters half way though. And once we lose Franck, we watch Jeanne cope with this loss, her coping driving much of the rest of the film. Her response to losing Franck is to commit a major hoax that becomes a national cause célèbre, so the movie shows how her intense, personal response to trauma drops her into a national debate she’s not even interested in. RER is at least partly an ironic view of how politics and media can use the pain of an individual who finds herself almost accidently at a fault line in her society. In RER, when Jeanne makes up her story about being beaten and called names, she becomes a locus of France’s worries about anti-Semitism and the nation’s ambivalence towards its Muslim citizenry; making such a film in the US, I’d chose a white girl who says she’s been attacked by a group of young black males for the same effect. RER looks at how Jeanne’s reaction to a very personal pain becomes a national affair. It’s a great central story.

Although Jeanne’s story is central, Techine fills the film out with a group of other well-developed characters which include Jeanne’s mother and the family of the lawyer, Samuel Bleistein. The Bleistein family is an example of why I like the excess I get with Techine. We learn about Bleistein, his deadbeat son, his overbearing daughter-in-law and his nephew. All these characters, completely unnecessary to the main line of the story and not even related thematically, we learn about in some depth. In fact, the coming of age story of Alex and his crush on Jeanne is even further astray from the political story, though still touching. It’s an immense cinematic pleasure to have so much extra to enjoy in a Techine film.

RER, as the title suggests, also has an honesty about it. In the film, we see dormitories, suburban streets and public transportation. These Parisian settings are more quotidian than you’d see in a romanticized Paris film. Jeanne’s mother lives in a nice, ordinary house, and the car parts place that Franck and Jeanne live in is likewise typical. The home of the wealthy Bleistein is a sharp contrast to these more normal exteriors, harkening back to the elegant Paris convention while adding to the range of RER.

Last, I think there are some great cinematic moments here. There’s the Kurosawa tracking shot in several instances and the circling camera that films Jeanne and Franck as they rollerblade though the streets. One of the most technically-engaging sequences is the editing when Jeanne and Franck are engaged in online sex. This is certainly one of the best portrayals of that I’ve seen.

Overall, I completely enjoyed La fille du RER. It’s Techine at a peak.

Jan 19: Les temps qui changent/Changing Times (2004--Andre Techine)

* * * *

There’s a lot to like here. Les temps qui changent has the frankness that I pretty much expect at this point from Techine films; Sami comes home from France with his girlfriend, and his first stop is off to see his boyfriend. They converse honestly, too, boyfriend Said talking about meeting other guys, one of whom has given him a moto. Cecile is honest, too, in reflecting on the love she shared with Antoine and in telling her husbanc, Natan, that their son is gay. Even Nadia's drug use has a matter-of-fact quality to it. Love and character are all part and parcel of this film, and there's little indirection. I like this quality in Techine films – all the elements of life, including love and sex, are so integrated.

I also like the portrayal of Tangiers here since the film sees the city as an outsider does. Sami sees cars full of Moroccans joking and laughing, Antoine visits work sites wondering why Moroccan workers aren’t acting like European workers, and Techine’s camera itself stops to look at the country and its people without taking us into what’s happening. What were the Moroccans in the car joking about? What is the story behind the sacrifice of the sheep? We see all this from the outside, not fully comprehending the everyday reality of what we’re seeing. It’s an effective representation of expat life from the POV of Antoine, Sami and Cecile. Another element of this portrayal is the view we get of expat life itself. The expat settings have a compelling verisimilitude. Cecile’s home is cluttered and a bit worn, like that of a middle class expat in a foreign country, and Antoine moves through typical international hotel and office interiors. Les temps qui changent has a true sense of expat life, from its physical environment to its psychological experience.

The main focus of the film is the relationship of Antoine and Cecile, and this relationship touches many things I expect to see when I watch a Techine film. It’s honest, and you see Antoine’s old, swollen hands and his stiff movements along with Cecile’s slightly aged face. The mother, Cecile, is another of Techine’s mothers: the gravitational center of the family, the main organizing point of family life if still somewhat cold and distant. The movement of Cecile’s character here, from her relative coldness to her reawakening into love, echoes the movement of Lili in Le lieu du crime and of Odile in Les egares. All three are mothers, all three have little personal life, all three organize the lives of their sons and all three are rejuvenated as their respective films progress. Small wonder that Catherine Deneuve likes working with Techine so much. He often has a strong, engaging female in his films who grows in insight and life.

