La collectionneuse

La collectionneuse (1967) is the third film in a set of six films— known as the Six Moral Tales— by French director, Eric Rohmer. These six films primarily focus on a male character who is on the brink of a committed relationship with an insignificant female character, yet is suddenly introduced to a seductive female character. Ultimately, in each film the male character chooses the initial, less significant female character with recognition to the fact that the seductive female assisted him in his final decision and moral growth much more than the less significant female. Eric Rohmer’s intention was to show the audience the story as opposed to telling it; this means that the film concentrates more on the characters’ mental struggles than their chosen actions. This particular film consists of three main characters: Adrian, Haydee, and Daniel who are on holiday together at Daniel’s house on a French Riviére. On this vacation, Adrian is attempting to remove himself from the day-to-day distractions of his life to fulfill his desire to be fully inactive. Unfortunately, Adrian’s life becomes more complicated through his desire of Daniel’s girl friend, Haydee, who is staying at his house. La collectionneuse devotes itself to the illustration of the relationships between the three characters.

Rohmer presented three notable themes in the film: desire, fidelity, and above all, the relations between the sexes, all of which are matters that are debated through the narration of Adrian. The theme of desire is predominantly displayed through Adrian’s sexual desire for Haydee. At one point in the film, Adrian even dares to say that the center of his entire interest is dedicated to his curiosity of her; as a result of this, Daniel is being ignored and pushed aside. The theme of fidelity is demonstrated throughout the film by the character Haydee. The film shows that she is obviously tied to Daniel, yet, she is free to behave as promiscuously as she pleases. Reinforcing the liberty of Haydee, Daniel describes her as a collector of men during a conversation between the three characters. It is from this dialogue that the title of the film is taken. Haydee disregards fidelity so much so that she is utterly indifferent to the feelings or emotions of those close to her. In addition, despite his desire for her, Adrien offers Haydee to spend the night another man. In closing, the relations between the sexes are exhibited as extremely difficult and spiteful. The film depicts that two members of the same sex will remain friendly until the introduction of a member of the opposite sex, which is when the two will begin to compete in an effort to humiliate the other in front opposite sex. Essentially, relations between the opposite sexes are shown merely as an attempt to either impress a member of the opposite sex or shame a member of the same sex. Rohmer portrays men and women as possessing a strong desire to conquer one another.

À bout de souffle

Critics and followers of French cinema regard Jean Luc Godard’s first feature length film, À bout de souffle, as the exemplar of French new wave cinema. À bout de souffle is representative of the notions of the new wave in its rebellion against the conventional methods of previous filmmakers and its establishment of an original approach to film to be imitated by subsequent films. This is demonstrated by the fact that it is “the most frequently watched film of the French new wave,” (Sellier, p. 273) in American colleges and universities. The film’s success is credited to its vast advertisement and hype prior to its release; both negative and positive. Unfortunately, Godard was immensely disappointed in the audiences’ uniformly positive reception of his film that which would lead to their infallible trust in him. In an interview shortly after the film’s release, Godard explains his desire to release an inferior film merely to disrupt the public’s interpretations of his work.

 

Godard was initially influenced to make his first feature length film by an American director, Orson Welles', film, Touch of Evil, and although he does reference popular French culture, the film appears to be a direct homage to American cinema. Originally, Godard sought to imitate early American gangster films but ultimately he pioneered a film in his own unique style. The most prominent style of this film was Godard’s utilization of controversial consecutive jumpcuts, which are used to shorten the length of a scene, provide the viewer with only the optimal footage (by excluding the unnecessary), and require the full attention of the viewer. Yet, Godard was criticized for characterizing his style with speed by alternating between short shots and long sequences and thus, creating a distinctive rhythm throughout the film. Another style that Godard incorporated into his film was his use off-screen dialogue as opposed to earlier methods of separate shots of each sole character reciting his or her dialogue. À bout de souffle contains a variety of themes mainly including: death, fate, speed, and cinema. The themes of death, speed, and fate are evident from beginning of the film when Michel murders an officer who is merely attempting to pull him over because he illegally passed another vehicle in his rush to Paris, which ultimately results in his own death. The theme of cinema is most blatant throughout the film in Michel’s admiration for and imitation of famous American actor, Humphrey Bogart; in one scene Michel even gazes at a poster of him outside of a theater. An example of an obscure reference to cinema is the scene in which a young woman is holding a copy of Cahier du Cinéma (of which Godard was a writer) up to Michel and asks him, “Do you have anything against the youth?” to which Michel replies, “Yes, I prefer old people.”

