37th entry - L' Homme de sa vie (Part 1)
On 14th Nov, S and I went to watch a French film, L'Homme de sa vie (2006), directed by Zabou Breitman. We enjoyed it, even though there were parts of the film that we did not understand fully. I was impressed with the director's clever use of tension, metaphor, imagery and symbolism to bring out the central themes of the film, but what I liked most was the ingenial technique of filming the same dramatic sequence from different angles as though viewed from different perspectives. Overall, I think its one of the best French films I've watched so far.
I do not have full background knowledge about the film, so what I describe is essentially what I saw and understood (which may not be an accurate representation of the film). A seemingly loving straight couple, Frédéric (Bernard Campan) and Frédérique (Léa Drucker) invites their family to their country home to spend the holidays. During one of their family dinners they decided to invite their new neighbour, Hugo (Charles Berling), a single gay man. Frédéric and Hugo had a deep and long conversation about falling in love, being committed in a relationship and what they both are looking for in life. Their conversation left a deep and permanent impact on both of them, and changed their lives significantly.
Use of Tension
The audience is initially treated to a slow-moving slideshow of picturesque scenery from the French countryside at the start of the film. The relaxing rhythm of the slideshow is interrupted by the buzz of activities in the house as family members prepare for their get-together. Tension (both atmospheric and dramatic i.e. between characters) rises rapidly as the plot of the story unravels. The mysterious and almost supernatural phenomena of the wind that howls suddenly and unexpectedly through the hallway of their country home; the mystery surrounding the neighbour/dinner guest who swims in the nude in his own pool; Hugo's awkward revelation of his own homosexuality (probably still regarded as taboo in French society) at the family dinner and his sardonic and critical comment regarding the stereotypical jobs of faggots - the tension added a aura of suspense to the film and made it entertaining.
Bits of comedy and surrealistic scenes were often injected in the film to ease or diffuse the tension, but these also enhanced the effect of the tension between the main characters, Frédéric and Hugo, as well as internal tension within the characters themselves. Frédéric's initial awkward interactions with Hugo e.g. their first conversation when Frédéric went to invite Hugo to the dinner, followed by their hug when Hugo arrived at the gathering unexpectedly ahead of time, as well as the way the men look meaningfully at each other, made us think that something other than friendship is going on between the men. The sexual tension between the men, which can be seen in their spoken and body language - innuendos and subtle glances exchanged - is quite important in this film. However, equally important is the internal tension within Frédéric and Hugo, for different reasons. For the former, it was the conflict between performing family duty and seeking fulfillment in life; for the latter, it was between seeking personal freedom and seeking love from/and recovering a lost connection with his family.
Frédéric's desire for a connection with Hugo brought the film to its turning point, when Frédéric insisted on jogging with Hugo in spite of having a sprained ankle. The tension between them (and within Frédéric) reached its peak when Hugo confronts Frédéric outside the nightclub - the two men faced each other, bodies almost touching, with Hugo searching Frédéric's face for an answer but Frédéric looking down and unable to express his feelings for Hugo, and ending with Frédéric turning abruptly and hopping away (due to his injury). We could see plainly that Frédéric was in turmoil and anguish at being unable to resolve the internal conflict in his mind. On the other hand, Hugo was in a way reconciled with his "lost" family and accepted, and the film ended with him embarking on a journey of new self discovery and recovery of old wounds (being rejected by his own family and father).
The tension between Frédéric and his wife Frédérique was also an important element of dramatic tension in the film. What began as Frédéric's inability to maintain an erection in bed eventually turned into the discovery of underlying problems in their marriage. Beneath the surface of mutual respect and love, the couple suffered from a lack of understanding and passion: it feels like they were staying together because of the marriage and their young son. Frédéric's dying interest in his wife contrasted with his growing desire for a connection with Hugo, which he was in denial of. Frédérique was frustrated and puzzled at the change that had come over her husband, and she suspected was amiss but could not bring herself to admit that it was because of Hugo. She feared change as much as Frédéric, refusing to let go and face the inevitable. The tension between them reached its peak as the film arrived at its climactic conclusion, when Frédéric revealed to his wife that he can no longer make love to her the way he used to. Her stable world came crashing down, and she is left with uncertainty and despair. In this light, Frédéric's transformation is a brutal blow to her and the family that they had formed.
