Villa des roses

I watched the movie on DVD for the very first time yesterday, 2006-5-9. The movie seemed disjointed and confusing to me at times, and just did not sustain my interest (I paused it twice to check my e-mail). Mlle. Delpy was absolutely brilliant in two separate scenes with Dingwall: in the park and at the railroad station; these two scenes saved this movie for me. None of the other performers seemed too greatly inspired in their roles. Delpy was emotive, captivating, and with perfect dialogue throughout. Also on the positive side, I thought that the decoration of the scenes was well done, most remarkably the opening scene of the German infantry in the trench and then later the scene of the locomotives and the passenger coach at the railroad station. The picture post cards were very intriguing, with a real feel of the art of the period. I blame the root problems with this movie with one or more of the following: the director, the screenwriter or the editor. Watch this movie, if you are a J. Delpy fan ... pass on it, if you are not.

It's a totally surreal movie that did remind me of "Delicatessen". Even the peculiar pastel colors are similar. The tale? A new maid starts working at a dilapidated boarding house - a pension - in Paris, in 1913, and she gets involved with a young German artist who lives there. Her relationship with him is the central part of the plot, but the other characters add subplots in their own strange ways. The people who live there are peculiar, the owners are peculiar, the situations are peculiar... but I got caught in it and came to enjoy the faintly claustrophobic atmosphere. Drama, touches of black humor, absurdity, love and betrayal, it's got it all. Not an absolute masterpiece but well worth seeing.

In the great line of both Belgian cinema as well as European cinema, Frank Van Passel keeps up with the likes of Kümel and Delvaux on the one hand and maybe even the Tavianni brothers and Kieslowski on the other hand. In time, 'Villa des Roses', will prove a corner-stone experience of Belgian cinematographic capabilities, and this along with the line of traditional great names of the past (mentioned above), names that also shaped European cinema into what it is now, or better into what it should be: rich quality. One can only hope that this period of time will be a very short one, for audiences abroad shouldn't be deprived of this work of art.

Do not go to this movie if you haven't read the book by the Flemish writer Willem Elschot. This movie is very boring and lacks all interest because you cannot identify with the characters. Does Grünewald (Shaun Dingwall) love Louise Créteur (Jules Delpy) or not? Does he become a deserter at the end or is he killed in the war? Why does the German commit suicide? What happens with the old woman Gendron (Dora van der Groen)? Grünewald must be something of a German superman that an American widow falls in love with him at first sight. This movie is slow and dark, is it always raining in Paris? Behalf of that you don't feel the Parisian atmosphere. It could be London at the end of the 19th century or even a German town at the same period. The lawyer (he was a lawyer), who is the real "chief" of the pension has no personality at all, he could as well be the postman ringing at the door. The end of the movie is the best: then at last you see that Louise Créteur has feelings and that she can cry. Every time that Grünewald wants to declare his love, somebody intervenes very artificially to interrupt their tentative to some conversation. Is Grünewald the "man with black hair" who is going to ruin the life of Louise as a fortune-speller predicts? The abortion seems to be done so that Grünewald never knows it, which is impossible. And how does Grünewald react to this remains also a mystery. The war scenes are superfluous and without interest. Everybody plays on the piano in this hotel which is also without interest. The friendship with the other servant is uncomprehensible, why is she so honest? Is she really her friend? She has nothing to win by being her friend. This movie is full of riddles and at the end you say: "Let this soon be over, please".

I think Frank Van Passel and Christophe Dirickx have succeeded beautifuly in capturing the essence of Elschot's classic novel. Sure, the other characters may have been minimised in the plot, but by doing so, the bulk of the story is allowed to breathe. You can only get so much of a large novel into 2hrs of screentime.

As for continually asking the question "why?", I have a question: Why is this a problem? I found it very stimulating to question throughout this film- I don't like to be spoon-fed answers. It kept me thinking. Not a bad thing.

By the end of the film, I was very glad of the ambiguity. I think it captured the ambiguity of love, lust and ambition. It didn't try to tie everything up in a ribbon- a bit like life itself really.

Beautifully written, directed and performed.