wpqx
11-28-2004, 07:55 PM
The directorial career of Jean Renoir had already been underway by the coming of sound, but after its arrival, no other French director stepped up to the new medium quite as memorably. Rene Clair might have been the first innovator with his trilogy of musical comedies (Under the Roofs of Paris, A Nous La Liberte, and Le Million), but his sound consisted of post-synchronized work. Clair got around the sound barrier by shooting silent films and adding sound in post-production. This gave the films their own unique quality, and allowed him to control audio like few directors could. In the case of musical comedies it worked to his advantage, not only with perfectly recorded songs, but also with comic substitutions on the sound track.
Renoir used sound while filming, giving his films a greater realism, and beginning with La Chienne he established himself as France’s greatest director. Renoir’s greatest period of creativity, both commercially and critically was the 1930s. Throughout the decade he remained prolific, profitable, and downright brilliant. La Chienne opened the door, and it remains one of his greatest films, and like Boudu Saved From Drowning (his very next feature) one of the most overlooked.
La Chienne is unique in its prologue, consisting of a brief scene with puppets followed by a very brief introduction to the film. This introduction can serve as a preview of Renoir’s entire 30’s filmography. It establishes that there are no morals, no lessons, no heroes, and no villains. The story consists of people like you and me, and herein lies Renoir’s central theme. Life is not black and white, and not only is it full of misfortune and general bad luck; it can also be a wonderful thing worth living.
Michel Simon plays a character described in the prologue as “The Man”. We learn he actually has a name, and it is Legrand. People familiar with the robust Simon of Jean Vigo’s L’Atalante and Renoir’s Boudu, might be very surprised to see him as the timid, bashful, and extremely gullible Legrand. The other two main characters established in the prologue are “The Woman” (played by Janie Mareze), and Dede (Georges Flamant).
Although Renoir might not want us to identify or feel with one particular character, we can’t help but identify with Legrand. For starters, he is the first character, not only mentioned in the prologue, but the first shot of the film features him. When we first see him he is being made fun of by his colleagues at a dinner party. His behavior seems to be anti-social and he declines an invitation to go out with the rest of his co-workers afterwards because his domineering wife had imposed a curfew on him. Throughout the film he is being used, but Renoir makes it clear that he isn’t the only one.
Lulu Pelletier (Mareze) is also made to be the victim. Legrand only meets her because Dede had nearly knocked her out on the street. Dede continually beats her throughout the film, but we can’t really feel sorry for the girl. Now this isn’t a declaration that she is a whore and Dede is her pimp, so that’s the way it is, it goes deeper than that. We can’t feel sorry for her because she loves Dede, who is an asshole. Renoir might not want to make any villains of the story, but if anyone comes closest, it has to be him. He is consistently manipulative of Lulu, and through her Legrand. He takes the money given to Lulu and gambles it away. He is using Lulu in the exact same way that she is using Legrand. The only difference is that Dede makes no attempts to hide his behavior, whereas Lulu is deceptive and secretive to Legrand.
Renoir keeps us on our toes though. No character stays the same, and each gets some thing that they deserve, as well as something they don’t. So in the end everyone seems to get their just dessert, but they also seem to have been used and abused by the system. No one really comes out a winner except for Legrand in Renoir’s eyes. That may only be because he has some understanding of the joy of life. With a 20-franc note given to him at the end, he says to his friend (his former wife’s first husband) “We’re going to have a feast. Life is grand”.
Renoir’s themes and style would prove highly influential. This may be his first experiment with deep focus photography. Renoir doesn’t use it to the effect of Welles. In a Renoir film, the photography seems to be naturalistic. In life all plains should be in focus, and that’s how it is in his films. With Welles we notice all plains are in focus, and it catches our eye. Renoir you might need to see a film of his several times to even notice it. The same goes for his lengthy takes. Renoir lets his camera move, but not to distract or to “show off” technique, but to observe the action.
