March 6, 2007
Rendez-Vous. 7.
At the Rendez-Vous with French Cinema series, James Van Maanen takes a contrary stance on one festival veteran but highly recommends The Man of My Life.
In his inimitable manner in the new film Flanders [Flandres; site], writer/director Bruno Dumont accomplishes for the French wartime home front (and the war itself in northern Africa) almost exactly what he managed for Southern California in Twentynine Palms and the downscale French suburb of L'Humanité: a fast-paced story full of zesty joie de vivre, fascinating characters and witty repartee. What? Yes, yes: I jest. A not unusual reaction, I think, to witnessing what I never imagined possible: a movie more stupid than Twentynine Palms. Yet Dumont does indeed outdo himself. If you are one of those fans who mentions Bresson in the same breath as this monumentally untalented filmmaker, you had better go back and watch some of Robert's work again soon.
M Dumont introduced the film at Rendez-Vous by telling us only that "I have done my best," and I believe him. In his Q&A following the film, he talked in circles, refusing to answer many of the questions in the legitimate spirit in which they were asked, and when he compared his work to that of De Sica, I beat a hasty retreat. Flanders is peopled, as per usual for this filmmaker, with characters that wouldn't rate a spot in Mike Judge's Idiocracy. And don't tell me this is any form of reality. Look to the Dardennes or Bresson for that. As a writer of dialog, Dumont is getting worse (L'Humanite had some promise, at least), and his sense of place and pace, not to mention verisimilitude, is woeful (his wartime scenes are among the silliest I have ever seen). Real characters, no matter how beaten down, uneducated, uncaring they might be, still have a few "characteristics" - those specifics that make one person different from another. And "real" movies are full of carefully observed reality, not the generic nonsense found here. At least Dumont did not tell us that Flanders should be perceived as a dream, as he did with his Palms. It is particularly difficult for me to believe that anyone could be moved by the ridiculous ending, in which the writer/director appears to imagine that his characters achieve "grace" when there are no real characters here at all.
I know my colleague David D'Arcy believes in this film, and after reading his review, I was prepared to as well. But then I sat there, increasingly slack-jawed, throughout. International Film Circuit has picked Flanders up for distribution, however; any of you so inclined will have the chance to weigh in later this year.
Moving from the ridiculous to the sublime, the same day at Rendez-Vous offered another film that spoke to me as intensely and beautifully as few others have: The Man of My Life (L'homme de sa vie), directed and co-written by Zabou Breitman, a filmmaker whose work I had not so far encountered. Ms Breitman tells the story of a family vacationing in one of those perfect French countrysides: mom, dad, son, grandma and friends. Their encounter with a neighbor, played by Charles Berling, leads to growth and change - not always easy or happy - for everyone.
The film is elegantly shot, with a beauty to rival that of Elvira Madigan, and its storytelling - though fractured enough to have left some of the audience members around me grasping - actually takes off from a single night-long conversation between the husband and the neighbor, interspersed with all that happens before and after. Ms Breitman has managed to make a movie about that most used and abused subject, love - for wife, child, companion and art - that resonates as strongly as any I can recall. It is chock full of such wonderfully specific moments that, though they are of the type seen many times before, by virtue of the filmmaker's skill, they become new and profound.
The musical score adds immensely to the movie's pleasures, as do the photography, editing - even the interiors of the homes (the Berling character's is rather phenomenal). The acting is on a par with all else, with Berling - as funny, sexy and special as I have ever seen him - Bernard Campan as the husband and Léa Drucker as the wife turning in the kind of performances that win awards and remain in memory. Strand is releasing this one, which will certainly be available on DVD eventually. While it may not speak as strongly to those who have not shared some of the experiences shown here, I would still urge you to give it a try.
Posted by dwhudson at March 6, 2007 1:10 PM
"While it may not speak as strongly to those who have not shared some of the experiences shown here, I would still urge you to give it a try."
MMM... you mean how many happily married people have not felt an intimate attraction for the next-door neighbour of the same sex who has just moved into the designer house next to your Provence holiday home..?
Jokes aside, I rather liked this film, especially considering that it is directed by a female actress (!), and am also glad it has been picked up for US distribution; it will enchant audiences who like French relationship dramedies whether straight or gay...
The best thing BY FAR about this film is the "Superman" opening shot; can't believe you didn't mention that in your review!
