Let's talk about the film, shall we? I was extremely anxious to see it, as I had a similar idea for a novel I'll write when I finish the current one and the one lined up after it; I emerged from the theater feeling deeply relieved that while more than one person can have a similar idea, the execution really will be totally different. I'm not going to share anymore of my idea now, because I don't want anyone to steal it! (hey, I've already had my blog plagiarized.) But I do want to talk a bit about the film: what was great, what was less great, and what it achieved.
What was great: the mimes.
What was less great: the weird Porte de Choisy sequence.
What it achieved: the fetishization of a red trenchcoat.
Ok, that was easy.
But seriously. What struck me was that the film took up the most mythologized theme in the most mythologized modern city-- love in Paris-- and deconstructed it in a number of different scenes all playing out around the city, featuring different people from different backgrounds experiencing a panoply of different shades of love. The mosaic of the film deconstructed the monolithic idea Western culture has of Paris as the city of love-- nowhere more brilliantly than in the "Tuileries" sequence [what, by the way, is with French men and ass-slapping? not that I'm complaining!] and attempted to give a richer and more quotidian portrait of both the city and the sentiment.
So in a sense, the film worked against the mythology of Paris. But then, if this is the case, why the filler shots of Paris at dawn, Paris at dusk, Paris at night, Paris with fireworks?
I think one possible answer is suggested at the end, when different scenes from the film are tiled over the shot of the Eiffel Tower doing the shimmy-- as if the two visual layers are working in counterpoint, the myriad "realities" laid over the myth-- which is itself a reality which occurs every night on the hour. Until, of course, they turn out the lights on the monuments at two am. That's when the vampires and Frodo come out.
One drawback, I thought, was that although the film was as much about Paris as it was about the individual characters, very few of the sequences actually used the tangible Paris neighborhood they were set in. Some did this brilliantly-- I'm thinking of the Place des Victories scene, with its statue of Louis XV [?] rearing on his charger and the centrality of cowboys to the story, or the bas-relief deer and fawn carved on the statue in the Place des fetes, against which the African man slumps after being stabbed in the street, innocent of any crime, a victim of the forest's predators.
My own project will interact much more with the physicality of the city, and the way one's experience of it constructs, remakes, reshapes one's soul-- profoundly, sure, but also on a very immediate level. The way places change according to our experience of them, and our emotional proximity to them, and the other way round.
"Paris je t'aime" gestured at this, and certainly came close to it in each sequence, but the producers were ultimately content simply to evoke twenty different neighborhoods in a way that would enlighten someone whose knowledge of Paris is limited to the tourist attractions, and to render nostalgic those of us with a more intimate knowledge of the city.
One last note: I think if I were still living in the States, frustrated and longing to move to Paris, seeing this film would have put me over the edge. Good thing I'm already here.
But oh, the part (I've already forgotten which segment) of the woman who comes to Paris for the first time and wanders around by herself. When she was sitting on the bench and the voice-over talked about how she was truly feeling emotions for the first time, I cried. I don't know why, but something in that part touched me so much. And the mimes! Oh, the mimes.
I loved your descrition, it reminded me so much of why I love Paris. I'll be going back as often as I can, especially now that I'll be in Lyon for two more years- I've been accepted into a Master in arts management. I'm over the moon, and also going to Tucson tomorrow morning.
ps- I WILL watch what I'm wearing if I ever walk along the rue Mouffetard- the thought of you mocking my outfit is just too too much to take!
Posted by: Gina Louise | July 13, 2006 at 07:42 AM
Do you know if the movie will have English subtitle so I can rent it in the States? I just got back from Paris and I'm already itchy to go again.
Posted by: Salon de The | July 13, 2006 at 01:28 PM
I think the NYTimes just wrote a teaser about "Paris, je t'aime"...Always tormenting us-the director said he wanted to tell an unromantsized version of Piaf's life..but wait perhaps that's a different movie..? Oh yes, La Vie En Rose..well this sounds terrific too & I'm pissed that I have to wait Gawd knows how long to see it. Sufferin' catfish!
Life is just NOT fair
Posted by: Carol Gillot | July 13, 2006 at 03:15 PM
Wow, great review Maitresse - I've been very anxious to see this movie since I first read about it. It even inspired me to blog about French films! I'm a sucker for #1 anything shot in Paris and #2 love stories.
Salon de The - from what I've read around the internet, we have to wait until the holiday season to see it in the States. I hope I'm wrong!
