Showing posts with label Catherine Breillat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catherine Breillat. Show all posts

Monday, November 7, 2011

277) Terri (2011), 284) Larry Crowne (2011) and RV!: The Sleeping Beauty (2010)

277) Terri (2011) Dir: Azazel Jacobs Date Released: July 1, 2011 Date Seen: July 1, 2011 Rating: 4/5

284) Larry Crowne (2011) Dir: Hanx! Date Released:  July 1, 2011 Date Seen: July 9, 2011 Rating: 1.5/5

RV!: The Sleeping Beauty (2010) Dir: Catherine Breillat Date Released: July 8, 2011 Date Seen: July 10, 2011 Rating: 4/5

Two out of three ain't bad. See my reviews of these films, as well as my review of Ironclad, at Nomad Wide Screen.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

62) The Sleeping Beauty (2010), 64) Deep in the Woods (2010) and 65) The Long Falling (2011)

62) The Sleeping Beauty (2010) Dir: Catherine Breillat Date Released: July 8, 2011 Date Seen: March 2, 2011 Rating: 4/5

64) Deep in the Woods (2010) Dir: Benoit Jacquot Not Yet Released Date Seen: March 2, 2011 Rating: 3.75/5

65) The Long Falling (2011) Dir: Martin Provost Not Yet Released Date Seen: March 3, 2011 Rating: 3.25/5

Hon hon hon. See my round-up of worthwhile Rendez-vous with French Cinema titles at Capital New York.

Friday, April 2, 2010

RV!: Bluebeard (2009)

RV!: Bluebeard (2009) Dir: Catherine Breillate Date Released: March 2010 Date Seen: March 31, 2010 Rating: 3.5/5

There’s something inherently dissatisfying about knowing that Bluebeard might be the Super-Breillat film, as Godard might put it. Bluebeard, a meta-reflexive adaptation of Charles Perrault’s fairy tale, is a crystallization of the French provocatrice’s usual themes of sororal rivalry and sexual demystification. It’s also an undiluted 80-minute shot of what makes Breillat so frustrating in her style of intellectual filmmaking. The Last Mistress, Breillat’s excellent last effort, was a departure of sorts from Breillat’s typical cinematic essay, a relatively unostentatious romantic epic about the seduction of a hot-blooded young hellcat that resembles the titular untamed beauty in Bizet’s Carmen. Bluebeard is a return to form in as much as Breillat’s films are defined by hertypically languid, nigh-inert style of filmmaking.

Breillat’s films typically invite viewers to mull over their consequences and appreciate various telling character traits for what they betray about their characters’ insecurities but it is always with the understanding that the characters are not to be approached on their own terms. Characters are not meant to be appreciated as characters but as ideas, sentiments, ideologies. Her style of filmmaking in that sense is a direct descendant of Eric Rohmer’s. And yet, it’s increasingly frustrating to note that while Bluebeard is Breillat’s most advanced treatise yet, she’s still not quite capable of sustaining both narrative dynamism and ideological potency for a narrative-length film (how’s that for a loaded turn of phrase?).

The story of Bluebeard, the wife-killing ogre, is set up as a story of commodified sexual expectations within a story of two young girls that each secretly want to believe in the promises of deferred romance and dread in that star. In the film’s fairy tale overplot, Marie-Catherine (Lola Créton), a young peasant girl with no dowry, marries Bluebeard (Dominique Thomas) and leaves her mother and her sulking sister Anne (Daphné Baiwir) behind to live in his enormous castle. In the film’s “real world” underplot, Catherine (Marilou Lopes-Benites) teases her older sister Marie-Anne (Lola Giovannetti) by telling her that story, relishing Marie-Anne’s discomfort at the film’s frightening ending. Marie-Anne of course isn’t upset because of the grisly fate that Marie-Catherine almost meets at her husband’s murderous hands but rather the suggestion that the child bride cannot find the fairy tale happiness she so richly deserves for her plucky attitude. In that sense, viewers can see Bluebeard as a full-length manifestation of the frustrated fairy tale wish fulfillment Breillat’s protagonists debate in Romance.

As with Fat Girl or Romance, the lifeblood of Breillat’s latest film is the way it does not emotionally attach itself to its subjects. Breillat treats her characters in the same way that Rohmer treated his subjects: as people-shaped things. This is not a result of sang froid or some manner of callous affectation (okay, maybe it is a little affected). On the contrary, Breillat shows a great affinity for both sets of siblings. Rather, what makes Breillat’s Bluebeard simultaneously so troubling and fascinating is that it appeals to the viewer’s need to find meaning in nuanced actions.

Breillat’s ideal viewer already knows Perrault’s fairy tale and is now looking to find her take on the subject in the way the characters’ movements give Breillat’s interpretation its Meaning. The foundation for ideologies, or in Breillat’s case counter-ideology, is meant to be sought out in telling lines of dialogue or declarative statements. As a conversation piece, Bluebeard will undoubtedly bring out the worst kind of snobby behavior in Breillat fans because it allows them the privilege of knowing that they are meant to quiz each other for answers afterwards, especially since that is what they now expect from a “Breillat film” (Or as Breillat’s ogre shrugs, “One should realize who one is, no?”).


