Around the World in 24 Frames 08.07.09: Les Diaboliques
Posted by Len Archibald on 08.07.2009
The French New Wave (didn't) start here; Don't give away the ending or I'll KILL YOU! (tm, Eminem)
Greetings! After a weekend in Canada, I have returned to give you the goods on films from around the globe! Let's get it STARTED (HA!) Let's get it STARTED IN HERE!
The Rant
*sigh*
R.I.P. - John Hughes: Genius behind many staples of 80's moviegoing and responsible for the following hits: Pretty in Pink, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Weird Science, The Breakfast Club, National Lampoon's Vacation, Sixteen Candles, Planes, Trains and Automobiles and Home Alone 1 & 2. He was 59 years old. Man, I am feeling more and more mortal everyday.
I recently spent a weekend with my family in Toronto, home of the annual Caribana Parade. For those unfamiliar, Caribana is a 45-year old weeklong celebration of all Caribbean cultures that have integrated in Toronto over the years, complete with concerts, art exhibits, food and even a "King and Queen" pageant culminating in a spectacular parade down Lake Shore Ave that displays some of the wildest floats, great music and LOTS of scantily-clad women dancing in the streets. It is basically a weeklong party in the GTA (Greater Toronto Area.) It is one of the largest festivals in the world and the parade itself usually acquires an average audience of about 1 million people (this year, 1.3 million attended the parade.)
This was my wife's first time attending the parade and we had a good time. It ran slower than usual (basically, the floats, costumes and various acts are judged so they give mini-concerts for the spectators before arriving for the grand finale in Exhibition Place), but it was a time where there was no shame in people from other countries waving their respective country's flags in the air and showing pride for whatever country they may have migrated from with no harassment or no beef for doing so.
It is one of the things I love about my home country in that it is OKAY to celebrate other cultures AND be considered "Canadian" at the same time. It pains me to hear the sentiment from ahem those from the U.S. who believe "you should be AMERICAN that's it!" and feel that immigrants should just drop and forget their respective past culture; only to turn around and preach about "freedoms" and "rights". I don't think these same people would have a problem announcing their American heritage in every other country they visit when they have the chance, though.
So here it is in a nutshell: You're American, you're born here, you have received certain opportunities and privileges and you're PROUD of it. Good for you. I am Canadian. I was born there, and received opportunities and privileges as well. I am PROUD of that. It should be celebrated. Same for someone of Irish, Jamaican, French, German, British, South African, Iraqi, and Australian descent. I still sing "The Star Spangled Banner" and recite The Pledge of Allegiance "O Canada" just resonates with me on a deeper level because it is my anthem of my BIRTHPLACE. Don't expect me to deny where I come from to appease your ideological views of assimilation. I really don't think the United States' definition of "freedom" requires total absorption into whatever culture one considers "American".
(Caveat 1: To those who may want to respond with the tired "well, you would be offended if we had "Whiteabana" or some stupid narrow-minded rebuttal that is just a subconscious smokescreen for one's jingoistic bigotry: We have many "little" cities around most of Canada; these include "Little" Italy, Greece, Russia, Portugal, France, Germany, etc. mainly predominantly Caucasian cultures and no one complains. In Brampton, we have an annual event called "CaraBram", which was originally Brampton's smaller-scale version of Caribana that has expanded - happily to include virtually any other country that has a voice and culture that wants to be celebrated, embraced and experienced by those unfamiliar with it. There are other Caucasian cultures other than "American", y'know.)
(Caveat 2: I'm sure there may be someone itching to say something along the lines of "If you love Canada so much, why did you come to the U.S.?" thinking that form of rebuttal will exude some form of national dominance because my country did not offer opportunities that I could ONLY receive in the United States. Sorry, I came here for love. Nothing more. My wife was born in Ohio, so I moved to Ohio and spent TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS and three years to get my Green Card to marry, have a family and life with her. Of course, now that she has seen firsthand how our health care system works, she finds ways to remind me somehow that I was stupid enough to make that decision.)
(Caveat 3: Please don't use the above to rant about the health care debate in the U.S., only to use Canada as some lame-ass attempt to shill your "talking points" if you aren't from Canada, you know nothing about Canada, so kindly sit down and shut up. My column is NOT a democracy, so I can make that request. Besides, you don't know how I feel about whether or not I think Universal Health Care will work here so you're just talking/typing to a brick wall on that one.)
(Caveat 4:...And someone has to make most of the above a moot point, as someone got STABBED during the parade. Jimminy Christmas!)[/end rant]
********************
I love movies. They represent escapism, art, intellect and spirituality. Some are nothing more than popcorn flicks, designed to ease the burden of "real-life" for a couple of hours. Some bring important issues to the forefront that challenges how we perceive our surroundings. The most important thing for me if one is a serious film goer is to constantly expand and discover new movies. This includes experiencing stories told outside of North America.
