Mauprat

I am trying to make my ongoing Luis Bunuel retrospective as comprehensive as possible so that, apart from the films he personally directed, I am including many of those he was involved with in some other capacity as well as some (by fellow film-makers) that inspired him or which he would single out as favorites.

The film under review is actually the very first job he landed in the industry, as an assistant director (reportedly, he also essayed multiple roles among the extras, albeit unrecognizably), one he would eventually reprise on the same director's more famous THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF USHER (1928), a revisit of which will follow this viewing. MAUPRAT is a lavish costume drama set in pre-Revolutionary France, adapted from a novel by George Sand (actually a lady and perhaps best-known for her liaison with composer Frederic Chopin); the atmosphere it evokes is not unlike that of the classic THE MAN WHO LAUGHS (1928), with its backdrop of criminals, aristocracy, kidnapping, misguided reformation and turbulent romance.

The latter is, typically, at the center of the narrative: the protagonists are actually cousins (which the film seems to make nothing of) – more confusing is the heroine's ambiguousness in the matter, where she alternately despises, ignores and cares for the male lead (could it be that Bunuel would remember this fact all those years later, thus going full circle, at the time of his last film i.e. THAT OBSCURE OBJECT OF DESIRE [1977]?). Again, though he would only breach this environment (the period piece) in THE MILKY WAY (1969) and THE MONK (1972; which he only co-scripted), the Spanish Surrealist master may well have been influenced for the notoriously blasphemous conclusion of L'AGE D'OR (1930) by the very opening scene of this one – where a band of sleazy renegade aristocrats attempt to gang-rape the virginal heroine in their mountain-side castle retreat! Besides, he must have been pleased by the ruse of making one of the villains hide under the guise of a mysterious but pious monk during the film's second half (as the last shot of his own EL [1953] can testify).

That said, Bunuel was known for not being at ease during his tenure as Epstein's assistant, given the latter's predilection for experimentation (indeed, this era in cinema was particularly rife with technical innovation); in fact, he went so far as to claim that he learned absolutely nothing from the avant-garde film-maker! Still, even if the plot itself is compelling enough, it is these stylistics – along with the impressive look – which really make the film (so that it does not feel that much dated when viewed today!). Most interesting is the way the passage of time is economically depicted by superimposing successive images on top of one another: for instance, showing the leading lady at various stages during her stroll in the country, or the hero's dream played out over an image of him sleeping. The latter's own initial liberating break with the shackles imposed on him by society starts off with a low-angle shot of the boy jumping straight into the camera, as it were, followed by a tracking shot – with the actor literally mounted on the dolly – in which he appears to be gliding! The finale of MAUPRAT, though, is somewhat baffling as the chief villain – chased along the rocks towards the sea – simply vanishes into thin air, leaving his pursuer dumb-founded (were we meant to take it that he had jumped in and drowned?).

While I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the film, I must point out that I did not really watch it in the most congenial of circumstances: not only did the viewing occur late in the day but I had to watch the rather verbose Silent in French only, because the English subtitles which were supposed to accompany it proved to be either slightly out-of-synch (though switching them on again just now, they seem to be working fine – duh!) or overlying the original intertitles! I had intended checking out the various other unwatched Epstein films in my collection as well, but I am not sure whether I will be able to fit them into my current schedule

The historical drama Mauprat is perhaps not the ideal novel for a silent film adaptation, it's a genre melange, with the courtroom element for example being a touch talky for a medium with no speech! On the other hand the Gothic novel element has very agreeable qualities for adapting in a visual medium! There are also elements of adventure, detective fiction, bildung and romance.

As usual with Epstein he does those superimposed shots and superimposed dissolves of his which make your heart float off.

The film also uses landscape to superb psychological effect and the tinting helps with this. Bernard is the only surviving member from the middle lineage of the Mauprat family; when he was an orphan the noble and ignoble sides of the family struggled over guardianship. It feels a little like Star Wars, the light and dark side of the force grappling for Bernard. The lowland Chevalier de Mauprat is an elegant and refined man, loyal to the king, whilst Tristan Mauprat up in his "Castle of Otranto", Roche-Mauprat, leads a group of his brothers who are atheistic libertines and brigands. Bernard is brought up in the heights of Roche-Mauprat, but a contrived series of events sees him attempting to become a gentleman living with the goodly Mauprats, who struggle to bring him out of his half feral half beautiful state.

This is the most compelling part of the story in which Bernard has to work to secure the affections of his cousin Edmée, who sees the good in him and has promised she will love no other (very different from promising to love him!). I thought that this was very resonant as many young men have to struggle to decide whether they will be inside predominant culture or sub-culture, whether they want to be self-effacing or self-serving, how much of themselves do they want to give up to lead their lives at a chosen level of comfort, and they have to learn how to be gentle around women. And so Bernard's story becomes something quite universal. Sandra Milovanoff's performance as Edmée is probably what makes the film, her face so emotive, so ardent, willing Bernard to temper himself. My favourite superimposition comes when Edmée appears in a vision of Bernard's, twice the size of him, and this is how I feel about love, it's aspiring to that which is greater than you, whether that is finding someone whose qualities insipires you, or in a religious sense.

88 minutes runtime is a very short time for all that happens in the film. Epstein makes some worthwhile changes to the novel, but the pacing feels very rushed at times. The secret I guess is to not be afraid of the chopping between genres, to luxuriate in some of the Gothic images, and to wait for the superimpositions to come like pennies from heaven.