And there’s a good deal of Meaning to be found if willing to rely on the nuance and sophistication of the dense screeds Breillat leaves behind on her human sandwichboards. The development of the timid/less mouthy of the two sisters in either pair of girls is naturally more attractive than the other one, though Marie-Anne does have a rather clever notion of what marriage is like (“Marriage is two people that love each other. And then, one day, they decide to become homosexuals. That’s true!”). If any character in the film can be sympathized with simply as a character, it’s Anne, whose smoldering air of defiant resentment is remarkable (“I didn’t choose to be buried alive.”). Still, while I can admire Breillat’s cinema of ideas and even find Bluebeard to be more satisfying the second time around, there’s no escaping the fact that this is a film that places heavy significance on loaded dialogue like: “There are always invasions. Barbarism is everywhere.” Give me the very un-Breillat Last Mistress over this any day.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

321) Bluebeard (2009)


321) Bluebeard (2009) Dir: Catherine Breillat Not Yet Released Date Seen: October 2, 2009 Rating: 3.25/5

Bluebeard, Catherine Breillat's dramatization of the French fairy tale based on the infamous murders of Gilles De Rais, is a predictable, though unfortunately toothless, provocation. The bulk of the film's suggestion is loaded into its final 20 minutes and even then, Breillat's not telling us anything that she hasn't already before (women use fairy tale archetypes to enact their latent masochistic sexual fantasies, even at an early age, when they can dissolve the part of their psyche that objects to their ingrained moral objections). The twin girl storytellers are cute but they're just an intellectually justified version of the usual "Have children say nasty things for a yuk" routine. Cheap but satisfying.

Note: After the first time we see Bluebeard on screen, I was constantly wondering rhetorically: what metal band is that guy the lead singer for and what kind of metal is it? He kinda reminds me of the Euro-version of Andrew W.K. Quand il est le temps pour feter, nous toujour fetons lourd (shit, that sucked; apologies to French speakers)!

Monday, September 14, 2009

294) Romance (1999)


294) Romance (1999) Dir: Catherine Breillat Date Released: October 1999 Date Seen: September 14, 2009 Rating: 2.25/5

"I don't like having to say things," says Marie (Caroline Ducey) just after having been tied-up by her older lover Robert (Francois Berleand!). That line of dialogue encapsulates the contradiction of Marie's sex life in Catherine Breillat's Romance. She has to tell us that she doesn't like telling us things and likewise has to be made to feel like a victim by her callous boyfriend Paul (Stagamore Stevenin) in order for her to not only accept but vamp up her role as a sexual victim. Robert provides Marie with her perfect solution as he is the living embodiment of the middle libidinal ground. He wrings his hands as he ties Marie up and begs her to tell him if it's too tight. He's sensitive enough to listen to Marie but brusque enough to screw Marie, satisfying her understandably contradictory hormonal impulses. 

Accordingly, Breillat refuses to allow Marie's body language to tell us what she's feeling but rather allows her to gab at us non-stop through a motormouth mock-conversational voiceover. The film's provocative images are thus tamed by Marie's contextualizing monologue, making the film a dull collision of blunt-on-blunt imagery. 

Breillat purposefully doesn't even allow us to feel our way through Marie's sexual trials on our own, instead giving us so much access that she's daring you to beg for less. Just as Marie gives away everything she has to guard herself from being invaded, Breillat wants us to feel like we want to be taken into Marie's confidence but not as thoroughly as we are. Felicitations, Madame Provocatrice. I relent.

Saturday, September 5, 2009

280) Fat Girl (2001)


280) Fat Girl (2001) Dir: Catherine Breillat Date Released: October 2001 Date Seen: September 5, 2009 Rating: 2.5/5

Catherine Breillat was both very smart and frustratingly self-satisfied to make the drama of feminine sexuality in Fat Girl as blunt as it is. Breillat even goes so far as to defend her plodding film's forthrightness in the film through an interview where a lady artist* and Breillat stand-in proclaims that she has made sex an issue because it is a common, and hence deceptively simple, shared experience of men and women. The shallowness of that meta-declaration is fitting because the film's apparent lack of nuance is its most over-used means of provocation. Psychological probing between two sisters, Anais the high school coquette (Anais Reboux) and Elena (Roxane Mesquida) her chubby foil, is performed through bedside conversations because it, like Anais' bedside chatter with Fernando (Libero De Rienzo) her older--as in law school older--boyfriend, is a part of the characters' self-fashioning. It's also kind of tedious. After all, what's a provocateur's idea of realism worth (if you can tell me with a straight face after watching the film's windshield-shattering finale that Breillat is sincere, have I got a Lars Von Trier film for you!)? For me, Breillat's defense is just a lame excuse that she does have to engage the audience with nuanced characters or dialogue to make her point because it is, like her characters' psyche, teasingly self-evident.

Talk of sex in Fat Girl is likewise so direct because its supposed to titillate us into discussion of the sincerity of the characters. However I'd only be tempted to answer one of the film's many nagging central questions like, "Is Anais performing as virgin for Fernando and vice versa regarding his claims to be a sympathetic womanizer won over by this young girl's charms" if I cared about them as characters. I do not because these tiresome trials of the heart are the most involving and meticulously fleshed-out establishing scenes in the film.

Still, while I know I don't like the film's empty prodding, I feel stupid for not appreciating Fat Girl. I felt like Breillat's insertion of her opinion into the film was her way of challenging me to not appreciate what she was doing knowing what her terms are. Sorry, not biting. If you can't accomplish something truly challenging, it's pointless to say that that's the film's point and dismiss your detractors as fuddy duddies that just don't get it.

Which is simply not the case for me. I just wasn't involved by the film's more shocking scenes because neither Anais nor Elena ever really earned my interest. It's not that the fact they declare the ways by which we should analyze their actions through insistent declarative soliloquys, such as a pool scene where Elena acts out her fantasies of dating two men or another when she's in the woods and tells us that she loves fairy tales, but rather that Breillat never fleshes out those dynamics organically. Baiting the viewer with explicitness is fine but its not enough to get me excited unless it develops into something worth puzzling over.

*I am making as much a point of her character's sex as she does, just in case you're lost.