The two main protagonists also have a rich, Techinean depth that appeals to me. We see Antoine’s slightly inept efforts to win Cecile, ranging from sending roses to considering folk charms. The scene where he tells Natan about his intentions is likewise pitiful. Cecile, too, has a richness about her, whether she’s talking about Antoine to a colleague or managing Sami’s life. We don’t need all this info, but it makes the viewer’s experience of the film much richer and more satisfying.

The central concern of the romance between the two main protagonists is whether a deep, obsessive love can be definitive, and working in the romance genre for this film, Techine tells us that it can be. Other loves in the film reflect this same concern. Sami clearly loves his friend Said, and the feeling is reciprocal, but Sami leaves Said anyway, tearfully begging his friend to come to Paris. We later hear that Sami has other boyfriends in Paris, but we’re left to speculate about whether another love will equal that which he has had with Said. At the end of the film, we also find the deadened Natan suddenly experience a coup de foudre with Aicha, who clearly has a reciprocal experience. We get little background on that affair, but love at first sight doesn’t need background. And as for Nadia, we can only hope that she and Sami manage to avoid getting tied down together; there’s no love there.

I’ve noticed that Techine’s films often have North Africans or people of North African descent in them, and this one, of course, is no exception. At the same time, Les temps returns to one of the concerns of Wild Reeds – what is French identity. Sami feels he doesn’t belong in France or Morocco, and his mother Cecile has lived in Morocco for years, but she doesn’t speak the language yet and has limited horizons because of it. She’s too French to be Moroccan. Perhaps France has long had this identity question as it’s tried to manage its colonies; French identity in an international world was certainly a concern of L'heure d'ete by Olivier Assayas.

No question in my mind that many of the negative feelings toward this movie are related to the ending, and I don’t know what to make of it either. My first response was to smack my forehead and shout with disgust, but I don’t think the director of J'embrasse pas, Ma saison preferee, Wild Reeds and Les voleurs would seriously end a romance with one of the protagonists coming out of a coma to meet the object of his affection. Rather, the film has mucked about in the romance genre throughout, from its casting to its plot, so the ending is a final farewell to romance conventions. Perhaps even an ironic one. Any director has to take risks and make judgments, I guess, and this wasn’t the best choice of an ending. Still, Les temps qui changent hits most of its notes right…way more right than many films.

Jan 18: Les égarés/Strayed (2003--Andre Techine)

* * *

Les Egares starts with a plane straffing a narrow road filled with civilian refugees from the German march on Paris. Cars explode and people die trapped on the road as it runs through an open area. When I first saw this scene, it made an indelible impression on me, one so strong I was sure I wouldn’t forget it. That was several years ago when I saw it in Rene Clement’s Forbidden Games, and I recognized it instantly in Les Egares.

I don’t think this opening in Les Egares is a gratuitous reference either, any more than both films having a brother and sister or the sister having the same hair style in them. The two films address the same idea of nature being both innocent and savage. In Forbidden Games, the kids innocently mimic rituals of death and try to understand and take care of their lost pets or other animals; it’s a creepy behavior. In Les Egares, Yves is a force of nature who climbs walls with agility and is one with the forest; he also robs the dead as need arises and seems dangerously blunt and abrupt. Nature has its rough edges in both these films, oddly sweet but nevertheless disturbing.

Les Eagares also adds in the Techine mother I've seen in so many films. She’s controlling, imposing order and social conformity, but she grows in this film, drawn by the power of nature to the culminating sexual encounter near the end. In a special feature interview on the DVD I watched, Techine says he wasn't sure whether to include this scene, but I'm glad it's here; the almost animal quality of outdoor encounter is an important indication of movement on the mother's evolution towards being a more natural, real being.

All this notwithstanding, Les egares isn’t one of my favorite Techine films. For one thing, the movie lacks the inclusive range that I usually like in his movies. We’re very focused on Yves and Odile throughout Les egares, and although the two leads are complicated in their own right, we don’t get the surplus insight into the other characters that I’ve grown to like in good Techine films. I want -- and take great pleasure in -- the excess that this generous director gives me, and there's not enough of it here. Also, Les egares has a somewhat classic plot structure that I found less engaging than the plot in much of his other work; Les egares starts and ends with the same characters in a classsic aristotelian structure instead of introducting me to interesting and important characters along the way and then dropping them just as readily.

I also found this movie to lack technical innovation. There is often flashy camera work or editing to make a Techine film a little more engaging, but aside from the Kurasawa-like tracking shots, there’s not much I haven’t seen elsewhere.