Posted by: Boyd at March 6, 2007 2:14 PMYou're right, Boyd. That Superman shot IS lovely. But then so are so many others! (What about that constantly blowing curtain and the space in the vestibule with the weird air currents?) The more I think about this wonderful film, the better I'd rate it. And yes, I do indeed mean "how many happily married people have not felt an intimate" etc etc. While the specifics of place my vary, it's the situation that's key. Thanks for reading--and commenting!
Posted by: James van Maanen at March 6, 2007 7:59 PMI've just realised that I can now test which critics I can trust and have something in common with. I find out where they stand on Flanders. If they like it, then I will read what that say about films in future with some attention. If not, then I will ignore their opinions. (Not that would, quite rightly,give a damn.) That goes for two other films I've seen recently: Still Life and Colossal Youth. Usually those critics who like Flanders, like these other two films. I can now see a distinct dividing line and I know which side I'm on. By the way, the second best 'French' film I've seen in the last month is Belle Toujours - a gem. I suspect James van Maanen is way over on the other side.
Posted by: ronald bergan at March 7, 2007 8:00 AMSo you'll only read critics to whom you agree with? I do know what you mean, but I can't think of too many films in which I'd burden any critic by making it the single litmus test for judging them. I can think of some critics I generally love reading, and usually agree with, and yet they totally hated some film I adored. I've since forgiven and forgotten. (Lord knows how many favorite films Pauline Kael ripped to shreds, but I kept reading her anyway.) But perhaps this film is a particularly strong one for which you identify with critically, artistically... I guess I just don't see how fair it is, in the long run, to dismiss anyone based on a single film. Maybe that's just me though.
In this case, I do know any film that so divides critics compels me to see it (though I wasn't a fan of 29 Palms either - and now I'm afraid to write anything about this one!) [g]
CP
Posted by: Craig P at March 7, 2007 4:31 PMRonald B--
Thanks for the tip re Colossal Youth, Still Life and Belle Toujours. I will definitely rent same -- if and when greencine gets 'em. And for goodness sake, don't trust me--or anyone--about movies. But, as Craig says, it IS a bit tricky to judge someone's every opinion via his stance on a single movie. Or even a single moviemaker. As much as I despised 29 Palms, I still took a chance on Flanders. And I probably will on Dumont's next one, even if it isn't a musical comedy (as the NY Times' Stephen Holden has suggsted it be). Actually, given Dumont's preference for zombie-like characterization, his first musical just might be a wonderful treat!
Perhaps I was being a bit reductive vis a vis critics. However, it is possible to share tastes with certain critics, though I find fewer and fewer with whom I agree. Just for the record, I walked out of 29 Palms. I interviewed Dumont some years ago when L'Humanite (what's your view of that, James?) came out, and he was talking, humorlessly, of making a musical then. I fear it might turn out to be as bad as Dancer in the Dark.
Posted by: ronald bergan at March 8, 2007 11:29 AMI can now see a distinct dividing line and I know which side I'm on.
Contemporary film criticism in a nutshell.
Posted by: md'a at March 8, 2007 1:33 PMRonald beat me to the punch: a splendid rule of thumb when sorting out what to read among the far-too-many film reviewers and critics in the world is to find out what they make of Dumont's work. Those who admire it are more likely than those who don't to appreciate the work of, say, Jia, Tsai, Reygadas, Haneke, Seidl, Martel, Ceylan, Solondz, Breillat, etc...
Posted by: Rob at March 8, 2007 4:09 PMRonald--
ohmigod! So we do agree on some things (and I even stayed to the bitter end of 29 Palms). I also thought Dancer in the Dark was one of the largest loads of baloney I have ever seen (I walked out on that one. I am not a von Trier fan, generally speaking). And I did like L'Humanite (with some caveats) but have not seen Dumont's Life of Jesus yet...
Rob--
I am quite fond of Solondz, Martel, Haneke and especially of Breillat, mixed on Zia and don't care for Tsai or Reygadas. So I do not think (for me, at least) your checklist works that well. Criticism is all so personal, anyway. When we watch and then write, we are somehow pulling together from probably every single thing we've experienced in our lives (and often using same in ways that even we don't understand). And then, out comes our critique. Consequently, as soon as you (or I) think we've found our critical "soulmate," s/he is bound to disappoint us--probably bigtime! (Hell, even the critics we hate sometimes agree with us perfectly.) Ah well: we do keep searching... for good criticism, for love, for peace in the mideast (or at least an end to the unmitigated disaster that is the Geo W. Bush regime).
md'a--
I hope by now you can see that the "distinct dividing line" you mention above has already shifted a bit. Tricky, those dividing lines....
Subscribe to GreenCine Daily RSS
Subscribe to GreenCine Daily by email
