Daily Archives: Thursday, May 19, 2016

  • Potiche

    François Ozon (2010)

    Potiche has been a huge commercial success, especially in France and Belgium, and British critics, at any rate, are very enthusiastic.  It’s a nice feeling when everyone enjoys something (unless you don’t) but anyone who thinks this film’s a popular and critical hit for the same reasons – because François Ozon has bridged what’s often a gap between different kinds of audience – is kidding himself.   Ozon ‘freely’ adapted Potiche from a successful stage play of the same name, a boulevard farce of the 1970s, by Pierre Barillet and Jean-Pierre Grédy.  There’s no doubt that the gently satirical treatment of the original material is part of the film’s appeal to its enthusiasts in Sight and Sound (including Ginette Vincendeau, who wrote along with her review an interesting piece on other hits transposed from boulevard to screen – most notably La cage aux folles).  And because Ozon has said the scenario reminded him of Ségolène Royal’s part in the 2007 French presidential campaign that’s enough, for some critics, to give Potiche ‘contemporary political relevance’.

    I’m sure cross-channel audiences have gone for the film in a big way because its star Catherine Deneuve is so enduringly loved.  Thanks to her, I doubt it would have made any difference to the box-office receipts if Ozon had reproduced the Barillet-Grédy material without irony.   It’s rather as if Helen Mirren had signed up to play Mrs Slocombe in a remake of the cinema version of Are You Being Served?, the film had gone down a storm with audiences, and the director was being praised for a wittily sophisticated ‘take’ on the original.  Actually, this is a poor analogy because the current S&S school of film criticism is too determinedly auteurist to be seen dead allowing domestic audiences to ‘privilege’ the importance of a British performer – or accept a television sitcom as cinema – in this way.  (You might also wonder if Helen Mirren would be seen dead playing Mrs Slocombe but, since she agreed to appear in the recent remake of Arthur, that’s harder to rule out.)

    The heroine of Potiche is Suzanne, the ‘trophy wife’ of Robert Pujol (Fabrice Luchini), a factory owner.  Robert thinks his wife’s a decorative fool – certainly foolish enough not to notice he’s carrying on with his secretary Nadège (Karen Viard).  There’s a strike over wages at the factory.  Robert has a heart attack of sorts.  While he’s indisposed, Suzanne takes over the running of the business (I missed why, beyond its being a plot requirement, her husband thought she was the right person to deputise for him).  She turns the whole place around and gets to like the job.  Profits increase and Suzanne brings harmony to the factory by charming the workers’ leading supporter, the left-wing mayor Maurice Babin (Gérard Depardieu), who turns out to be an old flame.  Once Robert recovers he elbows Suzanne out of the board room, with the help of their revolting daughter Joelle (Judith Godrèche).  By this time, Suzanne’s also been given the brush-off by Babin.  She therefore decides on a career in politics, standing as an independent candidate against him in the upcoming election.  She wins and becomes the region’s new député (although Babin continues as mayor – I didn’t get that either).

    The political appendage to the story, which wasn’t in the stage play, is pathetically lazy:  Ozon doesn’t bother to give us a sense of how the campaign is going – we just see that everyone adores Suzanne yet it’s a turn up for the books when she triumphs.  Other than as a reminder of bad industrial relations, I don’t see that Potiche tells us anything about the 1970s – or even much about how we see the decade now.  The slightly exaggerated costumes and décor may be spot on, but so what?   The sex jokes, which people in the Richmond Filmhouse enjoyed, don’t take the piss out of seventies sex jokes – they merely reproduce them.  When the Pujol business’s board of directors votes to decide whether Suzanne should remain in charge or Robert resume as the boss, Nadège keeps score Eurovision-style:  ‘Mme Pujol – un point’ etc,  One of the reviews in S&S describes this as a ‘sublime throwaway gag’!   This is enough to make you wonder if the highbrow and lower-brow audiences are enjoying the same things after all …

    S&S praises Ozon for ‘casting against type’ – but that implies the actors, although we see them in unaccustomed roles, are nevertheless persuasive in them.  Catherine Deneuve is actually not much more convincing a trophy wife than she was a factory worker in Dancer in the Dark – it may be because she’s incredible that people have found her so enjoyable here.  The whole film seems to be a love letter to Deneuve; this is where François Ozon and Gallic audiences anyway may be of one mind.  We first see Suzanne jogging (the 1970s seems early for a sixtyish middle-class woman to be doing that), pausing to write a poem about a squirrel she sees en routePotiche ends with Suzanne singing a celebratory I-love-life song as if we’ve been watching a heartwarming musical and in case we’ve forgotten (as if) that Deneuve has form in the genre.  (The Pujol factory makes umbrellas, a cosy nod to one of her rightly admired screen performances.)  Jérémie Renier, best known for his roles in the Dardenne brothers’ films, plays Suzanne’s son Laurent.  He gives a very skilful performance: you can read it as sending up a certain type of over-bright, constricted stage acting but it has its own dynamism too, and Renier certainly looks the part – though he also looks very camp from the start so the eventual revelation that Laurent’s gay isn’t much of a payoff.  (This is an example of how this film works:  admirers of Potiche will describe Laurent’s gayness as an amusing ‘twist’ then, if you say it’s obvious, praise Ozon for lampooning the obviousness of 1970s comedy.)