And I’ll add that I thought the end was hackneyed. Guess what Nature-Boy Yves does when he’s confined to a civilized prison..... (and if that's a hard guess, there's some pretty direct forshadowing)

I’d say the film is worthwhile, mostly for the complexity of the characters of Yves and Odile and the ideas they embody. Otherwise, there is so much obviousness and clunkiness that I wonder if Technine wasn't going for something I didn't get. In any case, I wasn’t particularly surprised or touched by anything here.

Jan 17: Les roseaux sauvages/Wild Reeds (1994-- Andre Techine)

* * * * *

I have to guess that Wild Reeds has gotten so much more notice than Ma Saison Preferee and J’embrasse pas because it involves the Algerian War, a trauma that France is still dealing with. But there’s a strong link among all these strong films of this period of Techine’s career.

The biggest link I see here is between Reeds and Saison: both focus on showing us personal relationship is a detailed, intimate way. In Reeds, there are four people rather than the two of Saison, and there’s more variety among the four, but Techine still manages to make us intimate with all four of them. Part of that is the detail, and another part is the film technique. Reeds takes us from one intimate conversation to another; I only have to think of the conversation between Maite and Francois when the boy comes out to his girlfriend to get the sincere, conflicted personalities of each. I love this dialog – it’s so first-hand and honest.

And as my French is getting better as I progress through these movies, I can actually watch them more, and what I’m seeing is a lot of close-ups. Lots. This is an effective way to create intimacy between the viewer and the characters, and it works like a charm. Of course, it only works if the actors can act, and the four leads are great. And the casting of the four based on their looks is dead-on, too. Gael Morel as Francois just looks sincere, fragile, and youthful. His earnestness and vulnerability are always visible when we see his face, and he plays these qualities beautifully. There’s a scene of him riding on his moped to Toulouse with his arms around Serge’s chest and a look of transcendent happiness on his face (and with Barber’s Adagio in the background and a earnest voiceover) that can bring tears to your eyes with its poignancy since we know at this point that Serge is straight and that Francois’ love is going to be unrequited. Elodie Bouchez’s Maite has a silent movie face with its expressive, mercurial changes to reflect her moods: love, confusion, anger, desire. She is France. Great casting of Stephane Rideau as Serge, too. Serge is nature, and he has a big, broad body and is slightly cross-eyed. He doesn’t show a huge range of emotion; he takes things as they come having learned living with hardship on the land. Frederic Gorny does a fine job with Henri, too. Gorny has a handsome, sculptural face that he uses to allow only hints of the hurt and anger it mostly conceals. All these actors have an authentic appearance and play their characters with a unique specificity…and the scenario lets them interact intimately. It’s the same focus I saw and appreciated in Saison.

But there’s more here. There’s a symbolic overlay as the film is also about France herself. You can see the farmer, the intellectual, the nubile and the North African here, classic elements of how the French see themselves. This is about France growing, being the reed of La Fontaine’s fable and not the oak. This is a France trying to move toward liberte, fraternite and egalite, even if that achievement is halting, uncertain, not wholly successfully. These fabulous kids move toward that vision with their sincerity, innocence and occasional stumble. It’s hard to say whether they’ll achieve this vision or not. But La Fontaine would have hope for a people with the attitudes of these four.

OTHER THOUGHTS: Again, no fathers, though Maite’s mother has some of the depth to her that Techine often gives his auxiliary characters. And there’s the same economy of editing here I like in all the Techine I’ve seen, sparing us unnecessary detail. AND I’m finally taking this opportunity to comment on a shot that I’ve seen in several Techine films but have forgotten to mention: the long tracking shot with the camera on rail following the subject but with something in the middle ground that shouts the motion. Saw this Rashemon but don’t know enough to say whether Techine got this idea from Kurasawa or from another source. But it’s effective. And last thought: I’ve also seen the camera move in circles several times to show the range of action taking place at the scene. This must be hard to do and is more something I’d expect from Scorcese more than from Techine, but Techine uses it often.

Jan 16: Ma saison préférée/My Favorite Season (1993--Andre Techine)

* * * * *

I was completely engaged in this film, and when it was over, I didn't know how to talk about it.

There aren't many traditional elements to deal with Ma saison preferee. There's a story, but it’s hard to find any Aristotelian structure to it unless you focus on the mother, and she’s not who you spend most of your time with in this film. And there are characters, but they don’t move to any revelations, act on hubris, learn anything or experience personality growth. Well, not much….

