Director: Max Ophuls. Language: French. Based on the short novel by Louise de Vilmorin. Setting: Paris, late 19th Century.
Before the film began, our instructor started off with a brief lecture, informing us of the "circular structure" of the film, which I didn't understand until after seeing it. In the film, a pair of earrings passes through the hands of several owners, which makes for very amusing entertainment. The earrings were originally a wedding present from General Andre (Charles Boyer) to his vain wife Countess Louisa (Danielle Darrieux). After years of marriage, they both end up having affairs, and the earrings are passed along to other people: Louisa sells them to pay off her gambling debts, Boyer gives them to his mistress, and Louisa gets them again as a present from her lover, a diplomat (Vittorio di Sica).
Similar to
Caught, this is a film about a woman who is caught between two men - one, her husband, and the other, her lover. It's also the story of a woman caught in a web of her own lies. From the very first scenes we realize she's a chronic deceiver. Boyer's character is not all that sympathetic either. Holding our interest throughout are the earrings, which take on more meaning throughout the film. By the end of the film Lousia has fetishized them to the point where they have overtaken her life.
---- The novel vs. the film version -----
I was curious about why this film was called "Madame de..." and why we are not told the last names of the characters. According to
the synopsis from TCM Imports,
(Louise) Vilmorin (the author of the novel) left the characters unnamed, using the abbreviated Madame de and General de in a tribute to 19th century novelists who had used the same device to suggest their stories were based on real-life events. She did not give her story any clear setting in time or place, however, leaving the details to the reader's imagination. In his adaptation, Ophüls kept the naming, creating the suggestion that his characters could represent anybody from the story's milieu. He also fleshed out the other details. In particular, he set the story in Paris during the 1890s, a period with which he felt a strong personal connection. And as a tribute to the author, he gave his leading lady her first name, Louise.
---- The Famous Ballroom Dance Scene -----
In perhaps the greatest sequence in the film, di Sica and Louisa meet in a ball one night and they spend all night dancing. Reminiscent of
Letter From An Unknown Woman, one of the band players anxious to go home observes, "Those two are always the last." An analysis of a part of this scene at the blog VCR-chaeology; read the post
here.
Roger Ebert,
in his review, wrote
"On the dance floor, they observe it has been three weeks since they danced together....and then they are dancing still and no time has passed. The dialogue and costumes indicate the time transitions, but the music plays without interruption, as do their unbroken movements together...The economy of storytelling here--a courtship all told in a dance--resembles the famous montage in ''Citizen Kane'' where a marriage dissolves in a series of breakfasts."
---- Final thoughts -----
The camera work is once again incredible, and there are some interesting transitions. In one shot, Louisa tears up a letter, and throws the pieces out of a train window. The pieces fly through the sky and dissolve into snow in the next shot, set in winter.
The ending of the film leaves it open to further speculation, and in the class we had a good time discussing what might have happened next. A few people debated the outcome of a dual that was to happen at the end.
---- For more about this movie -----
Recommended, and available on DVD/Netflix. The Criterion DVD (which I have not checked out yet) has an audio commentary, interviews, analysis of the film, and a booklet. Further reviews of this film could be found at
Criterion Confessions,
Movie Ramblings, and
The Molten Notebook.
