Jean Renoir's Grand Illusion
I got stood up at the brewery last night. This shouldn't be an issue: I'm at the brewery, right? But it was still a rough night. I eventually came home and watched Jean Renoir's Grand Illusion, which I'd picked up at the library.
This is about French POWs during WWI. I can't remember why I picked it up, I didn't really want to watch a POW film... but this film is nothing like I expected. In fact, it turns out to be one of the great humanist manifestos of the interwar years. What's amazing about this film is its absolute lack of brutality. While the film has been criticized for being unrealistic, (this is not a film about the front) it also opens this liminal space, where people's interests intersect despite war, and every man can recognize himself in those that are supposed to be the enemy.
Notes on the film said that the film (La Grande Illusion) should actually be translated The Great Illusion because it was inspired, in part, by the work of Norman Angell whose book by that name suggested that war is never in the economic interest of the parties involved, and that any outbreak of war would quickly be quashed by the disruption of international credit. His theory, published before the Great War (I), was proved wrong by the outbreak of that same war. He won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1933 for a revision of the same suggesting, instead, that any attempt for a country to enrich itself at the expense of neighbors was futile.
I don't suppose I have to point out the great ironies involved, or that between the making of the film (1936-38) and the restoration of it (1958) 20 years passed in which it was cut all to hell because the films viewpoint didn't suit anyone! Ironically, the film was originally restored by copies found in Berlin, and later, coming from Russian archives looted from Berlin.
The action in this film consists primarily of the prisoners entertaining themselves and their captors, and repeated attempts at escape, which are understood by all parties involved as the duty of the individuals and reflecting in no way about the conditions or relationships between the parties. This is perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the film, as is the sort of love affair that occurs between the rigidly corseted Erich von Stroheim as Capt. von Rauffenstein and the French Capt. von Boeldieu. Von Rauffenstein sees them as the last of the aristocracy and tells Von Boeldieu that their kind will not survive the war.
But the most touching aspect of the film is a kind of refusal to participate in brutality. Each of the characters connects on a humane level first, what they have in common as soldiers or mechanics (or aristocrats) far outweighs the illusion of borders. In fact the very end of the film --- INSERT SPOILER HERE ABOUT THE FINAL SCENE--- bears up this thesis.
And, yet, especially from the early part of the 21C, this is the most grand of all the illusions provided by the film. People, even in their daily, peacetime, lives, are much more likely to find reasons for difference and violence, then they are to find common ground. Nevertheless, this film suggests that we have a choice. If people, even within the depredations of warfare can find their civility and love for fellow man, certainly we can find it also.
A beautifully constructed and deeply humbling film. I recommend it heartily, and the commentary track on the Criterion Collection is very good... certainly worth watching the film twice. After seeing it once, you will want to.
This is about French POWs during WWI. I can't remember why I picked it up, I didn't really want to watch a POW film... but this film is nothing like I expected. In fact, it turns out to be one of the great humanist manifestos of the interwar years. What's amazing about this film is its absolute lack of brutality. While the film has been criticized for being unrealistic, (this is not a film about the front) it also opens this liminal space, where people's interests intersect despite war, and every man can recognize himself in those that are supposed to be the enemy.
Notes on the film said that the film (La Grande Illusion) should actually be translated The Great Illusion because it was inspired, in part, by the work of Norman Angell whose book by that name suggested that war is never in the economic interest of the parties involved, and that any outbreak of war would quickly be quashed by the disruption of international credit. His theory, published before the Great War (I), was proved wrong by the outbreak of that same war. He won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1933 for a revision of the same suggesting, instead, that any attempt for a country to enrich itself at the expense of neighbors was futile.
I don't suppose I have to point out the great ironies involved, or that between the making of the film (1936-38) and the restoration of it (1958) 20 years passed in which it was cut all to hell because the films viewpoint didn't suit anyone! Ironically, the film was originally restored by copies found in Berlin, and later, coming from Russian archives looted from Berlin.
The action in this film consists primarily of the prisoners entertaining themselves and their captors, and repeated attempts at escape, which are understood by all parties involved as the duty of the individuals and reflecting in no way about the conditions or relationships between the parties. This is perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the film, as is the sort of love affair that occurs between the rigidly corseted Erich von Stroheim as Capt. von Rauffenstein and the French Capt. von Boeldieu. Von Rauffenstein sees them as the last of the aristocracy and tells Von Boeldieu that their kind will not survive the war.
But the most touching aspect of the film is a kind of refusal to participate in brutality. Each of the characters connects on a humane level first, what they have in common as soldiers or mechanics (or aristocrats) far outweighs the illusion of borders. In fact the very end of the film --- INSERT SPOILER HERE ABOUT THE FINAL SCENE--- bears up this thesis.
And, yet, especially from the early part of the 21C, this is the most grand of all the illusions provided by the film. People, even in their daily, peacetime, lives, are much more likely to find reasons for difference and violence, then they are to find common ground. Nevertheless, this film suggests that we have a choice. If people, even within the depredations of warfare can find their civility and love for fellow man, certainly we can find it also.
A beautifully constructed and deeply humbling film. I recommend it heartily, and the commentary track on the Criterion Collection is very good... certainly worth watching the film twice. After seeing it once, you will want to.