A Dama de Honra

At his sister's wedding, a young man falls for a bridesmaid who harbors some weird ideas and may have a disturbing past. Chabrol is regarded as the French Hitchcock, and this film has some parallels with "Strangers on a Train," but it's not as taut and suspenseful as that classic. Chabrol here seems to be more interested in character development and relationships than in the plot. In fact, between a slow beginning and an unsatisfying ending, what little plot there is is rather predictable. However, it manages to be engaging despite these shortcomings. The pacing is leisurely but not boring. It has a good cast.

I really like the books of Ruth Rendell, some under the pseudonym as Barbara Vine and she had published some 80 books. Claude Chabrol I also like and he had made something like 60 films, some of them wonderful. He made a couple of his of Rendell's, the first one was The Ceremony (1995) a great film made out of, A Judgement in Stone. Later on, this film was made in 2004, and from her's of the same title. The book is fine but unusually with Chabrol in this one I'm not sure he really gets it quite right here. It is a bit complicated and a rather odd tale and I think he wanted it to be amusing as well, but maybe it wasn't a good idea. It is interesting but with the stone head with bed, the candles and no people, and some dead but not dead, maybe it is just too much going on.

Having read the book 'The Bridesmaid', I was gratified that this film was a very good representation of it. It kept close to the story and did not alter anything. Even though my image of Senta as she is portrayed in the book was different to that of the one in the film, it didn't matter as her personality was accurately portrayed - indeed, all the characters were excellent. Benoit Magimel was exactly how I imagined the main character, both in looks and behaviour.

The impact of the events would have been greater to those who haven't read the book (ie I knew what was going to happen) but I found it satisfying and would highly recommend this film.

Ruth Rendell's plots are so clever, with a twist in the tail, and it is important that a film captures this, and Chabrol manages it perfectly.

This is a very good Chabrol movie. To me, probably his best since "Merci Pour Le Chocolat". The "atmosfear" was captivating, the script well written. The casting is great. The sets were mysterious (the old castle, for example). Well, to make a long story short, if you like Claude Chabrol's suspense movies, please, do yourself a favour and watch this one. Much better than the previous one, "La Demoiselle D'Honneur", was, I think, innovative enough to mark the mind of even his (Claude Chabrol's) long time fans in the deepest way. If he's physically getting old, as we all do, Chabrol's mind is still very sharp and a joy to explore. In a word, the French Hitchcock is back in top form ! May be the Ruth Rendall background of this movie gives it its best aspects. "La Demoiselle d'Honneur" is a kind of child-movie to an older Chabrol's masterpiece called "La Cérémonie".

About ten years before he decided to venture again in Ruth Rendell universe, Claude Chabrol had transferred to the screen "a Judgment in Stone" entitled "la Cérémonie" (1995). It was his last great masterwork although he somewhat betrayed the novel. The choice of Sandrine Bonnaire for the main role was ill-advised. Afterwards, his career followed a creative downswing with rather mediocre works such as "au Coeur Du Mensonge" (1999) or "Merci pour Le Chocolat" (2000). So, could a new excursion in Ruth Rendell territory boost his career again?

Alas no and the title of my summary should give you an inkling about my thoughts on the Chabrol 2004 vintage. However, there were some good elements to make the film compelling and to grab the attention. The first sequence showcases Benoît Magimel and his family in front of the TV news that reveals a murder. Perfect to weave an eerie climate. The big, imposing, eerie house in which Laura Smet lives seems to shelter dark secrets and the "bridesmaid" lives in the basement. Chabrol was also interested in the games of truth and lie that link his two main actors and real suspense lies in Magimel's personality dangerously attracted to the bridesmaid. The filmmaker's touch is also discernible at the wedding ceremony where he ridicules its crucial steps. See the church sequence and the feast which echoes to the one in "Le Boucher" (1970). While I'm evoking this meal, the gastronomy dear to Chabrol has three sequences devoted to it in the whole film. But let's come back to the bulk of the plot. Like "a Judgement in Stone", "La Demoiselle d'Honneur" was an exciting novel to read and again Chabrol skipped over some important points, notably the reasons which prompt the hero to steal the bust from Gérard Courtois (Bernard Le Coq). In the novel, he stole it because he thought that Courtois was a vulgar man, but here Magimel's motivations to steal the bust remain blurred.

The thrust of the novel and so of the film is a man who gradually loses the control of his everyday life facing a sensual, attractive disturbing young woman. However, things aren't looking good because there's an absence of unnerving climate and the scenario seems to have been sedately written, especially near the end. In another extent, I know what I'm going to write is questionable but I do think that Chabrol contemporary films suffer from the choice of the actors (see bland Jacques Dutronc in "Merci pour Le Chocolat" or Jacques Gamblin in "au Coeur Du Mensonge") and sadly "la Demoisele d'Honneur" isn't an exception to the rule. Magimel's character isn't credible at all. He should get bogged down in madness as he's deeply in love with Smet but it isn't discernible on the screen. Laura Smet (Johnny Hallyday's daughter) has a monotonous acting while Bernard Le Coq's part is underwritten. Michel Duchaussoy who was brilliant in "Que la Bête Meure" (1969) is relegated to a minor tramp role unworthy of his wide acting skills.

So, an absence of interest for this story of manipulation is surely due to its actors and also because like for "la Cérémonie", Chabrol made dull Rendell's novel. Mr Chabrol, let's put it this way: the best of your work is far behind you in time (roughly the dusk of the sixties and the dawn of the seventies) and you will probably never reach this scale again. How about contemplating retirement?