Yes, I know: "I don't like to read while I watch movies". Well, neither do I, but I won't use that to prevent me from finding a great story within the screen. It is important, as human beings to discover other cultures and expand our perceptions of those different from us and how they see the world. There are reasons that Bergman, Kurosawa, Fellini, Ozu and Truffaut are important in the movie world They are just great at what they do.
I intend to highlight a new film every week that is considered "foreign-language"; now that definition is simple, yet broad and complex. For example, if you need subtitles to understand the events of the plot, I will discuss it. If it is a film from a primarily English-speaking nation, but is *NOT* in English (i.e. Leolo or Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner from Canada), I will discuss. If it is a film from outside the U.S. and it *is* in English, I will not discuss (sorry, Brits & Aussies) for now. My goal is to shed light on some of these gems, and help quell the insatiable appetites for those who can't live without seeing a new movie. Enjoy!
Les Diaboliques: The Devils (1955)
France
Dir. Henri-Georges Clouzot
Runtime: 114 min
Despite what many critics and film historians may indicate, my opinion is that the "French New Wave" began here from a filmmaker who was not initially part of the French New Wave at all: Henri-Georges Clouzot's heart-attack inducing thriller, Les Diaboliques. Here is a genre film that was so far ahead of its time that its influence still affects films of today. Would we know "Who is Keyzer Soze?", or figure that the ***SPOILER***one of the dead people the kid sees is Bruce Willis ***END SPOILER*** or The Planet of the Apes was actually a future Earth all along without Les Diaboliques twists and turns?
It is remarkable that this film is over fifty years old. I showed it to my 19-year old neice, who has been bombarded with MTV, special-effects driven cinema and movies with plot twists galore not too long ago and she was enthralled all the way up to the stunning conclusion (this is one film I will not spoil in any way whatsover!) In the age of M. Night Shaymalan, any film that can make it to a finale without a twist is an achievement. But this is a landmark film, and can still shock and amaze audiences just as much now as it did when first released during the pre-Elvis days of the world. This is the film Alfred Hitchcock wishes he made if he lived in France. I have a picture in my mind of him smiling from ear to ear watching its mischievous plot unfold.
Les Diaboliques starts simply enough. At a second-rate private boarding school in France, the tyrannical Michel Delassalle (Paul Meurisse) rules with an iron fist as headmaster. Along with him is the owner of the school and his wife, Christina (Vera Clozout, Henri's wife) and his mistress, Nicole (Simone Signoret), a fellow teacher. Michel is a dispicable man, who flaunts his affair in front of his wife and is physically and emotionally abusive to his mistress. He is terribly strict to the boys and is just as hard on his fellow teachers. Even though both women are aware they are sharing the same vile man, they are friends (or at least cordial acquaintances.) One day, Simone meets up with Christina wearing sunglasses and reveals a shiner over her eye. She is fed up with Michel. She wants to kill him. Even though Christina has a weak heart and strong moral convictions, she would not mind doing away with her brute of a husband.
Christina (Vera Clozout), dissatisfied with her brute of a husband, Michel (Paul Meurisse).
Les Diaboliques is a mystery, a dark comedy, a film-noir, a tense drama, and even (or at least it alludes to being) a supernatural thriller rolled up into a neat package, playing absolutely true to every genre. There is a running gag with a student who is a compulsive liar and his role in the film plays out as a cruel punchline. It is mentioned only sporadically that Christina has heart problems. Clouzot is masterful in the set up and eventual payoff of events. The first thirty minutes is dedicated to establishing the surrounding environment, the school, the children that occupy it, the teachers and the three main characters. Each is given a distinct, easily definable and recognizable role for the story to play out. He drops clues here and there of where the possible story could be going, then veers it in the complete opposite direction. This is not done in a boring manner, as Clouzot so sharply draws the Michel's character that the audience just BEGS for his comeuppance.
Eventually, the women devise a plan to lure Michel to Nichole's lodging, where they plan to drug and eventually, drown Michel in a bathtub. Nicole is nervous, but steely and cool on the surface. Christina is tormenting herself with second thoughts, fears of getting caught not even by the police, but by Michel himself. Time goes by. Palms are sweaty. Nicole clutches the poison in her hand. They plan to place it in a bottle of Michel's favorite wine. He arrives...
I won't lie right off the bat I knew that this would be a hard film to give a direct analysis of without giving away key moments. This is a film that I refuse to spoil because it is such a ride for a new viewer to experience. I admit that some of the films I have recently reviewed may be a little more on the "artsy" side (not that being "artsy" should disqualify a film from being great) but here is a film that is artistic and enjoyable on a basic entertaining level. Right from the beginning we are given reasons to care for, or despise certain characters. We are invested in what they do, the decisions they make and the consequences of their actions.
Michel, cool as a cucumber, after pulling a Chris Brown on Nicole (Simone Signoret).
