April 23, 2009
Un Certain Disregard
[As the lineup for the 2009 Cannes Film Festival was just unveiled today, Vadim Rizov weighs in on the festival's history with local auteurs. He still doesn't endorse sexual abuse.]
50 years ago yesterday, Jean-Luc Godard unleashed one of his charming
little cri de couers upon Cinema As We Know It. The occasion was
Truffaut's The 400 Blows being selected as France's sole
official submission to the Cannes Film Festival. "[F]or the first time
a young film has been officially designated by the powers that be to
reveal the true face of the French cinema to the entire world," Godard
exulted,
before launching into another seething blast against the cinema de
papa the Cahiers gang loathed so much. "In attacking over
the last five years in these columns the false technique of Gilles
Grangier, Ralph Habib, Yves Allégret [ed: another 18 names follow] ...
what we were getting at was simply this: your camera movements are
ugly because your subjects are bad, your casts act badly because your
dialogue is worthless; in a word, you don’t know how to create cinema
because you no longer even know what it is ... Today, victory is
ours. It is our films that will go to Cannes to show that France is
looking good, cinematographically speaking. Next year it will be the
same again, you may be sure of that."
And so it was, sort of. As it happened, The 400 Blows was
joined at the festival by Hiroshima Mon Amour, which was then
pulled from competition in deference to the outraged American
delegation. 50 years later, Alain Resnais is back once again with Les Herbes folles, his fifth appearance in competition; to an extent, the New
Wave became the establishment, as they wished. Things, of course,
didn't change overnight: Allégret was back in competition in 1962,
and arguably not another significant New Wave film was in competition
til The Umbrellas of Cherbourg in 1964 (and that's a tenuous
categorization). Godard, hilariously, didn't make it into competition
'til 1980, after he'd been safely absorbed into the canon. But the world
had noticed. If the New Wave never wiped out the "tradition of
quality" as much as they'd hope, they certainly made themselves felt
internationally.
In recent years, there's been a fair amount of bitching and paranoia
about the lack of French films in competition, regardless of
orientation. Leaving messy co-productions out of this and sticking to
films in French by ethncially French directors, 2003 boasted five
entries, none of which have really survived the test of time, even
five years later. They included François Ozon's risible Swimming
Pool, a minor entry from aging wunderkind Bertrand Blier, and
equally minor works from André Téchiné and Claude Miller. (I'm
reserving judgment on Tiresia, because of its Wikipedia
summary: "it tells of a transsexual who is kidnapped by a man and left
to die in the woods. She is then saved by a family and receives the
gift of telling the future.") In contrast, 2004 only had two entries,
and they were both weak: Olivier Assayas' token prestige pic
Clean and Agnes Jaoui's Look At Me (Jaoui is
precisely the kind of filmmaker Godard worked to eradicate,
though frankly these days she does better with the kind of material
Alain Resnais inexplicably chooses than Resnais himself). 2005 had two
films, but they were Lemming and, uh, To Paint Or Make
Love.
In truth, the great French Drought at Cannes has been greatly
exaggerated: the past two years had seven French submissions,
including major works like A Christmas Tale, The Class
and Frontier of Dawn. Still, it's hard not to get psyched about
a line-up so strong that informed speculation says Claire Denis'
latest didn't make the cut because it was so crowded in there already.
(I mean, they could've done away with Xavier Giannoli, but whatever.) The real
point isn't whatever faux-panic we're having this year; the point is
that Godard didn't win. We celebrate the New Wave, as always, just as
we celebrate adventurous descendants like Desplechin. But things swing
back and around; Allégret never left Cannes, and now we have Jaoui and
her ilk, the traditionalists' heirs. They will never leave. One of the
filmmakers on Godard's shitlist was Julien Duvivier; from May 1-25
(outlasting the Festival handily), MoMA will host a retrospective of
his work. If you go look up the more obscure works on IMDb, battle
scars still linger. Check out the bitter comments on e.g. Un Carnet De
Bal: "While Godard and co were still in diapers, Duvivier, Renoir
and Carné were inventing the best French cinema that had ever been. I
would trade you all M. 'A bout de soufflé' filmography for 'un carnet
de bal'." Copious [sic]s aside, it's telling and odd that way after
the New Wave, some people are still angry, presumably still seeking
out classicist cinema. The real question at Cannes (and in world film)
isn't how many French films made it; it's what they represent. 50
years later, Cannes tilts highbrow, but still will never eradicate its
middlebrow component. Not that that's a problem—I, for one, am pumped
for this chance to re-evaluate Duvivier—but it's the status quo,
just as it's been for 50 years. The New Wave's real achievement wasn't
erasing the middlebrow, no matter how hard they tried: it was creating
a separate space to co-exist in, if a more marginalized one
commercially.
Posted by ahillis at April 23, 2009 2:11 PM
Tiresia is wonderful actually, and I suspected that Claire Denis' new one would be a no-show (at least in competition) as it could cause a sort of conflict of interest with Isabelle Huppert as jury head and the star of the film.
Posted by: Joe Bowman at April 23, 2009 3:49 PMRight you are, Joe. That totally slipped my mind.
Posted by: Vadim at April 23, 2009 4:53 PMI SAW "To Paint Is To Make Love," and boy was it some special kind of awful. If you ever thought that the presence of Daniel Auteuil and Sabine Azéma was sufficient to redeem any film, this will disabuse you of the notion right quick.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny at April 23, 2009 6:32 PMWhat does "ethnically French" mean?
Posted by: Ben Slater at April 23, 2009 7:33 PMThe critics at Cahiers du Cinema may have loath the directors in Godard's list, they may have simply disliked them, they may have mostly ignored them, but one thing they did not do was loath anything they termed the "cinema de papa".
http://jdcopp.blogspot.com/2007/01/cinema-de-papa-truffaut-godard-young.html
Posted by: Joe Coppola at April 24, 2009 7:32 AMCris des coeurs
Posted by: ronald bergan at April 24, 2009 10:31 PMI remember the days when no viewing of a Godard film was complete unless at least 10 people got up and walked out in outrage. It was film as it could be, in intense and intentional interaction with social phenomena, not just as iconic mirror. Since then most of the rules have been broken and life has become supersaturated with images. As the image comes at us from countless screens the quest to subvert the image goes on. We have grown numb. Still, there is the opportunity to be surprised.
Posted by: Ralph Melcher at April 26, 2009 2:35 PMI'll say this: the moment Assayas debuted DEMONLOVER at Cannes, that spirit was still shown to be somewhat live and kicking.
Posted by: vadim at April 27, 2009 11:27 AMI haven't seen any other Duvivier films but Au bonheur des dames was something of a revelation for me at the San Francisco Silent Film Festival.
Posted by: Peter Nellhaus at April 29, 2009 1:08 PMPépé le Moko remains Duvivier's masterpiece, a classic of the genre of exotic intrigue. Gabin, as the rogueish quintessential loner, is at his best. Remade less well (no surprise) by Hollywood twice.
Posted by: ronald bergan at April 29, 2009 10:50 PM







Subscribe to GreenCine Daily by email