Movie Review: Frantz

Frantz *** / *****

Directed by: François Ozon.   

Written by: François Ozon and Philippe Piazzo based on the movie Broken Lullaby by Ernst Lubitsch

Starring: Paula Beer (Anna), Pierre Niney (Adrien), Ernst Stötzner (Doktor Hoffmeister), Marie Gruber (Magda Hoffmeister), Johann von Bülow (Kreutz), Anton von Lucke (Frantz), Cyrielle Clair (Adrien's mother), Alice de Lencquesaing (Fanny).

 

Francois Ozon’s Frantz would likely had worked better as a 60 minute film than it does at twice that length. The movie isn’t overly original (the story was made before, by master filmmaker Ernst Lubitsch in 1932 as Broken Lullaby – which is not, to put it mildly, among his best remembered films – Ozon apparently didn’t even realize he was making a remake with this film) – but for the first hour, the film casts it spell, and is quietly effective. Yes, a black and white film that flashes to color to signify emotion isn’t really original, but it works for a reason. This is a quiet story or loss and regret, which is odd for Ozon who usually goes bigger than this. Yet, the second half of the film kind of drags on longer than needed – you keep waiting for that half to build to something, and it never really does.

 

The story takes place in the aftermath of WWI. The title character of Frantz was killed in the war, leaving a whole in the lives of his fiancé, Anna (Paula Beer), and his parents – Dr. and Mrs. Hoffmeister, who Anna remains close to, perhaps as a way for them all to try and keep Frantz’s memory alive. Into their small German town arrives Adrien (Pierre Niney) – a Frenchman, who everyone eyes suspiciously – the war is over, but the French and Germans still hates each other. Yet, Adrien is there to visit Frantz’s grave – which he does several days in a row. Eventually, he will meet Anna, and then the Hoffmeister’s – telling them that he knew Frantz before the war, at the art school they both attended in Paris. Eventually, Anna learns the real way they know each other – and starts lying to both sides, not telling the Hoffmeister’s the truth, but telling Adrien she has. He eventually goes back to France – and after a while, she follows – but now doesn’t know where he is, and has to track him down.

 

The two halves of the movie work as kind of two sides to the same coin – or mirror images of each other. In the first, Adrien is the Paula is stricken with grief, which is alleviated somewhat by the appearance of this mysterious stranger. She doesn’t stop loving Frantz, but for the first time sees a life for herself moving forward. Adrien is quiet and mysterious, and doesn’t discourage her projecting this life onto him. In the second half, she goes to find him – and is somewhat surprised to find that for him, life has gone on – he isn’t quite the same person he was in Germany – he isn’t as stricken with guilt – at least not until he sees her. It is a reminder that for him, the war is over – he may feel guilt over what he did, but he has a family and a comfortable life to go back to – and he’s able to slide back into it. The same isn’t true for Anna, who life is forever altered. She isn’t able to slide back into her planned life – she has to invent a new one. It isn’t until she gets to France, and meets Adrien again that she realizes this.

 

Frantz is a sad movie of course. It is about guilt and grief, and about the monotony of both really – how you are afflicted with the same numbing sadness all day, every day. The beautiful black and white cinematography is appropriate. The flashes of color are a simple way of conveying emotion, but it’s an effective one.

 

The second half felt tacked on to me – as if the first half wasn’t sad enough, so the film felt the need to really drive home its points. In particular, the lengthy search for Adrien really doesn’t add very much to the film – other than to extend the runtime. You wait for the film to build to something, and it doesn’t quite get there.

 

There is still much to admire about the film – including a restraint than Ozon has rarely shown before. The film doesn’t really feel like one of his films – which I’m sure for fans of his will be disappointing, but for someone like me – lukewarm on him – wasn’t a major deal. Overall, I think Frantz is an interesting film, but one that never quite comes together.

Movie Review: Young & Beautiful

Young & Beautiful
Directed by: François Ozon.
Written By: François Ozon.
Starring: Marine Vacth  (Isabelle), Géraldine Pailhas (Sylvie), Frédéric Pierrot (Patrick), Fantin Ravat (Victor), Johan Leysen (Georges), Charlotte Rampling (Alice), Nathalie Richard (Véro), Djedje Apali (Peter), Lucas Prisor (Felix), Laurent Delbecque (Alex), Jeanne Ruff (Claire).

Luis Bunuel’s Belle de Jour (1967) is one of the best movies of all time – about a young, beautiful Paris housewife of a rich man who works two afternoons a week at a brothel. It is an erotic, ambiguous, mysterious and brilliant film – and contains arguably the best work of the incomparable Catherine Deneuve. Francois Ozon’s Young & Beautiful is obviously inspired by Bunuel’s film – his protagonist is a spoiled, 17 year old Parisian girl who becomes an internet call girl, seeing mainly middle aged or older men until one dies during sex, and the whole mess comes crashing down around her. The difference between Bunuel’s film and Ozon’s film is simple – Bunuel understands who his protagonist is, and why she does what she does. Ozon doesn’t seem to have a clue.

The film is told over the course of a year – in four parts separated by the seasons. It starts in summer when Isabelle (Marine Vacth) is on vacation with her mother Sylvie (Geraldine Pailhas), her stepfather and younger brother. She’s having a summer romance with a German boy named Felix and the two have a rather sweet date, that ends with her losing her virginity on the beach. She seems bored by the experience, and afterwards she is cold towards Felix. When they return to Paris for the school year, she opens a webpage, and starts seeing men – for hundreds of Euros a pop.

