Die Marseillaise

Between Jean Renoir's deeply humanistic 'La Grande Illusion' and the doom-laden 'La Bete Humaine', undisputed masterpieces both, comes this depiction of 1789, that monumental year in France's history, which is oddly devoid of drama and historical bias in its quest of documentary-like authenticity. A collective enterprise, financed mainly by the French trades unions, it is essentially Renoir's call to arms to a country facing the Fascist menace. Suffice to say it did not have the desired effect and proved a costly failure, was dismissed as politically naive, recouped a mere one-tenth of its 10,000,000 Franc budget and marked the end of the director's love affair with the utterly ineffectual Socialist/Communist coalition known as the Popular Front, for which he had earlier made the propogandist 'People of France.' The film was restored pretty much to its original length in 1967 by the Cinématheque Francaise but remains arguably of interest only to cinéphiles and Renoir devotees.

Despite being somewhat didactic and uneven it is performed with ésprit and contains a few marvellous scenes, notably the splendidly choreographed storming of the Tuileries and an effective little shadow play courtesy of animated feature pioneer Lotte Reiniger, in exile from Nazi Germany. As one would expect from this director, the emphasis is mainly on the individual and there are especially appealing performances from Edmond Ardisson as Bomier, representing Everyman and Nadia Sibirskaia as the girl he loves. Renoir being Renoir, he has chosen to demonise neither the aristos nor the Monarchy and as played by his brother Pierre the character of Louis XV1 is hugely sympathetic and whose observation "The leaves are falling early this year" whilst making his fateful way to the National Assembly is one of Cinema's most poignant moments. Lise Delamare as the much-maligned Marie Antoinette is imperious but at the same time rather pathetic. Aimé Clariond and a suitably somber Louis Jouvet have telling cameos.

Writer Joseph Conrad had no illusions regarding revolutions and maintained that they simply allow narrow minded fanatics and hypocritical tyrants to come to the fore and betray revolutionary hopes and ideals. One cannot but help agreeing with him.

La Marseillaise depicts lesser known stories attached to the events in Versailles in 1789 which led to the downfall of the monarchy. Renoir continues with a consistent stylistic system - great depth of field, two-shot closeups, framing of crowds, mobile framing, polyvocal (accents). In fact, aristocrats and citizens receive the same treatment from the camera. The exception is with the King and Queen who receive one-shot closeups, however, this seems more in the service of a dialectic regarding the Brunswick Manifesto than it being about psychological identification. This story is symbolic and likely the symbolism and abstraction is what led to the film not being as popular as was expected. There is also a confusion for the spectator because of Renoir's humanist treatment. Bumpkins are charming, aristocrats are accepting and armies more or less fight together instead of against each other. Renoir often spoke out against violence in film and this might be another disappointment for audiences at the time. Most violence is dissuaded through crafty acts of oration. The brains over brawn theme certainly lacks something of the 'common touch'. The breaking down of the song into parceled quotations reminds of the French New Wave's often lyrical and intellectual modes of expression. There is a monarchist rhetoric that runs through the film regarding order versus anarchy... yet there is little example of anarchy but also no false reprisal by monarchists against citizens. The treatment of war is tepid, but it just goes to show that Renoir was never comfortable representing hardened political positions.

This film was an opportunity to view the French revolution from the view of the common people. Most viewers have only seen, perhaps, A TALE OF TWO CITIES or THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL, so this film does offer fresh insights. However, to me, some of the dialog and one-sidedness of the film seemed as one-dimensional as the other two movies I just mentioned.

The film deals with events from 1789 to 1792 and so it really doesn't delve into the bloodier years of the Reign of Terror. It is understandable that these abuses aren't covered in depth, but to omit the be-headings completely seems rather dishonest. I'd really like to see a film that gives a balanced view of this period, but have yet to see it--and that's a shame, as it's a fascinating and tumultuous period.

FYI--From my point of view as a history teacher, it does seem amazing that within only two years of the completion of this very rousing and patriotic film the French capitulated to the Nazis.

La Marseillaise takes place during the phase of the French revolution that was the most optimistic and the least bloody. Director Jean Renoir is concerned with how this moment is viewed by both the monarchy in Paris and the everyday people of Marseillaise who march to Paris singing their song (Battle Hymn of the Rhine Army). His presentation is realistic and probably more accurate than most films that have dealt with the subject.

La Marseillaise has been proclaimed as a masterpiece but, while I liked the film, I cannot share in that acclaim. Jean Renoir is considered one of the (if not THE) greatest French directors in film history. I love The Rules of the Game, but have found many of Renoir's other films slow going. This is true of parts of La Marseillaise as well. The running time is 132 minutes; there is (intentionally) no main protagonist; an assumption is made that the audience knows more about the historical events than some viewers (like me) may.

Despite some restlessness on my part, La Marseillaise remains a worthwhile film. Every Jean Renoir film has wonderful moments, La Marseillaise especially. My favorite is Louis XVI's long walk with his family to Parilament. Renoir uses a crane shot to view the pedestrians. The dejected look on the King's face is powerful. He and his son share a reflexive moment over fallen leaves. This scene powerfully contrasts with the buffoonish way Louis was portrayed at the beginning of the film. This is a perfectly made scene. The film has other great scenes as well.

Although it did not affect me as deeply as it has others, I would recommend La Marseillaise, especially to French film admirers, students of Jean Renoir, and history buffs.

The movie starts slow and perhaps not in the most engaging way, jumping from one location to the other and from one royal setting to a peasant's judicial troubles, but at least each change of scene is dutiful announced, so that the audience know where and when the scenes take place.

One would wish that they would still do this in movies, without assuming that the audience is smarter than it actually is. However, it's clear that there isn't a main character, even if the guys from Marseille get a lot of screen time.

Roughly the plot covers a few years, from 1789 to 1792 just before the revolution got bloody. The main thread of the narrative is how a group of people from Marseille formed a battalion and marched to Paris, singing the famous song which became France's anthem and then moved with other battalions to Valmy to defend France against Prussia and Austria.

Interesting but not Renoir's best.