Posted by: Suzy | July 13, 2006 at 07:06 PM
"One last note: I think if I were still living in the States, frustrated and longing to move to Paris, seeing this film would have put me over the edge. Good thing I'm already here."
Aw, damn. I don't want to read that. I've been wanting to see this movie so bad, and I know it won't be until next year, and I'll have to hit up Blockbusters or something.
Le sigh.
Posted by: lafashionista | July 13, 2006 at 09:30 PM
D'oh! I'm sorry fashionista! That was so insensitive. I was just thinking it would really be torturous to see the film and not walk out into Paris.
Gina, congratulations! I'm so glad to hear it! Would love to hear more. Definitely ring N's doorbell if you ever are in the rue Mouffetard!
Salon de the I'm sure it will be released in the States with English subtitles.
And thanks Suzy, glad you liked it.
Posted by: maitresse | July 14, 2006 at 04:45 AM
Nice review, Maîtresse. I agree with you on the Porte de Choisy sequence, I didn't much care for it either.
Now I'm looking forward to reading your not-yet-written book on a similar idea!
Posted by: La Page Francaise | July 14, 2006 at 07:58 AM
Perfect move for Bastille Day.
Posted by: Neil | July 14, 2006 at 04:33 PM
SNEAK PREVIEW ALERT!
8 little mini segments Voir la bande-annonce de Paris je t'aime here:
http://www.allocine.fr/film/video_gen_cfilm=46401.html
WOO WOO !
Posted by: Carol Gillot | July 15, 2006 at 12:14 AM
I have to take back my reccommendation to watch the previews :(
You will be driven even more nuts then reading Lauren if you can't run out & see it tout suite.Triste.
Posted by: Carol Gillot | July 15, 2006 at 12:33 AM
wait, so reading me can drive you nuts?
jeez! sorry!
:)
L
Posted by: maitresse | July 15, 2006 at 05:01 AM
Well yeah kinda nuts: with envy, with covetness if there is such a word, like watching those snipets of "Je T'Aime"..Hey I want to be THERE NOT HERE - especially today. You make it seem very real and tangible, like just walk out the door and it's there. Sometimes vicarious isn't enough. But that's not yr problem Désolé :(
Posted by: Carol Gillot | July 15, 2006 at 08:21 AM
Well, because I'm a glutton for punishment, I tried to watch those clips. I think my laptop knows me well; the clips refused to play! But, I watched the trailer anyway at the official site. Paris, je t'aime cannot get here soon enough.
I have question, though: What is the French obsession with red? (Or, is there a French obsession with red?) Off the top of my head, I'm remembering the reds in Amélie, the red Hermès Kelly bag in Le Divorce, and now the red trench in Paris je t'aime (which I now covet).
Posted by: lafashionista | July 15, 2006 at 09:01 AM
I really enjoy reading your blog. I'm a New Yorker stuck in Los Angeles, who really needs to be living abroad. I am looking forward to seeing this film. Great review. I think they are shooting a NYC version.
Posted by: nyc/carribean ragazza | July 18, 2006 at 10:11 AM
oops, I spelled Caribbean wrong in my previous post. It's a litle early.
Posted by: nyc/caribbeanragazza | July 18, 2006 at 10:19 AM
Love your synopsis!
(And yes, I wish we'd met up, but I'm hoping I'll be back next year).
I so wanted to see this when I was there, as it'll take forever for it to arrive here in Australia, if at all. But with only 5 days in Paris I wanted to be out every minute, 2 hours indoors seemed unbearable (even with the thought of some air-con to tempt me).
Posted by: Julia | July 21, 2006 at 12:33 AM
Maitresse,
Not sure what is the deal between the Americans and Paris. Migrants like you have made of this city a theme park for anachronistic people with no ideas, no originality and nostalgy of the past.
One day, they will begin to charge an entry fee to all Americans who come here with the same prejudices and a fundamental lack of travel experiences.
I hope one day you can afford travelling to some other places and you will value the world as it is and not through others' (Americans) eyes.
I wish you good luck with your Paris novel or movie or whatever, I just hope that the Hollywood version hires a Meg Ryan or a Marlon Brando for the leading roles, otherwise I think I will miss it.
Cheers!