Continued in Part 2
(pictures taken from official site of L'Homme de sa vie)
posted by sunshine wallflower at 1:09 PM
4 Comments:
You have raised two very interesting points, which I believe bear repetition.
First, a man best understands another man.
Second, the biggest insult to a woman is to lose her husband to a man.
Interesting, no?
In the film, it seems that Fred and Hugo had a connection that was never present in the relationship between Fred and his wife.
I think the film does not portray the woman as one who was insulted. Rather, she appears defeated (her seemingly beautiful marriage dream shattered and her hopes of happiness dashed), lost (not able to understand what her husband was going through or to know what to do next to salvage her marriage or to give up) and reeling from immense pain at the blow dealt to her (upon the realisation that her husband is no longer the same as the man she loved and married). I think the director leaves us to ponder over her fate but strangely, I dont think we are led to blame the husband or Hugo for her plight. Thats my view
Should have written "insult" instead.
It's the worst thing a man can do to a wife - fall in love with another man.
Its just unfortunate when a man falls in love with another man while still married to his wife. My assumption is that its impossible for a person to love more than one person at one time, and to love them both equally. Hence, in cases where a man falling for another man while still in a viable marriage, usually its either that the love between husband and wife has already died or changed, or that the man never really loved the woman in the first place. I think the former is probably easier for the wife to accept than the latter. If we can afford to be non-judgmental for a moment, then perhaps we can see cases like this are not so straightforward. We generally tend to sympathise with the woman in such cases, ignoring the circumstances in which the relationship is formed.
For instance, the man could be bi-sexual (he can love a woman the same way that he can love a woman), gay but acting straight (to be accepted by mainstream society) or "confused" (he is a gay man in denial). The first case may be straightforward: to me, it is no different than the wife losing her husband to another woman. In this case, the woman should not feel insulted, but just accept the fact that she married the wrong man who failed to give her the happiness she deserves, and take consolation in the fact that he did truly love her, once. Lets face it: people change, feelings change, and once it happens, the relationship might not withstand the impact of these changes.
In the second case, it is questionable whether the man actually really loved the woman at all. The woman may feel deceived if she even suspects for a moment that the entire marriage was a sham or a lie. The assumption is that the man beyond doubt that he is gay but only pretending to be straight. In some extremely conservative societies or social networks, such men may be acting in self-preservation, fearful of being ostracized or even physically punished for coming out as a gay man. In such cases, the woman needs only to threaten her husband into submission, and she will probably keep her husband but lose his heart (although we should not discount the possibility that love will rekindle).
In the third case of a gay man in denial, the problem lies with what the man is thinking. On hindsight, until he straightened out his thinking, he should not have gotten involved with a woman. However, some men never realise their true sexual orientation until much later in life, and their discovery could be triggered by a one-off sexual encounter. The assumption is that a truly heterosexual man would never find another man sexually appealing. But this begs the fundamental question whether "truly heterosexual human beings" exist, or do all human-beings fall on a continuum of sexuality and that we tend to be more or less heterosexual/homosexual? For some, its never a doubt - human beings are born to be heterosexual. For others, failing to explore this issue and establish for themselves the nature of their sexual orientation can lead to disastrous consequences in life e.g. inability to form intimate relationships with others. I think the largely homophobic society and certain religious groups have to bear some responsibility for casting unfair stereotypes and being intolerant of differences, thereby instilling fear in people and preventing them from ever finding out their true sexual orientation. But this is my view.
Post a Comment
<< Home