    When Gérard Depardieu first appears, he’s such an extraordinary shape – with his square features and huge gut – that he looks like a figure in an animated film.   From then on, his bland performance is an evocation of the seventies of just the wrong kind:  a reminder of how good he used to be.  Sergi López has an amusing cameo as a lorry driver who gives Suzanne a lift when Babin ejects her from his car.   It’s almost too apt a reminder (even if perhaps an unintentional one) that López is nowadays flourishing in Depardieu roles d’antan.  When Deneuve looks at López and he grins back at her, we seem meant to realise Suzanne’s still a bit of a goer – but that ‘still’ hints at one of the nonsenses of the plot.  It may be a reasonable joke that Suzanne turns out to have been sexually liberated as a young woman (this is one respect in which casting Deneuve makes sense) – but, in that case, when did she start being the subordinate little woman?   I realise one answer is that the disempowering sexual structures of the times made her so.  I think a truer answer is that Potiche wants it both ways.

    26 June 2011

  • Point Blank

    John Boorman (1967)

    A man hunts down other men, who owe him his share of the proceeds of a robbery they did together on Alcatraz island.   It could be a B-movie plot and much of the acting in Point Blank is undistinguished (the star, Lee Marvin, is a notable exception).  As a piece of film-making, though, it’s ambitious, and the incongruence of style and substance – technical sophistication versus formula plot and characters – makes the picture more remarkable.  John Boorman concentrates on the geometry of modern buildings and their component parts and contents:  doors, windows, slatted blinds, striped curtains.  The scale of the physical settings, mainly in and around Los Angeles, is often huge:  one of the most impressive moments in Point Blank is the shooting of the pin-sized figure of a man who’s trying to run away in a vast, desert-like space.  Boorman and his cinematographer Philip H Lathrop use the sunshine of LA where you might expect noir darkness – this anticipates the use, in the outdoor sequences of Chinatown, of light on the subject as a counterpoint to shadowy goings on.  There’s a merciless quality to this light as there is to Boorman’s spectacular staging of the several deaths that occur in the course of the film.  There’s an increasing consonance too between the director’s and the film’s protagonist Walker’s preoccupation with how things get done – and between the soulless landscape and that of Walker’s own mind.   (In the end, Walker doesn’t bother to collect his money even when it’s there for the taking.)   The source material is The Hunter, a 1962 novel (the first of a long series featuring the same central character), which Donald E Westlake wrote under the pseudonym Richard Stark.  The screenplay is by Alexander Jacobs, David Newhouse and Rafe Newhouse.   Whoever decided on the change of title earned their fee:  the literal meaning is obvious but Point Blank also gets across the existential emptiness and nullity of the world that Boorman creates.

    The privileging of style over substance in the crime thriller genre has become very familiar in the decades since Point Blank was made.  But it must have looked innovative at the time of its original release; and because this is unmistakeably a 1960s piece, it’s distinctive from much of what followed – so that it still seems unusual, almost aberrant.  I didn’t enjoy watching but I understand and accept the cachet the film has acquired.  Lee Marvin’s combination of a persistent persona, utter physical relaxation and deadpan verbal wit makes him seem a hybrid of an old-time star and a modern actor.  The volatile relationship between Marvin’s Walker and a woman called Chris is central to, and the strongest human element of, Point Blank.  As Chris, Angie Dickinson’s prettiness and great figure are made more interesting by her used, tawdry quality.  One of the best sequences in the film occurs when Walker and Chris are in a house together:  he wonders where she’s got to – she’s always one room ahead of him.  Walker’s search begins in a vast kitchen in which Chris has turned on a noisy orchestra of electrical appliances.  His disorientation is complete when, in a games room, she whacks him over the head with a pool cue.  The cast also includes Keenan Wynn, Carroll O’Connor, Michael Strong, Lloyd Bochner, Sharon Acker, James Sikking and John Vernon.  The opening credits include ‘Introducing John Vernon’:  he’s an unusually mature debutant (thirty-five) but this was indeed Vernon’s first appearance in cinema, although he was already well known as a stage and television actor.

    9 April 2013

Posts navigation