 

As a first-time viewer of the film, I find it embarrassing to have not yet seen this monumental piece of cinema. À bout de souffle, in my opinion, best defines new wave cinema in comparison to the films we have viewed in this class thus far. I particularly admired Godard’s extensive knowledge of film and unique style that he introduced to cinema. The film most captures the ambience of Paris in the scene in which Michel meets with Patricia on the Champs-Élysées and the scene in which Michel is driving Patricia around Paris at the nighttime; this is credited to the cinematographer, Raoul Coutard’s handheld camera work and use of natural lighting. In addition, as a viewer I prefer Godard’s style, in that he utilizes successive jumpcuts to include only the most beneficial shots. Overall, À bout de souffle had a distinctive impact on not only the films that followed soon after, but also our modern cinema. 

Sources: French Cinema - The Student's Book, Bonus Material on Criterion Collection edition of À bout de souffle.

La Règle du Jeu

Although Jean Renoir’s La Règle du Jeu persists as a classic depiction of French society prior to WWII, this film was not as highly regarded by the audience at the time of its premiere as it is today by historians and film critics worldwide. In fact, when the film was released it spawned such public outrage and disgust that the French government banned it— as it was regarded to be “demoralizing” for the public. During WWII the film continued to be banned by the Nazi regime. Finally, after the war, Renoir was able to collect remains of several copies of his film in order to reconstruct it after the original was destroyed during the war. It was only then that both critics and audiences alike commended Jean Renoir for his film, which led to its being ranked as the second best film of all time in 1972 (it remains to hold this title).

Predominantly, La Règle du Jeu is a portrayal of the formalities and spontaneities of French society on the onset of World War II. For example, when Octave requests the invitation of Andre to Christine and Robert ‘s hunting party, he must first ask the lady due to her personal relations with Andre before asking her suitor, Robert. Its flawless illustration of the restraints of affluent society depicts the complexity of courtliness. Furthermore, the film exhibits the proletariat society as liberal and indulgent in its morals and lifestyles. This is evident in the character of Lisette; not only in her loyalty to Christine as opposed to her husband, Schumacher, but also in the manner in which she flirts with Marceau around the table. But above all, if the viewer had not previously found the stark description of French society, the closing scenes somewhat parade these notions. While the affairs of Christine and Octave unfold behind closed doors, Schumacher, enraged by the flirtations between his wife and Marceau, recklessly hunts Marceau throughout the party. The guests, all members of the social elite, fail to acknowledge Schumacher’s hunt, though it occurs just outside the castle. The desperate secrecy of Schumacher’s violent act of vengeance builds upon the theme of this society’s strict proprieties.

Overall, I found La Règle du Jeu to be a vital piece of French cinema that captures and encompasses the essence of its early years. Through watching this film, I could not help but admire Renoir’s innovative style in respect to the year of its release, 1939. Renoir included several tracking and panning shot in a conscious effort to allow the viewer to become the unseen guest and thus, he or she is able to examine all aspects of the scene. I must mention my favorite scene where Christine demands that Lisette retrieve her lipstick, that which Lisette argues it does not flatter her nor does it appear natural. Christine replies simply by asking, “What’s natural these days?” To add to his realistic element, Renoir allowed himself and those involved to improvise throughout the filming; Renoir explains this choice best himself, “Yes, I improvised quite a bit: the actors are also the film’s authors, and when they work, they sometimes produce unanticipated reactions. These reactions are often very good, and I would be crazy not to take advantage of them” (Rivette and Truffaut, p.4). Without these successful attempts to create an atmosphere that intrigues the viewer and forces he or she to involve his or herself in the unfolding plot, this film, in my opinion, would be incomplete. Renoir was a pioneer of film; a visionary so far ahead of his time, he was forced to patiently wait for the public to mature in order for his film to receive the praise it deserved.