I had a discussion a few years ago about why there were films like American Wall Street (1987) ( the result was presented This year at Cannes) and why the novel Bel-Ami de Maupassant had not been adapted by a French filmmaker. In the spirit of Michel Deville had made The Enraged Sheep (1974) highly successful in itself but, lacking the classic French films, very limited in scope. The film is unlikely ever to leave an unforgettable memory, which is normally typical of mediocre films. Mediocrity, so ambitious? For once Bel Ami offers a vision of political opportunism and collusion with journalism that present a formidable challenge.
The lack of ambition in the theater French is the default generic well protected our system, our cultural exception, where a handful of producers are biting the tail trying to fill the boxes. Behind this there is a default installation of right-thinking intellectuals "who dare criticize Pinochet less than 10 000 km from Santiago ( Desproges ). The political machine is Costa-Gavras, who held the store: make serious films or the only emotion is outrage. It's been cooing at Saint-Germain-des-Pres, but it does not piss off. Ditto, when Michael Moore tells them what they want to hear about the U.S. that they are powerful. But level of political fictions that have the ambition to speak with news that it has been miserable flops . This tends to maintain the idea that the French do not want to see fiction rooted in the real world political-economic.
That said, going back to Bel-Ami , the problem is that you can not have a hero in film negative showing recessed the corruption of its environment. If the villain played by Michael Douglas is the most important person on Wall Street, the narrative follows the footsteps of a young ambitious and naive will have problems of conscience once in insider trading in dark side.
I remembered seeing it that David Fincher (say in my FincherPrice) would release a film about the creation of Facebook by following his (unsympathetic) CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Communication about the film tries to raise the buzz, the press officers are struggling to say that this is the movie event of the season. A negative hero? While lifting up the secondary characters moral level is the story of his ascent. And I do not see it drop to the end because people would see a true story. A biopic of Facebook? But the 500 million users do not care. Dirty tricks the genesis of Facebook are known to those who are interested in the issue, but others are content to play in Farmville as big horse. Personally I think that the film will not be at the height of the marketing hype starts. If the film is successful the curiosity of the subject would have done the work buzz, there they are trying to reduce people's perception by boosting expectations on matters that do not necessarily correspond to what can interest an audience there. Typically I think this kind of story would work better with a positive hero who became a millionaire rather than a story that emphasizes the enemies he made in passing. Beau
challenge for Fincher? You bet this guy is a fact that clipeur mumuse with his camera, he gives a writer, he makes beautiful pictures above. The bluff works more or less according to the writer but now, since it merely filming his characters as fashion plates, it will be rare.
0 comments:
Post a Comment