IMDb Link (as if you've never heard of this film)
This is gonna be difficult for French hipsters... On the one hand, you got a film that innovates (by doing what was being done in the 20s), plus it's French. But everybody, audiences and critics alike, loves it! So French hipsters, by default, will have to hate this film, like they did 'Amélie.' Unless they are so hip that they say they like the film, to be ironic. So we're to believe they don't really like it, but they do only because it's ironic. But deep down they actually truly like it.
Wow, fuck. France is so complicated.
Anyway, I do understand why Americans love this film. First because yes: it's actually good. But also because it shows an era when films meant something, when people got dressed up to go see a motion picture, when seeing a movie wasn't about how much popcorn was sold, but how much joy you got from it.
And it's called 'The Artist.' Not 'The Actor.' So Hollywood goes gaga, saying: 'Yeah, we're artists! We're
sensitive and important!' (also, they totally plagiarize Stuart Staples, apparently)
And it's also a love story. Yes, the regular kind, but not only. This is a love story about cinema, this is a love story from a French man about American silent cinema.
Yes, the French invented cinema, Americans refined it, but then fuck it up, then the French came to the rescue. Then the Americans got inspired by them and managed to fuck it up again. And now the French raking in all the awards.
Wow, goddamn it: France is so cool.
Of couse, the film references are aplenty. There's a bit of 'A Star is Born,' some 'All About Eve,' some 'Singing in the Rain,' 'Sunset Boulevard' some Ginger & Fred, some... well... Keaton/Chaplin/Lloyd. Well, that was a bit lazy of me, really... I just said that because they're stars of the silent era. In a way, it's more Lubitsch or von Stroheim or Lang. Hmm... All totally American directors. And I want to say a bit of Sam Fuller (who, after all, was never truly appreciated in his own country, but found recognition and respect in France). And, yes, I'll dare say it: some Welles, too. Another genius who found refuge in France. Is anyone noticing a trend, here?
But it's deemed a great film because it's about the emergence of talking cinema and a guy who says he doesn't need sound for his films. And the film is silent. And it's winning every award in the world. Literally. I think the baker down my street just gave it 'The Kadıköy Bakers' Association Award for Excellence in a Motion
Picture.' But don't quote me on that. My Turkish is kinda bad. Maybe he was just asking me how many simits I wanted.
By the way, in passing, I just want to say I am a big big big fan of the two 'OSS 117' films and so whenever Dujardin laughs in 'The Artist,' I can imagine his OSS laugh... 'Maaahahahahahaaaa! Jaaack!'
Unfortunately, I am sure that right now studios are green-lighting the shit out of silent films, so they'll ruin
that, too. And that for me is irony... You had silent cinema, then silent movies being usurped by talkies.
Then SFX and blah blah blah and some 80 years later, a silent film, going back to the roots! But then it's gonna get overdone. We'll probably get 'Avatar 2 in glorious black and white and silent! In golden-era-style 2D!'
Then again, since Mel Brooks' 'Silent Movie,' I haven't really seen an actual new silent film.
Re-by the way: How great is it that a movie produced by a company called 'La Classe Americaine' (which was an Hazanavicius 'film') gets all those awards? 'On va manger des chips!'
Back to the point, I admit that the sound effect sequence was as unexpected as it was cool, and I was really hoping that was going to become the main plot line, but when it didn't, I still enjoyed the film. Michel's done his research and, visually, the film is brilliant, guaranteed to give a boner to film students everywhere... Just look at the way Jean and Berenice talk when the former knows he's on his way down (literally) and she's on her way up... they're both on stairs, him looking up at her (literally) and she dominating. Even the boy toys are ahead of him at his point. Or when Dujardin's all sad, the cinema in the background is showing 'Lonely
Star.' And so on and so forth, I'll let you analyze the hell out of it on your own. Papers are due next week. Please double-space.
I am surprised Cromwell took on such a small role, where he pretty much reprises his role on 'Murder by Death.' Respect. He's the Stroheim to Dujardin's Swanson. From 'Greed' to 'Babe.' That's cool.
And I also find it pretty unfair that everyone congratulates Azanavicius and Dujardin only. Don't get me wring, they both deserve it, .but Ms Bejo is not talked about much. And yet she shines and she sparkles. But I guess some things never change. Be it 1929 or 2012, women are only women.
I of course also think that a special shout out to the composer is in order, because after all his music is all we hear for 90 minutes and it creates and/or complements the pace of the film perfectly. My guess is that he might not get the Oscar, maybe he won't even be nominated. And that would be sad and tragic and unfair. That would be Hollywood. Hey: that's kinda the whole point of this film!
Anyway, you know how I know it's fiction? Because we see a film set and the screenwriter has his own chair. On the set. With the word 'Screenwriter' written on it. Come on, that only happens in fiction. Or in Kadıköy (that's a Giyotin Film plug, y'all!).
So, yeah... In the end I admit I really enjoyed it, but I also don't completely get the world-wide adulation. I suspect it's because it's a film about the golden age of films, and it's silent and original and it makes us long for a time when things where simpler. Still fucked up, but simpler. And that's cool.
Plus I am really happy for Jean and Michel (yeah, we're on a first name basis by now) and I hope this is not going to go to their heads and that they won't start selling out or sucking.
'Si, ça sert de discuter! C'est toi qui as toujours raison!'
