setsuled: (Mouse Sailor)


Why do works of fiction spend time on people with amnesia? One good reason can be seen in Hal Hartley's 1994 film Amateur--it's a convenient tool for discussing essential human nature. But it's just one of the ways the film talks about guilt and compassion, men and woman, and the significance of socially prescribed identity.



The protagonists all have extreme, larger than life identities--in addition to the amnesiac, who turns out to have been a high level gangster, there's a porn star, described as one of the biggest porn stars in the world, and a virgin former nun who describes herself as a nymphomaniac.



The amnesiac, Thomas (Michael Donovan), wanders into a cafe at the beginning of the film where he meets the former nun, Isabelle (Isabelle Huppert). Both characters are blank slates in different ways--Thomas, obviously because he doesn't even know his own name, and Isabelle because her peculiar history makes her free of prejudice. She now tries to earn a living writing smut for a porno magazine but the publisher is frustrated when she constantly brings him stories that end with depressing existential statements.



There's a cuteness in the size of things established in the film and the deadpan dialogue that has a fetishistic quality. The porn star, Sofia (Elina Lowensohn), is intensely beautiful and Hartley wastes no opportunity to remind us.



She blames Thomas, her husband, for leading her to a life of porn. She talks about the abuse she's suffered at his hands and she's clearly terrified of him yet at the same time she says she loves him. The film never actually shows us Thomas before he lost his memory so almost everything we know about him comes from Sophia with one significant exception.



Isabelle hears Thomas talking in his sleep to someone named Sophia, threatening to cut her face with a razor. So we can assume Thomas was capable of horrific behaviour but the fact that we never actually get to see him or his relationship with Sofia puts us in his perspective since we know about as much about him as he does. Sofia's terror of him is justified but his frustration at being constantly met with suspicion also seems justified.



Thomas says he doesn't think Isabelle is really a nymphomaniac and he might have a point. We see her go on a date to a movie with a guy she met through a phone sex line. When he starts groping her she seems mildly surprised, gets bored, and abruptly leaves. She says she wants to sleep with Thomas but keeps putting it off throughout the movie. She, too, starts to wonder if he's really the decent guy he seems to be, and if this is because he's not the man he used to be or if it's because that man was more complicated than the few horrible details we know about him. With her being a former nun--who is on this adventure because of a divine vision she claims to have had--it's hard not to think about original sin and her potentially infinite compassion being the grace of God, or her potential condemnation being God's wrath.



As a counterpoint, we meet another man in the film, Edward (Damian Young), a friend of Sofia's who's mixed up in the same Dutch criminal empire as her and Thomas, run by a sinister, unseen man named Jaque. Two of Jaque's goons wind up catching Edward and he's unwilling to give them the goods on Sofia despite the fact that they spend all night torturing him by electrocuting him. After this, though, it's hard to tell if he hasn't also lost his identity. When he winds up at a police station, a soft hearted police woman uncuffs him at which point he immediately takes a gun and murders another officer. So this is a world in which Isabelle would not be wise to blindly trust someone like Thomas.



Huppert gives a performance that is both deeply cool and weirdly innocent. Hartley's storytelling instincts are nicely low key and this is an enjoyable, thoughtful film.
setsuled: (Louise Smirk)


Is she innocent, psychotic, sadistic, confused, a victim of sexual abuse, or just a normal girl with syphilis? From the way 1978's Violette Noziere avoids answering the questions it constantly provokes about its title character one would expect the film to be a muddled mess but it's all anchored by an unfailingly solid performance from Isabelle Huppert.



Violette (Huppert) lives in a small flat with her parents. Her mother (Stephane Audran) is fussy and overbearing while her father (Jean Carmet) comes across as more easy going. Violette is based on a real life murderer who killed her parents in 1935 and perhaps this is why the film wants to avoid making strong arguments about her actual motives. Violette tells several people, long before her parents' deaths, that her father had routinely raped her since she was twelve. The film is very careful to show that this might be true and yet it might not be. In one scene, Violette catches her father looking at her while she washes and she covers herself but the two carry on a casual conversation without missing a beat.



Is this a sign of too much familiarity? Is the casual atmosphere a sign that nothing really wrong had happened and he had just made a mistake? One thing's for sure, Violette is a very good liar and Huppert plays her as someone who can quickly jump into a story without breaking stride. When she catches syphilis, she coolly says, "So you already know?" when her parents confront her about it, having been informed by the family doctor, Deron (Jean-Pierre Coffee).



The fact that she is such a good liar makes it difficult to trust anything she says, and if her ability to commit to lies so effectively is a sign of her mental illness, how can her guilt be judged? The one potentially honest moment is when her parents are dying in front of her and she just regards them coldly as a reptile.



But one also has to take into account what syphilis can do to someone's mind. We see that she has hallucinations where she mixes people up and she has fainting spells.



She seems to be genuinely in love with Jean (Jean-Francois Garreaud) but it's hinted that he's only using her for the money she steals from her parents. But she sleeps with a lot of men. One of them, a musician, sees her taking money from his wallet. When he shrugs and says it's okay, it's normal for her to be paid, she becomes angry and asks if he thinks she's a whore. This one little moment nicely opens up a lot of questions. If she doesn't think of herself as a prostitute, she must just like casual sex. But she is taking his money. Why would she rather he think she's a thief than a prostitute if she never plans on seeing him again?



In the hands of many other actresses, Violette would come off as a frustrating jumble but the commitment Huppert has to the role, the confidence she has in thoroughly inhabiting her, is so convincing that the ambiguities seem like genuine, provoking mysteries in human nature.

Twitter Sonnet #1003

A teacup rogue on drying seas contained
And held a bursting ten and screaming heads
Arrested by their spongy necks restrained
And charged in living sweat for batt'ry beds.
The wheels in pins disprove a floating wind
And slipping shoe absorbed in books beside
The smiling cork acclaimed in tops to fend
Alone in matchless pants, apportioned ride.
Across a crust canals of butter bring
The tides of tender trade to towns who sleep
Who drift inside a lime and lemon ring
The circlet's source of strength in yellow deep.
A peg appointed for the sign revealed
The path where burning coal and cars congealed.

Profile

setsuled: (Default)
setsuled

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 3rd, 2025 11:11 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios