Le conformiste

Set in 1938 as it follows the title character (Jean Louis Trintignant), a Fascist operative in Mussolini's Italy, is given orders to travel to Paris and assassinate his former school teacher. Trintignant is trying his best to fit into the society of his day: working for the ruling party and marrying a pretty, if vacuous, girl (Stefania Sandrelli) from a respectable family. Things become more complicated when he meets his target's new wife (Dominique Sanda) with whom he falls immediately in love. Will he carry out his orders, even if it means hurting the new woman in his life?

My description makes the film sound rather banal and cliched, but it's anything but. The style of this production is impeccable, and the cinematography by Vittorio Storaro is excellent. There are countless moments throughout the film that could easily be paused and framed as works of art fit for a gallery. Each shot is carefully set-up and arranged, and the camera movements add to the visual flow of the story. Storaro, who would go on to shoot films such as APOCALYPSE NOW, REDS, THE LAST EMPEROR, and DICK TRACY, deserves a spot in the list of greatest cinematographers for this film alone. The score by Georges Delerue is also excellent, as is the costume and production Design. I also liked seeing Gastone Moschin, who played Don Fanucci in THE GODFATHER PART II, in another role, here as a fellow fascist operative.

The narrative is very complex, and can be a bit confusing at first. Scenes jump across many different times in the protagonists life, with little warning, and the audience must pay close attention or be lost, especially in the first 40 minutes or so. I think seeing this on the big screen would eliminate much of this possible confusion. For me, though, it never reached the point of annoyance, and I was able to follow along with no trouble.

I have been a fan of Bertolucci for quite a while now - his recent films like "Stealing Beauty" and "The Dreamers" make my all-time favourites' list, while his acclaimed "The Last Emperor", which I saw years ago, didn't make me a great impression: it was definitely a well-made epic, just didn't fascinate me like some of his other films. Same thing with his controversial "Last Tango in Paris": other than Marlon Brando's devastating performance, which will always be a must-see for those who admire raw acting, the film's daring (for its time) approach to sexuality is now outdated, and the film is rather dull in its apparently liberal speech (the fact that I'm not exactly a Maria Schneider fan doesn't help). And last night, I finally watched the extraordinary "The Conformist", arguably his masterpiece and undoubtedly one of the greatest films ever made.

Based on a novel by Italian author Albert Moravia (who also wrote the novel that inspired Godard's "Contempt"), "The Conformist" is the story of a closeted homosexual, Marcello (Jean-Louis Trintignant) who becomes a fascist yes-man, marrying a clueless girl, Giulia (Stefania Sandrelli) and going to Paris for their honeymoon. Marcello's bosses ask him to kill his old college mentor, Quadri (Enzo Tarascio), an anti-fascist who fled Italy to live in Paris with his young, beautiful and idealistic wife, Anna (Dominique Sanda). Anna and Marcello are former lovers, but that's not the only pitfall in Marcello's plan, nor is it stronger than his tragic conformism to an exacerbated political regime and the fear of living as a "pederast"/having his homosexuality made public.

The political factor is an open part of the plot, while Marcello's sexuality is very ambiguous (he seems to have real feelings for Anna, yet a childhood trauma and a homophobic attitude show his tragic character formation). "The Conformist" works as a riveting political thriller and a haunting character study, and it's impossible to praise this film without mentioning Vittorio Storaro's breath-taking cinematography, possibly his greatest (and that's saying a lot) and certainly one of the very best in film history. The whole film is so beautifully shot that every scene seems to be taken out of a painting; it could perfectly be photographed now rather than 38 years ago and it wouldn't look any better. The performances are all magnificent, particularly Trintignant, Sandrelli and Sanda, each perfectly portraying blind rage, ignorance and idealism, respectively. All in all, as close to perfection as film-making gets, and as timeless as its main themes (politics, conformism and sexuality) - if you think this couldn't happen today, take a look around and tell me how many gay Republicans you know?

10/10.

The Conformist (1970)

Well, the reputation this movie has for visual brilliance is well earned. There are whole scenes, lasting just seconds, that are breathtaking not only for the setting (or the sets) but for the way it's composed, a pair of figures in one place, a different scenario (and light) in the background. It's endlessly fascinating and evolving, this play of space and light and figures (actors, yes) moving through it all.

