New Directors/New Films and Film Comment Selects

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks for taking the time to reply in such detail. I was merely explaining why my response was different from yours.

"With all due respect," you comment, "while I am interested in what others say about a film, everyone's in a different space and reacts differently. In the final analysis, like viewing a painting, I always go with my experience and what it means to me on a personal level."

Indeed. But I was consulting with other people on what actually happened in the film. One can get that wrong. Especially in this case. There were a number of places where I was not sure. And I consulted further this morning with people who had seen the film with me last week. As I said, a couple bits in your own summary of the action of BELLE ÉPINE seemed to me to be almost certainly slightly off: "Franck (Johan Libereau), [who] takes advantage of her for his sexual pleasure. When she walks out of a movie leaving Franck feeling angry and deserted, she goes to his house to try and talk to his mother."

By my own impression and by consulting with others the other day and today, I found we all felt this was not accurate. Of course I may still be wrong about all this. I may have misunderstood the film, and the lady who loved the film and seemed to have observed and understood it best, and you. That is my point. The film is hard to follow. And so I don't know what it means, and I don't find it ultimately satisfying. I know it is meant to reflect the confusion of feeling of its young protagonist. But there is such a thing as too much of an objective correlative.

Another discerning and very well informed person whom I often talk to waved all these questions aside and said they didn't matter and said, "It's just a little film, but it's promising."

Can we leave it at that?

[Howard Schumann]

A couple bits in your own summary of the action of BELLE ÉPINE seemed to me to be almost certainly slightly off: "Franck (Johan Libereau), [who] takes advantage of her for his sexual pleasure. When she walks out of a movie leaving Franck feeling angry and deserted, she goes to his house to try and talk to his mother."

If you think this is certainly slightly off, please explain to me why it is incorrect and what you think actually happened. I'm sorry that you think you still don't understand the film.

[Chris Knipp]

Mainly just this part:

Franck (Johan Libereau), who takes advantage of her for his sexual pleasure. When she walks out of a movie leaving Franck feeling angry and deserted, she goes to his house to try and talk to his mother. . .

...that it's misleading to say that about Franck, because she wants it. He may seem aggressive, but that doesn't mean she didn't seek the sex just as much herself. And as I recall she was at the hotel for the sex, and then went downstairs and talked to his mother the next morning. The way you tell it seems a bit off in the nature of the event and the sequence. But I may be wrong. However Marcia L, a lady I have talked to at the screenings who loved this film and obviously "got" it much better than I did, did not think "takes advantage of her for his sexual pleasure" gave the correct impression. She said Prudence wanted to go to the hotel to talk to Franck's mother, so the sex may have been partly an excuse, but she didn't feel Prudence was taken advantage of.

She was at the hotel

[Howard Schumann]

Mainly just this part:

Franck (Johan Libereau), who takes advantage of her for his sexual pleasure. When she walks out of a movie leaving Franck feeling angry and deserted, she goes to his house to try and talk to his mother. . .

...that it's misleading to say that about Franck, because she wants it. He may seem aggressive, but that doesn't mean she didn't seek the sex just as much herself. And as I recall she was at the hotel for the sex, and then went downstairs and talked to his mother the next morning. The way you tell it seems a bit off in the nature of the event and the sequence. But I may be wrong. However Marcia L, a lady I have talked to at the screenings who loved this film and obviously "got" it much better than I did, did not think "takes advantage of her for his sexual pleasure" gave the correct impression. She said Prudence wanted to go to the hotel to talk to Franck's mother, so the sex may have been partly an excuse, but she didn't feel Prudence was taken advantage of.

She was at the hotel

Yes, I can see the way I put it leads to a misunderstanding. What I meant was that she was seeking a relationship and not just sex but he wasn't interested in a long term relationship, so in that sense, he was using her for his immediate pleasure. I will have to edit my review so it communicates my intent better.

By the way, I'm not sure if you've seen this review, but I think it may help to make the issues clearer for you:

http://www.quietearth.us/articles/20...NCE-BELLE-PINE

[Chris Knipp]

Okay, we're straight on that. I read that review, but I think yours is just as good. I would like to see much more detail. I have scanned a number of the French reviews but not taken the trouble to read through all of any of them. I think I've seen enough, but I am certainly willing to see the director's next film.

[Howard Schumann]

Okay, we're straight on that. I read that review, but I think yours is just as good. I would like to see much more detail. I have scanned a number of the French reviews but not taken the trouble to read through all of any of them. I think I've seen enough, but I am certainly willing to see the director's next film.

Thanks fir the complement. My only problem now is whether or not he really wanted her for a sexual relationship or that was just her perception.

Clarification of that will have to wait until it comes out on DVD, if it ever does. I will also look forward to her next film.

[Chris Knipp]

Well he obviously was hurt when she walked out on him in the cinema.