In the summer of 1991 an elderly woman Ghislaine Marchal is found murdered in the basement of her home with the message "Omar M'a Tuer" (Omar has kill me) written beside in her own blood. ... See full summary »
Transport Minister Bertrand Saint-Jean is awoken in the middle of the night by his head of staff. A bus has gone off the road into a gully. He has no choice but to go to the scene of the ... See full summary »
In the 1980 French countryside, farmer Jojo and his ill-tempered wife Lulu hate each other, though their respective interests speak against divorce. The only thing that keeps the oppressed ... See full summary »
In London, a mother and daughter navigate their respective romances: Madeline rekindles an affair from thirty years earlier, while her daughter Vera is caught between a musician who cannot commit and her ex, who still pines for her.
Rachel, shy little 9 year old, loved by her father and stifled by a possessive mother, meets Valérie, a fearless and shameless girl of her age. With her new friend, she engages to profanity, indecency and nonsense, and opens up to life.
Deux beaux-frères, Didier et Bernard se lancent un défi: chacun ne doit pas fumer pendant quatorze jours. Ce pari, qui se prolongera ultimement sur beaucoup plus longtemps, bouleversera ... See full summary »
A chronicle of a group of friends in rural France in 1918. Garris and Riton live in the marshlands along the banks of the Loire river. Riton is afflicted with a bad-tempered wife and three ... See full summary »
Moved by the plight of the mother of her daughter's school friend, a young judge facing an incurable disease teams up with an older colleague in order to fight against financial companies that exploit the poor.
Paris lives under the control of German occupation. While filming "the Children of Paradise" Arletty, an unconventional actress, continues to live according to her desires. While she ... See full summary »
The premise - not of the film itself, but let's say what surrounds it, its instance as it came to be - is interesting, namely, the depiction of a nation's President in his/her rise to power and while he/she still is in power; what titillates in such a premise is I think the promise that we truly live in democratic times and that means times that can pull off the apparition of such a film sincerely, exposing the machinations and the weaknesses of a leader, as some kind of demonstration in the making that turns spectacle into some kind of self-witnessing democracy in the making.
May I never write that sentence again.
What is so wrong with it? It suffers from plausibility of the politically correct kind, of a stupid, biased kind. Just take some steps back and reconsider the film you saw: would you really think having seen it that the film is a demonstration, or a proof that we live in democratic times?
Let's begin from the soundtrack that snaps right away: the references to Rota ground the film in Fellini territory, and so by cultural allusion we wonder if this wouldn't be more properly employed in Berlusconi's case - or is it that Berlusconi is in a way the future of
European at least - leadership, and so Sarkozy's vulgarity is a
peripheral phenomenon to the standard shamelessness of Berlusconi as stand-in for the Rota/Fellini circus?
But even this doubly misfires, I am afraid; I think to have a film critical of a head of state while still in power - truly, politically critical - could be the name of utopia itself, and doubly so: that means on the one hand practically it would never purely be so for at least at some point it would have to invent and so enter the ideological imagination of the script-writer (when Mrs. Almost-Ex-Sarkozy gratuitously cried towards the end I wished I had never entered the mind of this particular script-writer), or, in order to remember early 20th century propaganda frames, such a film would be a redundancy.
Yet we live in biased more than propaganda times: do we need radio and press and media exposition - if we have followed the political climate and state in France during the time - turned into a semi-fictionalized account? Does this not mistake, and it is a major mistake, information for political stance, which is another name for politicizing melodrama? But maybe we are still in a frame of mind not far from the one Jean Baudrillard exposed back in the 90's when Cicciolina (remember?) was elected in the Italian Parliament: it was literally for laughs, as a face-off of politics into female impersonation.
For what we have in the film are impersonators, and not actors. Perhaps there is a charm to it, watch your favorite buffoons played by some impersonators with the occasional poignant truism in their mouths here and there. But I do not want my genuine buffoon Sarkozy played - sorry, impersonated by another buffoon and spoil my male-bonding fun: and this is the crux of the matter for me: instead of just plainly turning a misconception into maybe a bad film, more importantly it turns a misconception into bad democracy anchored into macho innuendo.
I admit it was a bit harder for me to digest, since the spice added to my watching experience was the remembrance of watching Podalydes as Jean-Paul Sartre some years back in a french miniseries: he was truly bad, of the same brand of badness as here, that is over-reacting the body language and confounding the demarcation between it and bodily tics, as if attacking the whole thing totally from outside, and offering us the ludicrous ruin of a theatrical alphabet; think of Louis de Funes instead as what a truly ingenious confusion of the above categories would mean each time he exploded bodily coordinates, unless one conceives Podalydes' over-reacting as the allegory of the unhappy Left: the invasion of the body snatchers into the liberal body that mistakes bodily tics for politics!
Do not think of these asides irrelevant to the film - that is its ideology: they make all the more palpable the lack of political and aesthetic, cinematic decisions: to put it bluntly, if this film has some kind of political novelty - and is not as I believe something re-appropriated if not shamelessly pushed around by the liberal consensus - then it has to be supplemented by a film surrounding the rise to life of the Bruni-Sarkozy child, since it is the first time a President becomes father while in office! That would give us the glimpse to the hotness of the first lady we have so shamelessly and programmatically been declined: imagine Podalydes in seizure as he takes a baby from Laetitia Casta's bosom.
May we never have to see such a film.
5 of 14 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?