So people quick to point out the revolutionary technique of Rules of the Game might want to check this film out, made 8 years before. The very same technique is on the forefront. Most people however didn’t have the option of checking it out. La Chienne didn’t come out in American until 1975. Today Rules of the Game has gotten the royal Criterion treatment, but La Chienne is unavailable even on video. Although not as popular, I would argue the film is as good, if not better. Renoir’s moralism was a stark contrast to that of Hollywood, particularly in the era of the Production Code. Moral justice isn’t dished out here, but poetic justice comes in abundance.
Renoir used sound while filming, giving his films a greater realism, and beginning with La Chienne he established himself as France’s greatest director. Renoir’s greatest period of creativity, both commercially and critically was the 1930s. Throughout the decade he remained prolific, profitable, and downright brilliant. La Chienne opened the door, and it remains one of his greatest films, and like Boudu Saved From Drowning (his very next feature) one of the most overlooked.
La Chienne is unique in its prologue, consisting of a brief scene with puppets followed by a very brief introduction to the film. This introduction can serve as a preview of Renoir’s entire 30’s filmography. It establishes that there are no morals, no lessons, no heroes, and no villains. The story consists of people like you and me, and herein lies Renoir’s central theme. Life is not black and white, and not only is it full of misfortune and general bad luck; it can also be a wonderful thing worth living.
Michel Simon plays a character described in the prologue as “The Man”. We learn he actually has a name, and it is Legrand. People familiar with the robust Simon of Jean Vigo’s L’Atalante and Renoir’s Boudu, might be very surprised to see him as the timid, bashful, and extremely gullible Legrand. The other two main characters established in the prologue are “The Woman” (played by Janie Mareze), and Dede (Georges Flamant).
Although Renoir might not want us to identify or feel with one particular character, we can’t help but identify with Legrand. For starters, he is the first character, not only mentioned in the prologue, but the first shot of the film features him. When we first see him he is being made fun of by his colleagues at a dinner party. His behavior seems to be anti-social and he declines an invitation to go out with the rest of his co-workers afterwards because his domineering wife had imposed a curfew on him. Throughout the film he is being used, but Renoir makes it clear that he isn’t the only one.
Lulu Pelletier (Mareze) is also made to be the victim. Legrand only meets her because Dede had nearly knocked her out on the street. Dede continually beats her throughout the film, but we can’t really feel sorry for the girl. Now this isn’t a declaration that she is a whore and Dede is her pimp, so that’s the way it is, it goes deeper than that. We can’t feel sorry for her because she loves Dede, who is an asshole. Renoir might not want to make any villains of the story, but if anyone comes closest, it has to be him. He is consistently manipulative of Lulu, and through her Legrand. He takes the money given to Lulu and gambles it away. He is using Lulu in the exact same way that she is using Legrand. The only difference is that Dede makes no attempts to hide his behavior, whereas Lulu is deceptive and secretive to Legrand.
Renoir keeps us on our toes though. No character stays the same, and each gets some thing that they deserve, as well as something they don’t. So in the end everyone seems to get their just dessert, but they also seem to have been used and abused by the system. No one really comes out a winner except for Legrand in Renoir’s eyes. That may only be because he has some understanding of the joy of life. With a 20-franc note given to him at the end, he says to his friend (his former wife’s first husband) “We’re going to have a feast. Life is grand”.
Renoir’s themes and style would prove highly influential. This may be his first experiment with deep focus photography. Renoir doesn’t use it to the effect of Welles. In a Renoir film, the photography seems to be naturalistic. In life all plains should be in focus, and that’s how it is in his films. With Welles we notice all plains are in focus, and it catches our eye. Renoir you might need to see a film of his several times to even notice it. The same goes for his lengthy takes. Renoir lets his camera move, but not to distract or to “show off” technique, but to observe the action.
So people quick to point out the revolutionary technique of Rules of the Game might want to check this film out, made 8 years before. The very same technique is on the forefront. Most people however didn’t have the option of checking it out. La Chienne didn’t come out in American until 1975. Today Rules of the Game has gotten the royal Criterion treatment, but La Chienne is unavailable even on video. Although not as popular, I would argue the film is as good, if not better. Renoir’s moralism was a stark contrast to that of Hollywood, particularly in the era of the Production Code. Moral justice isn’t dished out here, but poetic justice comes in abundance.