After watching Lonesome last week, it seemed only fitting to chase Paul Fejos’ sublime tale of two lovers meeting on a day trip to Coney Island with Jean Renoir’s short 1936 film A Day inthe Country. It’s another romantic story, though one with complications and more social commentary than Fejos had to offer. If love and romance are true and real in the earlier film, they are a bit more questionable in Renoir, even if they can be just as strongly desired.
Renoir’s movie is based on a story by Guy de Maupassant. It
details an afternoon getaway for the Dufours, a Parisian family of middle-class
wealth, likely of new money. Monsieur Dufour (André Gabriello) owns a shop, and
his wife (Jane Marken) and daughter, Henriette (Sylvia Bataille), don’t seem to
lack for the finer things. When the group finds a little out-of-the-way inn
along the Seine, they stop to get some food and enjoy the sights of nature.
These city folk are immediately spotted and sized up by the
locals, and just as he would in his most revered film, The Rules ofthe Game, Renoir balances his story on the divide between the two
classes. A pair of layabouts, Henri (Georges D’Arnoux) and Rodolphe (Jacques
Brunius), begin scheming to steal the ladies away from their male
companions--Dufour brought his dimwitted underling, Anatole (Paul Temps)
along--and have a little fun before they move on. It could be a harmless
action, or even comical, but there’s more motivating the boys than just lust.
As they see it, Parisians are a bit like the cliché of “Ugly Americans.” They go
where they want and do as they please and see the rest of the world as there to
serve them. So for the more serious and dark Henri, this is a little bit about
revenge. He quickly goes from being the reasonable foil to Rodolphe’s clowning,
and morphs into a more sinister and calculating villain. He even goes so far as
to shove his friend aside to get what he wants.
As the day wears on, it becomes clear that the perception of
the Parisians is a bit skewed. Sure, they are demanding, but they are also
looking to take part in the world around them. It may be a bit like slumming
for them, but it’s also genuine. Dufour is a loudmouth and a boor, but he’s
there to fish and enjoy what nature has to offer. When the boys finally engage
the family, the out-of-towners are genuine in their friendliness. It’s the
reverse of a country bumpkin being taken advantage of by the city slickers. The
impending squall doesn’t serve as clear enough metaphor to warn Henriette out
of the way.
Made in 1936, Renoir designed A Day in the
Country as a short film. As he explains in the vintage introduction
recorded for a later TV broadcast of the movie, he wanted to see if a short
form film could be every bit as complex and artfully crafted as a longer
feature, with the idea that three 40 minute movies could be strung together for
an evening’s entertainment. Interestingly enough, A Day in the
Country was not quite complete when Renoir was pulled away from the
production to go make The Lower Depths (and Gabriello and
Temps would go with him). It would be some ten years, and the director would
have already moved on to Hollywood, before Renoir’s remaining team would
assemble the footage and add a few explanatory title cards to hold it together.
The final product doesn’t feel unfinished, not even remotely, you’d never
notice it if you hadn’t read this (or the back of the Criterion box, or the
intro put on the film--everyone wants you to know!).
On the contrary, A Day in the Country
does exactly what a short film should: it draws its audience into its setting,
orients them to the situation, and then leads them to a certain revelation or
question, its compactness allowing for the storyteller to be simultaneously
more direct and more ambiguous.
This plays out when we see Henri make his move on Henriette.
She resists his suggestion to pull the boat into the tall grass by the
riverbank and sit alone, but her defenses keep failing. Henri has an answer for
everything. The young woman’s resistance continues on the bank, but his
persistence proves stronger. Just how does Henriette feel about this? One can
only judge by her expressions: refusal, acceptance, regret. There are many
potential reactions and consequences to what happens, it’s not some afternoon
fling whilst on vacation. A small event looms large, a point Renoir emphasizes
in the film’s final scenes when he jumps ahead many years. Henri seems to have
added some actual affection to his nostalgic view of what happened, but
Henriette’s feelings remain unexplained. In a longer film, with room for a more
conventional denouement, or perhaps in less capable hands, this is the moment
when the girl would make her feelings explicit. We can only guess why she cries
the tears she does, all we know is that she cries them for herself.
It’s kind of beautiful and brutal all at once, not unlike
the remarkable tracking shots of the rain hitting the river that Renoir and his
cameraman, his nephew Claude, managed to grab when their location shooting was
overtaken by the weather, prompting a rewrite. One can only wonder how differently
the sexuality might have appeared had they been able to stick to their original
plan to shoot in the heat and sweat of summer. The moody gray makes Henri
appear more cold, more predatory; the coupling is devoid of passion. The clouds
and the rain recolor everything. The frivolity turns serious. Perhaps this is
why Henriette ends up with Anataole, a man of no great significance, a capacity
for more has been robbed from her. The lingering question of what might have
been could go either way. Sylvia Bataille shows us how much the girl’s heart is
broken, even if we could debate over what.
No comments:
Post a Comment