Why does Isabelle do this? The movie never explains. That wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing if the movie gave us any indication that Isabelle at least knew why she was doing it. But Vacth plays Isabelle as almost a complete blank slate. She is gorgeous, but she never betrays any sort of emotion whatsoever. She doesn’t seem to either like or dislike the sex. She doesn’t seem to like or dislike much of anything. If it’s simple boredom that drives her to do it, that would one thing – but I’m not sure that is it either. There does seem to be some genuine emotion on the part of the aging Jon who dies during sex – he has seen her before, and is interested in her as a person, not just as a sex object (although he also sees her as that as well). She seems to feel some guilt over that – and also some shame when her mother finds out her secret. That part of the movie that deals with the fallout of her secret being revealed is the best in the movie – while Isabelle may be a blank slate, Sylvie isn’t – and her love for her daughter is mixed with shame, and even a little revulsion. The movie tiptoes towards some dangerous ground with the relationship between Isabelle and her stepfather, but quickly retreats to safer ground. The last act of the movie basically resets itself to the beginning – and suggests the whole thing may just start over again.

There has been a long history of European – often French – movies that explore the sexuality of teenage girls. Some of these films are brilliant works of art, some are mere exploitation. On the surface, Young & Beautiful seems like one of the more artistic end of the spectrum, but as it moves along, and I started to understand that Ozon wasn’t really interested in really exploring Isabelle as a person, I started to think that it really is more the later. Ozon is a prolific, yet inconsistent director. His last film, In the House, was one of his best. Now comes Young & Beautiful – and I cannot help but think it’s one of his worst.

Movie Review: In the House

In the House
Directed by: François Ozon.
Written by: François Ozon based on the play by Juan Mayorga.
Starring: Fabrice Luchini (Germain), Ernst Umhauer (Claude Garcia), Kristin Scott Thomas (Jeanne Germain), Emmanuelle Seigner (Esther Artole), Denis Ménochet (Rapha Artole père), Bastien Ughetto (Rapha Artole fils).

Francois Ozon’s tricky new film In the House sneaks up on you slowly. It reminded me of a Hitchcock film, the way it subtlety enlists you to be complacent to the characters and their actions – to turn the audience into voyeurs – before slowly turning the knife and you realize just how poisoned everything has become. It is the best film Ozon has made in years – perhaps since Swimming Pool back in 2003.

The film stars Fabrice Luchini as Germain, a bored creative writing teacher at a suburban high school in France. He thinks his students are idiots – and when he gives a simple assignment to his class asking them to tell them about their weekend, and one student writes all of two lines “On Saturday, I ate pizza and watch TV. On Sunday, I was tired and did nothing)” – it’s hard to argue with him. But then one student catches his attention – Claude Garcia (Ernst Umhauer). His assignment is brilliant – telling of the time he spent in the house of a classmate, who seemingly has a “perfect family” – unlike Claude’s own. It’s clear Claude has contempt for the classmate, who he perceives as a dolt, for the father, who he thinks is a bore, and dismisses the wife as “smelling like the Middle Class”. He looks down on these people, but he has obvious skill – and Germain takes him under his wing. He even lets his wife, Jeanne (Kristen Scott Thomas) read the stories – and although she thinks the things she writes about this family are awful, she cannot stop reading them. One story arrives after another, and Germain and Jeanne fall under Claude’s spell. How much of what he is writing is fiction, and how much is real? The stories gradually start to focus on the mother – Esther (Emmanuelle Seigner), who Claude sees as both a surrogate mother figure and a MILF. Slowly, so slowly that Germain and the audience barely notice, Claude starts asking Germain for things that clearly cross a line – and to keep getting installments of the story, he does.

In the House is a tricky film. It doles out information on a need to know basis, so we can never quite get a handle on Claude. Is what he says about what happens in his friend’s house true? Is what he says about his own home life true? Is he a sociopath, or just a troubled kid? And why, when everyone else seems to hate Germain – even the other teachers – does he zero in on him. It’s to the credit of Ernst Umhauer’s performance that he never really lets us inside. You can never get a read on him, and that makes him fascinating. The rest of the performances are just as good. Fabrice Luchini is in top form as Germain, who seemingly for the first time in years seems actually interested in anything other than himself. His world comes crashing down around him, but he is clueless – so wrapped up in the love of this new talent, he cannot see what is happening around him. Kristen Scott Thomas is also very good – why she’s so much better when she works in French than English, I’ll never know, but she is – as she too gets drawn into Claude’s world, although at least she realizes it. She even finds a sort of kinship with Claude, in the way he’s obviously toying with Germain. And Emmanuelle Seigner is excellent in a tricky role – a role that requires her to change at times scene to scene, because she is only ever seen through the eyes of Claude – and his gaze his constantly shifting.

In the House also has some interesting things to say about the nuclear family. Most often in movies, we get the portrait of the seemingly happy suburban family, which is really built on nothing but appearances and lies – think American Beauty or about 90% of the movies that come out of Sundance in a given year. But In the House is different. The normal family – married parents, one child – may be dull, boring and none too bright, but they really are happy in their little life. Meanwhile the childless couple – Germain and Jeanne – and the child from a broken home – Claude – are all much smarter than the family, but all much more miserable. Ozon seems to have sympathy for these outsiders, even as he punishes them. But it also seems to be saying that the duller you are, the happier you are.

But overall, In the House is really about storytelling – about how a gifted storyteller can slowly suck you into his story, without you even realizing it. Claude is a natural storyteller, able to get people to buy in hook, line and sinker before they know what hit them. So is Francois Ozon.