Ma saison preferee, instead, just shows us relationships and gives us info about the people involved in them to let us fill in the gaps. But it does this by showing us such a rich breadth that we feel like we know who these people are, and by the end of the film, we almost predict how they’ll act and what they think. It’s a very unique movie in giving so much information and insight but not seeming to move in any particular direction. We watch Emilie and Antoine interact with each other, with their mother, with others they know, and we learn about them intimately as they do so, but in the end, we’re left with a brother who is so close to his sister that he’s truncated his own life and a sister who has always coped by organizing and directing. We see these two personalities reveal and express themselves throughout the film, we learn what has created them, but by the end of the film, there’s no great insight of social importance. We’ve simply seen an intimate portrait of how a particular brother and sister relationship has developed and how it functions. It’s the depth and intimacy of the portrait that makes this movie so fantastic.

And as I see so often in Techine’s films, there’s a fabulous excess in Ma saison preferee. If the film were simply giving the history and present of Emilie and Antoine, there would be no need for the kids Anne, Lucien, and Khadija. Yet the three, along with Bruno, get plenty of screen time and have their own depth. They’re more shallow than Emilie and Antoine, but the other characters do more than reflect or introduce element of the main two siblings. They have their own development, conflicts and personalities, the kids perhaps beginning to reflect the influence of the parents as Emilie and Antoine reflect the influence of theirs (Antoine’s talking to himself if an especially obvious example of this since his mother does the same thing).

It’s a film about families, about modernity, about France and about generations and siblings. On reflection, I’m delighted at the range of experience and knowledge in this film.

Last note: Again, I note the absence of a father in a Techine movie. This film focuses on Berthe and her effect on her kids Emilie and Antoine. And of the parents in the film, we see much more of Emilie than of Bruno, who appears just a little hapless even though Anne is partial to him. All the fathers I’ve seen so far are inarticulate or clumsy. Techine is certainly partial to the role of the mother, another original element of his work.

Jan 15: J'embrasse pas/I Don't Kiss (1991-- Andre Techine)

* * * * *

I loved this movie, and it's very clear to me that Techine had hit his stride when he made it. You could see it as an homage to 400 Blows, but it's more than that. I think it's an update of Truffaut's film to a time that's got its own brutalities and in a medium with more flexibility because of relaxed social mores. J'embrasse pas considers what would have happened to Antoine Doinel if he'd been born in the late 70s and convincingly finds he'd have ended up a hustler in the Bois de Boulogne.

Like Doinel, Pierre faces some hard obstacles. He leaves a less-than-ideal family for Paris, and I was cringing at his beatific smile and naive optimism as soon as he got there. He's used, robbed, beaten and raped in the course of the film, a series of events that hammers the adolescent.

But many of his problems are also self-inflicted. Like the kid Thomas in Le lieu du crime, Pierre fiercely rebels against any authority or external control. He’s sexually attracted to Mireille, though when she gives him money to try to hold him, he immediately leaves. He goes with Romain to Spain, but when he feels (imagined) pressure to join the Romain’s team, he bolts. His knee-jerk rejection of authority eventually leads him to cross the path of a particularly vicious pimp, and that encounter gets him severely beaten.

In each of these situations, Pierre is following his heart, though his heart isn’t always right. With Mireille, Pierre was only interested in sex and didn’t care about her or her situation. Romain (a precursor of Adrian in Les temoins) was more concerned about Pierre’s future than sex, a fact that Pierre’s visceral homophobia prevented the kid from seeing. Pierre’s obsession with Ingrid eventually leads to his getting beaten. In all these, Pierre doesn’t have a good perspective on himself or on others, and this lack of perspective is what leads him into making bad decisions and becoming disillusioned.

Pierre also lacks perspective about himself. He doesn’t have the education to play Hamlet, and the scene in the film where he fails at that reading is painfully honest; after his failure, Pierre drops his dream of being an actor, a dream so naïve that even the kid working at the hotel remarks on it. Pierre then focuses on money, but when Romain asks him what he’d do if he had it, Pierre can only say he’d be respected. He doesn't have a vision and doesn't know what he wants to do, but he's dogged. His are a much stronger version of the problems Doinel faces in 400 Blows.