The "French New Wave" is said to have gotten its true start around 1958 with the release of Truffaut's The 400 Blows; these were films that went against the grain, sacrificing traditional narriative structure, big budgets and A-list recognizable actors for unconventional stories that dealt with existentialism, freedom of expression and used radical low-budget (some out of necessity, some by choice) camera techniques to showcase their talents. Les Diaboliues was released three years prior to the start of this movement and follows a pretty straight-forward narrative style, but is so ripe with ideas and forward-thinking plot that it's easy to get it mixed up with Shoot the Piano Player and Weekend. Clouzot used his own wife as a main character, used minimalistic sets and set design and employed very few effects, and it is still a triumph of style.
Paul Meurisse plays Michel as a contemptible and absolutely evil human being. He cheats on his wife and beats his mistress, and continues to boast his chauvinistic views even at a dinner where other teachers are present. He is cocky, arrogant and an all around ass with absolutely NO redeeming qualities. It is a great role, and one can tell he is having the time of his life fleshing out this horrible human being on screen. Simone Signoret is marvelous as Nicole, balancing between tough, smooth, vengeful and sexy. She is a great "femme fatale", exuding traces of what we would come to know as "the modern woman". Vera Clouzot shines as Christina; beneath her petite and frail exterior lies the heart of a woman who when pushed too far, is capable of terrible things. Later on in the film is where her acting truly shines, walking a fine line between remorse and paranoia. Her fears and anxieties ultimately become ours.
There is a foreboding atmosphere that I could never put my finger on while watching this film countless times. The black and white photography, provided by cinematographer Armand Thirard is delicate and complex. There are shadows and half-seen images that pop out of the corners of the screen that matches the sense of dread and terror the characters (especially the two women) encounter. Shots were composed and set up for maximum effect. I remember watching the horrible HORRIBLE remake created in the 1990's starring Sharon Stone just the fact that it was shot in color put me off. Similar to Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho, the world is meant to be drained of all color. There is no other way to express it.
Nicole tries to keep Christina from cracking under pressure.
Georges Van Parys provides the film's score, opening with a deep and pulsating string section that perfectly reflects the films intensity. It pushes and pulls, gets dizzy and eventually succumbs to a frenzy It evokes another great string score from another great thriller with a shocking twist that was released five years later...Hmmm...
Les Diaboliques overflows with suspense. One of the most difficult things to accomplish as a filmmaker when crafting a story out of the suspense/thriller genre is to take seemingly mundane moments and create tension from it. There are two of these moments, revolving around water that are more nail-biting than any cliched scene where a character has ten seconds to detonate a bomb. Clouzot understands how to drag out moments up to the point where it is unbearable for both the characters and the audience. It is a trait that Sergio Leone had mastered while filming his "Spaghetti Westerns" (he hates that term) he played out the tension and suspense of who would be the first to draw in a gunfight to such unparalleled levels that one could feel the heart almost beat out of the characters' chests. Again, I am reminded of a scene in Psycho, where Norman Bates stands watch over a car in the lake he intends to drown. He watches it sink, sink, sink...It pauses, the end of the car still holding up. The tension mounts. Norman looks around to see if anyone is around in those moments. The car completes its descent. He, and the audience sighs, relieved.
Les Diaboliques used this idea twice five years before Alfred Hitchcock's most popular opus. There is a legend that Hitchcock just missed out on purchasing the rights to the novel Les Diaboliuqes was based on, Celle qui n'était plus (She Who Was No More), by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac by just a few hours, with Clouzot reaching the authors first. The film caused an initial sensation when first released; it is credited as one of the first films to have an "anti-spoiler" message, suggesting not to reveal the final moments of the plot to those who had not seen the film. The movie then gained a more macabre notoriety when Vera Clouzot died of a heart-attack at age 46, only five years after the release of the movie.
Somebody's not having a good day.
Henri-Georges Clouzot was a gifted filmmaker, notorious for having a pessimistic view of society. After an attempt at a career in journalism, he began writing screenplays once he became enamoured with the German Expressionist films of the 1930's. He made his directorial debut with L'assassin habite au 21 in 1942 under Nazi-occupied France during World War II. He was suspended from making films after making Le Corbeau in 1943, a noir thriller with allusions to life under the same regime. He returned making films in 1947 and became a recipient of many accolades including The Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival for Manon in 1949. His other universally praised and popular film is Le Salaire de la Peur (The Wages of Fear) (1952).
But Les Diaboliques may be his calling card. A film that despite its ambivalence is nothing more than a joy to watch and piece together. Even if you are able to decipher the finale (or if you know it from the inferior 1996 remake) there is still a charge and shock that the movie exudes. This is a film tailor-made for "word of mouth" the ancestor of film revelations such as who Luke Skywalker's father is (if you don't know THAT by now, I'm not gonna tell you...) Now, don't you DARE tell anyone how the movie ends...or I will hunt you down.
Trailer for Les Diaboliques
{Film Passport Stamped}
Coming Attractions...: Next week, the start of a back-and-forth retrospective of the two undisputed leaders of the French New Wave the first is a tale that will leave you out of breath.
Questions or comments? Email me at aa24frames@aol.com!!!
_-08_26280.jpg)
_-06_26279.jpg)
