Camille Claudel 1915

Juliette Binoche and a cast of mental patients. What could possibly go wrong? And the answer is: nothing. This film is practically flawless from start to finish. I'll forewarn you by saying you mustn't expect a biographical story relating the turbulent life of sculptor Camille Claudel. For that, you might want to check out the 1988 film "Camille Claudel" starring Isabelle Adjani.

"Camille Claudel 1915" is, as director Bruno Dumont says, "a film about someone who spends her time doing not much". In other words, this won't give you the saucy, dramatic story of Camille's affair with her mentor Rodin, nor will it attempt to explain what her "mental illness" was, and very few clues are given as to why she ends up at a mental asylum to begin with. Perhaps even more noticeable is the fact that none of Camille's art is shown or alluded to. This movie, quiet but moving, is simply about 3 days in the life of Camille as she copes with an artist's worst torture: boredom.

Camille is excellently played by Juliette Binoche who describes this film as "mostly silent with only two or three moments with a lot of speaking, as if all the words she hadn't been able to say come out in a rush, all at once." Indeed, she doesn't say a word for almost the first 10 minutes. But through the use of extreme, unsettling closeups, and some painfully telling facial expressions, the film conveys almost everything we need to know without words. When Juliette does open her mouth to deliver her monologues, they are absolutely riveting, emotional and affecting. It should be noted that many of her lines were improvised, having only 4 pages of script to work with. Dumont simply asked her to fill in the blanks.

Similarly improvised were all the roles of the mental patients around her. These were actual mental patients (attended by actual nurses dressed as nuns). The patients were never told what to do or how to "act". Instead Dumont wanted to capture the true environment of a mental institution which he felt is the same story 100 years ago as it is today. If Dumont needed a certain reaction or expression from a patient, for example an intense look of pensiveness, he would give the patient a piece of scotch tape to play with and film the patient's reaction. This all makes for very genuine cinema, the kind you could never get from SAG card-carrying actors.

Thus, don't expect a lot of dramatic scenes of patients being tortured by their sadistic keepers à la "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". Here instead is a very realistic image of a mental institution where people are cared for, and it's simply their condition of idleness and lassitude which is the torture. That itself conveys more hopelessness than if we were to see Nurse Ratched administering shock therapy.

Excellent cinematography and stunningly gorgeous locations round out this film. I don't recall hearing any music, and there are certainly no car chases and shootouts. No fancy camera tricks; in fact most of the takes are very long and still, allowing the images and actors to tell the story. I would compare this movie to other laconic, beautifully-shot films like "The Spirit of the Beehive" (1973) or some of Herzog's early work.

The only other Bruno Dumont film I've seen is the bizarre and shocking Twentynine Palms so knowing Camille Claudel 1915 is about an insane asylum, it's difficult to not expect something that will rock me to my core. However, Camille is surprisingly restrained. While this feels like a mature approach at times, it can too often feel like it's too weak on its themes of religion, sanity and art when there's such potential. A little more focus and clarity could've saved what would be a great film. What ends up making the film is Juliette Binoche's committed performance that provides a unique perspective into a personal hell. She certainly deserves to be called one of the best actresses of all-time and this just confirms it further. It's beautifully shot and constructed, but then this leads to it feeling too measured and thus too forced when it could've been much better if it was allowed to breathe naturally. It's a very interesting film, but I can't help that it needn't been as empty as it was.

7/10

Camille Claudel was a successful artist who had an affair with Rodin. She had mental health problems and was placed in an asylum by her family. Whether this was intended to resolve Camille's problem or remove Camille as a problem is left for debate.

The film tells the story of her life in the asylum, her desire to leave and her unhappiness. We gain an insight into the artist's mind and the world of the asylum. Juliet Binoche's acting is excellent and the use of patients and staff from an asylum works well although is potentially controversial.

However, the film is slow and is too long for the little is actually revealed in 95 minutes of screen time. More back story and context is needed to provide reasons for sympathising with the main character and sticking with the film.

Bruno Dumont's film is best appreciated if the viewer has viewed Bruno Nuytten's 1988 film "Camille Claudel" which ends with Camille being institutionalized by her brother Paul and her mother. That act can be initially condoned as Camille needed treatment at that time. Dumont's film is based surprisingly on the letters of Paul Claudel.

In Dumont's film too, Paul does not heed the doctor's view that Camille is a docile and almost normal and could be discharged. For those who have seen Nuytten's film, there is sufficient evidence that brother and sister had been very close to each other and Paul had tried to make his sister's work famous. All these critical facts are never stated in Dumont's film. The religious fervour of Camille in Dumont's film is totally absent in Nuytten's film. The long religious soliloquys of Paul, fits in with Dumont's interest in religion. For me, Dumont's attempts at describing Camille in the asylum is merely projecting Paul's attempt at absolving his decision not to help release his sister from the asylum.

Binoche is always good in any film but this performance is not her best--which I am convinced was the one in "Certified Copy."

I wanted to leave this screening about halfway through, but not because it was a terrible film. On the contrary, it was because Dumont's impeccably observed production evokes the same sense of claustrophobia experienced by its titular character, who is yearning for release from the asylum to which she had been committed by her family.

For most of the film's duration, neither Camille nor the audience are entirely clear about why she was incarcerated, or at least, why she remains so. What little back story we are given is relayed principally by Camille herself, and in a manner that suggests more eccentricity than madness. I had not read up on Claudel prior to seeing this film, but having done so since, I absolutely endorse Dumont's rendering.

The direction is unhurried and the dialogue minimal. Long takes abound, soundtracked by repetitive noises like echoing footsteps, the crunching of gravel, and, most disconcertingly, the infantile howling of the asylum's residents. The sense of place and aesthetic is intelligently realised, and for all its oppressive qualities, this film is a beautiful thing to look at.

As Camille, Binoche shines like the genuine star she is - a genius artist playing a genius artist. The occasional closeup (and there are many) may reveal a composure running one or two shades too deep for this character, however whenever our heroine cracks, Binoche exemplifies her mastery at bridling and channeling female psychology. The other figure in the narrative equation - Camille's brother Paul - is played by Vincent in turns both tender and oblique.

Thematically, Dumont does not preach, but tantalisingly throws juxtaposition after juxtaposition before us, inviting manifold readings.

Rather than write a critical analysis here, it will suffice to say that there is much to be gleaned from this film, notwithstanding biography.

8.5/10