As life in Paris takes its toll, Pierre seeks refuge and eventually lands in the army. He’d previously rejected military service because he rejected authority, but after his beating, perhaps he saw he wasn’t handling life as well as he’d thought. He had plenty of money as a prostitute, but it didn’t get him Ingrid, didn't get him respect, and didn't prevent his beating. He sought refuge, if an unhappy one. Unable to control his determination even in the army, he spends evenings berating himself in the mirror. Unlike the other army kid, Pierre doesn't reject love; he rejects failure to follow his own ideal.

And upon leaving the base, Pierre heads yet again to follow his dream, and J'embrasse pas makes its most explicit reference to 400 Blows. The responsible, societal thing to do would have been for Pierre to visit his aging parent nearby like his brother advised him, but he heads to the coast to see the sea that Ingrid had told him about. The final shot of Pierre in the ocean , and the scene has the same bittersweet tone as that in 400 Blows. Pierre hasn't changed, and the same world awaits him.

One of the things I especially notice in this film is how it doesn't leave gaps in psychology that I can't fill. Unlike in Le lieu du crime, for example, when Lili is suddenly in love with Martin, none of the shifts in Pierre's character are so sudden that I couldn't follow them. Perhaps Techine made Pierre easier to understand because Pierre is the sole focus of the film. Rather than trying to bring 2-4 characters along, J'embrasse pas brings along only one, and it therefore has the time to look at Pierre in some depth.

Techine doesn't neglect secondary characters. Mirielle has her motivations and conflicts, and so does Romain. Even Said has personality. One of the things I like in Techine is the character richness that his films have and his willingness to wander off on details that don't necessarily have to be in the film. I wonder if Hollywood would have kept Said as a character at all. And I don't see that the scene with Romain and Dimitri had to be there. Nor, for that matter, the all the scenes with the Brazilian transvestites. These, though, give a huge depth to the film that makes J'embrasse pas resonate even more.

Jan 15: The King's Speech (Tom Hooper -- 2010)

* * *

This was a good, competent movie in the usual Hollywood style. It was quite touching, especially in the climax were George VI gives his speech. I liked the way he was in a closed room for the speech: that setting made the speech simultaneously the private victory of an individual as well as the hugely important political event it was for the citizens of the nation. His success there was a great, Hollywood climax, not to take anything away from it for being that. (And the Beethoven 7th, second movement, is one of my fav pieces of music).

The other thing I liked in the film was the portrayal of Edward VIII and Wallace Simpson. I think of Edward's abdication as the triumph of love over privilege, but how striking to see Guy Pearce's interpretation of Edward as a self-absorbed, oblivious weakling. And the infamous Ms. Simpson as a bossy, superficial flapper. Given the historical moment, that interpretation has some resonance.

I'd also have to say that Colin Firth carried the film though Geoffrey Rush clearly could have if the script had given him that opportunity. And Helena Bonham Carter reigned herself in and did a very capable job, too.

I don't get what all the fuss is about this film. It's good, for sure, but it seems very conventional.

Jan 14: Le lieu du crime/Scene of the Crime (1987-- Andre Techine)

* * *

I liked this film much more than Hotel des Amerique.

For all the apparent focus on the boy, on the criminals and the crime, it's very much about...the grandmother! I like how that fact sneaks up on you in the film until you realize that much of the action revolves around how the various characters deal with her. It should have been clear to me quite early in the film when we see her bossing her grandson and conspiring with her son-in-law, and I didn't even get it in the excruciating First Communion celebration when she compels everyone into fitting into the universe the way she wants it. She's the missing center, the energy that drives most of the protagonists' actions.

I really only got it when Techine uncharacteristically includes a clunky line of dialog for Lili to the effect that she always tried to please her mother, and that had been the problem with her life. Her affair with the good criminal Martin was her (finally!) rebelling against her mother. The drama and punishment around her love with Martin was preferable to her following her mother's desire for a conventional, bourgeoise life, and she ends on the road to a new life...having lost much of the love in her life and looking at confinement.

Lili's son, Thomas, is a parallel character. Unlike Lili, though, Thomas rebels from the beginning and suffers mightily for it. Outspoken, disobedient and insolent, he fights grandmother, school, church and father. Had Lili rebelled earlier, as she says she wishes she had, she would have been Thomas. Thomas, too, ends on the road to a new life, one with less love in it than he might have had.

I've seen parallel characters in Techine before -- Adrian and Sarah from Temoins, for example. I like the way Techine guides pairs like this through a narrative, connecting them via the criminals (Scene) or free-spirit (Temoins) and leading them on similar and contrasting paths. And in each case, the elements that connect the parallel characters leave their traces on the protagonists; that's almost a theme, too.