Uranus
Posted by: Uranus | July 21, 2006 at 07:39 PM
uranus, do you even read my blog before you leave comments like this? because if you did, you would be aware that not only have I travelled extensively, I certainly look askance at the "Paris myth" and never for a moment do I ally myself with any effort to reinforce it, preferring instead to examine, deconstruct, and at times, ironise it. If you don't understand cultural criticism when you read it, that's a drawback in YOUR education.
Finally, it's not Americans who make the city into a theme park, but a deeply entrenched vision of the city as a cultural monument, a living museum, on the part of its historical leadership. Moreover, the view of the city as theme park is hardly a new one, dating back at least to Rabelais, whose read the city as carnival. And I'm sure you'll agree that the carnival is certainly the ancestor to the theme park.
I deeply, deeply resent any mention of anachronism with connection to my writing about paris and I challenge you to put your money where your mouth is. say, some sort of billy madison-esque face-off?
Posted by: maitresse | July 22, 2006 at 07:32 AM
Dear Maitresse,
Your position is hardly defendable, unless your analysis is buried under loads of prejudices. In America exists a "Paris myth" and you contribute constantly to it, in most of your posts and in this last comment:
1. The "living museum". It is difficult not finding a "living museum" in Europe. As soon as you find more than 20 buildings together on the side of a river, you have a "museum". I guess the "living museum" expression refers to the customs and behaviour of the people inside the "museum"... and again, an American can be as shocked by the cultural differences in France as in Greece.
2. "Historical leadership"... Not sure if you are talking about Paris, or that Paris has more historical leadership than the US (which is probably your benchmark). Let me tell you that Paris is one of least relevant capitals in European history. The bearly 300 years of history of Paris as a city make it hardly impressive, even for French standards. That about history, about "leadership", the 3 only times Paris has asserted itself as an important centre of power were the Napoleonic invasions (Napoleon, who became an Emperor and kissed the Pope's ring, invaded a lot of European and African countries, imposing dictatorships and appointing his relatives as Kings); the colonisation of Africa and Asia (the colonies were so brutally treated that one after the other, they rebelled against the French invaders and kicked them out of their countries); and the alignment of the French with Adolf Hitler in WWII.
I am not sure how many countries you travelled to, or lived in, and if you were biased by your American prejudices when you finally walked in the millions of "living museums" that you can find in Europe, but I can only tell you that when I read your posts praising Paris every day of your life and thanking the French for not kicking you out of their country, you just demonstrate that you are... just an American.
Uranus, World Citizen
Posted by: Uranus | July 22, 2006 at 07:59 AM
Oh yes, a fight between Uranus and Maitresse! How exciting!
Is Uranus going to overwhelm Maitresse with his prejudiced non-sense? Or is Maitresse, the master cultural criticism, going to deconstruct Uranus' discourse? Can't wait!
Posted by: Anonymous | July 22, 2006 at 10:53 AM
Wow, what a great contribution! "Prejudiced" applied to a guy who has lived in Paris for 3 years!
Look the meaning up in any dictionary.
Cheers dude!
Posted by: Uranus | July 22, 2006 at 06:31 PM
can i just say, maitresse, that when you take the bait, you usually end sounding like someone who takes themself far too seriously? basta with the deconstruction defense, already.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 23, 2006 at 01:58 AM
"Wow, what a great contribution! "Prejudiced" applied to a guy who has lived in Paris for 3 years!
Look the meaning up in any dictionary."
I don't need a dictionary, I just read your blog! That gives me better a way better idea, and a clearer definition, with plenty of examples to illustrate the concept.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 23, 2006 at 03:51 AM
It will be difficult finding a single breeze of prejudice in any of my opinions, blog postings, etc, but if you find any please share it.
Posted by: Uranus | July 23, 2006 at 04:53 AM
Uranus-- you're entitled to your opinion of Paris, no matter how you've arrived at it (tho for the life of me I can't understand why you stay if you hate it so much!), but all I ask is that you respect mine without blaming it on my nationality, as if my view of paris could really stand in for every american's, and also that you have a little respect for the fact that even if some americans wax hyperbolic when they talk about paris, some of us take great pains to be specific about our relationship to the city.
anonymous-- what's wrong with taking one's opinions and writings seriously, even too seriously? that said, you're right: I have exhausted my quota for the verb "deconstruct" and promise to find more interesting ways of making my point without resorting to jargon which, tho it means something in certain contexts, smacks of pretention to a general readership.
Posted by: maitresse | July 23, 2006 at 05:19 AM