Skip to main content

The Criterion Channel Presents: France (2021)


It’s really cool that Criterion is becoming a place attractive to a certain kind of modern world cinema that might not so readily find itself in the collection but is worth shedding a light on anyways. It’s also cool to see Criterion actively pursuing this kind of relationship. Ryusuke Hamaguchi doesn’t have a single film in Criterion’s ranks (though Drive My Car is on its’ way there), but that didn’t stop them from becoming the streaming home for his earlier Happy Hour. And now France, a film from last year by Bruno Dumont, has its’ streaming premiere on the platform. Sure it’s not something like an exclusive Marvel TV show on Disney+ to attract new subscribers, yet there may well be a contingent of Léa Seydoux fans willing to join up for a chance to watch one of her most acclaimed films in recent years.
I actually did hear enough buzz about this one to get me interested. I’ve been a fan of Seydoux for a little while and last year was a very good year for her, even just between No Time to Die and The French Dispatch. But France was her big starring role in her home country, and though not necessarily better, it might be the most interesting of her combined output in 2021 -and yes, a performance for which she probably should have been nominated for an Oscar.
A satire-cum-character drama, France is about a star television journalist called France de Meurs, whose career consists of breaking virtually every one of Jane Craig’s rules from Broadcast News. She is patently disingenuous, especially in her work as a war correspondent, frustratingly apolitical, and way too entranced in her own celebrity. On her personal life, she barely has one –an absentee mother and partner in a loveless marriage. An accident and scandal combined with a severe bout of depression ultimately forces her to re-examine all of this and the relationship between media, the truth, and society.
I personally can’t speak much to the movie as allegory for France itself in the twenty-first century, unaware of its’ socio-political intricacies of commentary, but I can recognize this aim of the movie and some of its’ broadest points of criticism –I mean the protagonists’ name literally translates as “France to die”. Dumont’s principal target is the news media, how it chooses to present and distort information, and how that dictates a discourse. France is one of the most powerful people in the country, her face is on billboards, buses –but when we see her journalism it is revealed to be quite shallow. Nothing she says in her reports is all that insightful, in fact often she simplifies nuanced situations and circumstances, and plays to public opinion –keenly studied by her social media manager Lou (Blanche Gardin).
All of it is meticulously designed, from France’s own image –immaculate blonde hair, deep red lips, and gorgeous expensive outfits- to the work she produces. A great early scene sees France in some unidentified war-torn Middle Eastern country, wearing her hijab in the most stylish way, rehearsing her dialogue with interviewees for the camera (involving a fair bit of hyperbole as to the truth of their situation), and then working through a language barrier to get a particular shot of one rebel in an aestheticized pose. In a later sequence she boards a refugee boat (a potent subject for the French), doing her piece from there for the optics, but staying aboard no longer than is absolutely necessary. It’s a vicious indictment of a side of news journalism we don’t always consider but are here asked to be suspicious of.
This cynicism drives much of the film, but it is not without humanity in its’ portrait of France, both the person and country. Seydoux is equally excellent in either dimension of her character and fosters a genuine sympathy in her efforts to do some good –donating a small fortune to the family whose son she inadvertently injured for example. Its’ an intense and compelling struggle between the part of her being confronted with the repercussions of her career choices and the part of her that is dependent on them. She finds love at a secluded spa away from all the machinery of the media, and it’s tragic what soon becomes of it –and the message she takes.
From its’ opening on a press conference lampooning President Macron (through poorly integrated archive footage) to its’ final moments seemingly pulled from a New Wave film, France is a sharp and surprisingly unrelenting statement on modern media culture. Aided by a strong sense of heightened realism and a powerful score by the late French musician Christophe, it is an exciting, incisive work of the new political cinema.
 
Criterion Recommendation: Another Round (2020)
       It’s been a year and lesser movies have gotten quicker Criterion deals so how about Another Round? Thomas Vinterberg’s delightful dark comedy about burned out teachers experimenting with day drinking as a way of spicing up their home and work lives is one of the best and low-key most outrageous movies in recent years about mid-life crises. Unafraid to be a little bit bleak (as most movies from the Dogme 95 gang are), it’s a journey of depression and alcoholism, but also fulfillment through vice as well –it doesn’t shy away from the appeal of drinking culture, much as it advocates moderation. Mads Mikkelsen gives one of his best, most dynamic performances as the leader of this little rat pack of middle-aged Danish pedagogues –the warmest he’s been in years, despite the selfish, self-destructive tendencies this habit brings out in him. The whole thing is a tribute to Vinterberg’s late daughter, whose experiences were a major source of inspiration, and whose death early into production prompted the ultimately heartwarming ending –still maybe the most joyous moment in a movie this decade. It is quite literally a gift of a film, what better reason for inclusion is there?

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
1 comment
Read more

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
14 comments
Read more