La Marsellesa

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.

This film, despite being directed by Renoir, is largely forgotten today. This is a pity, as there are few films actually about the French Revolution (though it is used as a backdrop for a variety of plot lines), and none that really deal with the birth of the Republic.

It was made at the tail end of the 'Popular Front' government, a coalition of parties (including the communists) formed to protect the Third Republic from right-wing domestic subversion and the baleful influence of the Nazis.

It chose to use the early years of the revolution as a metaphor for this political situation - France was still a (constitutional) monarchy, and the King possessed the power of a constitutional veto. The Queen and her circle were said to be plotting a counter revolution.

Within this context, each city and region of France is requested to send a Battalion to Paris, to defend the government against its domestic enemies. We follow the adventures of some of the ordinary men in the battalion from Marseilles (who sing a new song called the "Marseilles" as they march. We see their experiences in Paris (including a love interest), and their simple and honest defence of what they believe in. Finally, they participate in the coup that leads to the establishment of the Republic and the arrest of the King.

The film is episodic, and some of the scenes are a little melodramatic. But the characterisation is excellent. The King and his court are not one-dimensional villains. The scene of his departure is quite moving.

In short, a film well worth rescuing from obscurity.

Jean Renoir's classic tribute to the glory of the French Revolution, the film captures the personal flavor of the struggle and the philosophical background to the revolutionary upheaval. In a rapid series of vignettes we are introduced to the elegance and nobility of the court of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette... the contrasting plight of French peasants governed by laws they cannot understand...the storming of the Bastille in 1789 by an undisciplined mob...the plotting of France's exiled nobility to return to power...the Republican march on Paris...and the capture of the Tuilleries in 1793, ending the revolution. The film follows the adventures of two young patriots who join the Peoples' army in Marseilles. As their battalion begins its long journey north to Paris to join with the Federate army, they adopt as their anthem a song from the Army of the Rhine. This song was soon to be known all over France as "La Marseillaise" and would lead the newly unified nation to victory.

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.

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.