It's also so stylized it becomes a force of its own, above the plot, which has its own kind of surreal fragmentation. So the end result is simply being there, somewhere, and having events twirl around you. This is almost enough. It's magical and moving and simply beautiful. The cinematographer was Vittorio Stararo, in one of his first films. He has worked with the director, Bernardo Bertolucci, on a whole bunch of films ("Last Tango in Paris" might be the most famous for American viewers), and also with other directors for some of their masterpieces: "Apocalypse Now" and "Reds" are just two.

This large, controlling, sometimes self-serving style might not suit everyone, but it does me. And in this case ("The Conformist") it's actually the strongest element. The rest of the movie is really a little bit of a mixed bag. That the end result is pretty fabulous is a testament to making some odd pieces fit, or not fit, perfectly.

What doesn't become clear for some time is the point of the title, which is the moving, significant point of the movie: the main character survives Fascist Italy and then post-War, anti-Fascist Italy, but "conforming," which is to say, he doesn't have particular beliefs, but he knows what will get him to survive. And for him, survival is all that matters, even if it means a watered down life. His professor of many years earlier is just the opposite, and is a kind of hero and de-facto enemy to him. This professor has left Italy in order to fight Mussolini, and he has to face death threats as a consequence.

It's always interesting when the main character, this blow-with-the-wind Marcello, is not especially admirable or even interesting. He is surrounded by some quirky and inevitably interesting people, for sure, but even the two most important of these, his wife and his lover, are kind of symbolic and slightly unaffected types. I mean unaffected by all this terrible stuff going on in the lead up to the War.

And so the end result is we are less affected than you would expect. Or like. Yes, I know this movie gets hugely appreciative reviews, and I think it's for the ambiance, and for the big anti-Fascist message (which is smart and powerful and I agree with). But as a drama between people trying to find themselves, to love the right people, to accomplish a violent political crime, it remains distant, at least most of the time.

Another thing to note: even though the titles are in English, this was and is an Italian movie, with dialog in Italian and a little French. You'll find the sound is awkwardly dubbed--and I mean dubbed in the original language, a looseness of lip-synching that just wouldn't make it in Hollywood (and which you see in other earlier Italian films). Because in fact the dialog is often re-recorded later in movies like this (for superior sound, or because there was too much ambient interference), the synching becomes an issue. Ignore it if you can. It bugged me sometimes.

Overall, yes, this is a kind of masterpiece--flawed, a little bit at arm's length, but stunning, too, and with an important theme.

A weak-willed Italian man (Jean-Louis Trintignant) becomes a fascist flunky who goes abroad to arrange the assassination of his old teacher (Enzo Tarascio), now a political dissident.

The film is said to be a case study in the psychology of fascism: Marcello Clerici is a bureaucrat dehumanized by a dysfunctional upper class family and a childhood sexual trauma. Political philosopher Takis Fotopoulos calls the film "a beautiful portrait of this psychological need to conform and be 'normal' at the social level, in general, and the political level, in particular."

I loved it. I think it was very symbolic of not just fascism, but politics and humanity in general. There really is a desire to conform, and normality varies based on when and where you live. Political ideas might seem weird in one place and not another. The same with morality. Could a society exist where the removal of your friends is just a part of life? Sure. (The Mafia does it.)

To be everything is nothing. To go against what you cherish the most is the symbolic gesture of weakness. The brilliant story telling of the young and passionate Bernardo Bertolucci remains as vivid and powerful as the first time I saw it - 15 years ago, when I was 21 - The film is 41 years old now and I can only imagine the effect it had in its day. For me, it became a point of reference and to see it again is a shattering scramble of emotions. Jean Louis Trintignat is extraordinary and Stefania Sandrelli is superb as the mediocre, petite bourgeois wife. The art direction by Ferdinando Scarfiotti and the photography by Vittorio Storaro are, quite simply, without equal. I was very moved by the appearance of Pierre Clemeti as the ambiguous Lino. A film to visit and re-visit.