I also appreciated the link between Thomas and Lili in this film. You don't often see the relationship of a boy and his mother at the focus of a film, and it's tender and painful here. Perhaps I'll revisit Almodovar's All about My Mother to see how he deals with this topic.

Even though I like so much of this film's character and plot structure, I still felt left jerked through some of the character development -- I didn't see Lili falling for Martin so fast; I didn't see Maurice as in love with Lili. I like the decentered story here, the misleading focus, the fast editing, but I'm (again) put off by some of the gaps in the characters. Not sure why I can take the gaps in everything but the characters. Perhaps because the film is so set in a mimetic paragdigm I want to see the mimesis in the characters, too.

Jan 13: Hôtel des Amériques/Hotel America (1981-- Andre Techine)

* *

I just didn't like this movie even though I really wanted to.

It has a lot going for it. I like the editing, the compression of the story; I'm alway appreciative of a movie that shows someone walking to a car and cuts to driving, sparing me having to sit through the predictable door opening, key insertion, blah, blah. And like in Temoins, there's engaging psychology here and what is, for me, the frankness about relationships. Hélène is complicate, Gilles is complicated and even minor characters like the sister, the gay postal guy and the two women friends of Hélène are complicated. And lots of the visual is nice, from Catherine Deneuve to her primary-colored wardrobe and the views of Biarritz from the perspective of a local.

The problem I couldn't get past was the blockiness of the narrative. Hélène is distant, then vulnerable, then suffering in mad love; Gilles is sweet, then depressed, then crazy. There are too many big jumps and jolts in the movie. In the later Temoins, there are also jumps and empty places in the narrative and portrayal of the characters, but these gaps aren't so far or abrupt that my experience would keep me from filling them in. Here, though, there is so much distance in the jumps that a scene loses touch with the previous, a mood or attitude loses touch with the previous, so there's no overall arc or unity. Maybe the movie just tries to cover too much story and character development in too short a period of time, but I caught myself thinking "What!?" more often than a viewer should have. And the hackneyed music doesn't help matters.

Sixteen years before Temoins, Techine is already looking at some of the same themes: the difficulty of expressing and realizing love, the persistence of love after loss, the pain that accompanies love, and the complexity of individuals' psychology and desire. There are also gay characters, openly interacting with straight society (though out of the main narrative here), and there's even cruising in a park.

Techine does a much better job of controlling the range and gaps in is films in the later Temoins than in this one, and that's a pity. I would have liked to know Hélène an Gilles as well as I know Sarah and Adrien.

And was I in France in 1981? Those narrow ties brought back some uncomfortable memories of my life at the apex of fashion.

Jan 12: Les temoins/The Witnesses (Andre Techine--2007)

* * * * *

Not sure why this movie hasn't gotten more note; David Jones recommended it to me, so I checked it out.

And loved it. Touched seeing on screen the frankness of so many parts of gay life I've been familiar with: cruising, younger/older, AIDS, gay/bi interface, gay (male)/straight (female), dealing with being gay, love...even the quotidian details involved with transporting the body. And like so many French films, this one deals so (refreshingly) frankly with sex, love and relationships. I know of no other national cinema that can look love so directly in the face and not blink.

Film is not only direct, but it leaves so much unexplained. Michel Blanc's fully-realized Adrian is touching, loving Manu as a mentor but also desiring him, but the others are harder to see into. Mehdi totally loves Manu and Sarah, Manu loves Adrian as well as Mehdi, Sarah loves Mehdi, Adrian and her writing. And the movie explores none of this in an analytical way. In fact, Adrian moves on, Mehdi moves on, Sarah writes the movie and even Manu's sister Julie moves on.

All are touched by the episode with Manu and carry him with them, but their lives continue. Ironically, it's probably Sarah who most honors Manu.

The film observes all these relationships -- no interpretation, no analysis -- so we follow what we see: surface, in a keenly observed context. I'm impressed at Techine's way of portraying such intense, complicated relationships and think I'm going to watch more of his films.

Thanks, David!

Shaun the Sheep (Aardman Animations)

Jan 9: Lady Vengeance (Park, Chan wook--2005)

* * * *

Jan 7: Old Boy (Park, Chan wook--2003)

* * * *

Jan 5: Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (Park, Chan wook--2002)

* * * *

Jan 3-11 -- Gaumont Treasures 1897-1913 (Guy, Feuillade, Perret)

* * * *

Jan 2: I Love You, Phillip Morris (Glenn Ficarra, John Requa--2009)

****