| |
Summary
1933. Police inspector Bonny is conducting a private investigation into the influential
impresario and financier Serge Alexandre. He threatens to expose his victim’s unsavoury
past as the petty crook and swindler Stavisky. However, this is only one of Alexandre’s
problems. The financier’s business empire is beginning to crumble through lack of
funds and his former friends are deserting him. To escape ruin, Alexandre is forced
to resort to ever more spectacular schemes, including issuing millions in false credit
vouchers and laundering funds destined to support the approaching Spanish civil war...
Review
Although not intended as a conventional historic drama, this film sheds some light on
the enigmatic yet comparatively unknown character of Stavisky. A Russian émigré,
Stavisky built an empire through a combination of subterfuge, fraud and false identity,
becoming one of the most influential and powerful men in France in the period between
the wars. His life was the perfect sham which took in businessmen, financiers and
politicians of all persuasions, yet he was also the catalyst for some major changes in
society in France in the 1930s, with implications extending much wider, as the film reveals.
Any attempt to reconstruct
the life of this mysterious character would be a major undertaking, rendered almost impossible
by the amount of distortion and pure fabrication which such a mythical figure has aroused.
To their credit, the director Alain Resnais and his writer Jorge Semprún restrict
the scope of the film to the last few months of Stavisky’s life, to his spectacular fall
from grace, for which reliable sources of information do exist. Stavisky’s past
activities are hinted at in the film in a rather vague, sometimes conflicting way, lending
the character of Serge Alexandre the halo of an enigmatic second persona.
As a result, Alexandre appears a complex, mysterious figure, defying his inevitable failure
with heroic determination, yet displaying a tragic quiet acceptance of his inescapable
doom.
Any film by Alain Resnais
deserves close examination and serious critical appraisal. Although Stavisky
is far from being his most original works, it is among his most technically accomplished.
The elegant, fairytale-like photography recreates the artificial splendour of a flawed
elite society oblivious to its impending demise. The typically Resnais device of
the flash-forward constantly reminds us of the tragic trajectory the film is following.
At the same time this emphasises the blind complacency of Stavisky and his entourage,
and it heightens the tragic irony of Stavisky’s actions – everything he does can only
increase the stakes and hasten his failure.
Better known for playing
tough action heroes, Jean-Paul Belmondo would at first sight appear an unusual choice
to play the role of Stavisky. However, his disarming charm and skill at playing
the solitary outsider makes him the perfect choice for the part. Although his performance
is unusually subdued and lacking in humour, it has a genuine pathos and tender quality
about it. The pairing of Belmondo with Charles Boyer, another great French actor,
who plays an impecunious Spanish nobleman, is exquisite, giving the film some moments
of poignant reflection. Another acting legend, Gérard Depardieu, also makes
a brief appearance in the film.
Other strong production
values include an excellent script from Jorge Semprún and some enigmatic music
from Stephen Sondheim (his first film score). Needless to say, the period detail
(costumes, sets, etc.) is impeccable.
The film’s only fault
is a sense of icy detachment which prevents the audience from really sympathising with
Stavisky and his wife. This probably arises from the film’s broken narrative structure.
For those who are not familiar with Resnais’ work, this could significantly weaken the
film’s impact. Also, the sub-plot concerning Trotsky’s exile in France is a distraction
from the main story about Stavisky. The suggestion that the Stavisky affair had
a major impact on Trosky’s fate is an interesting observation, yet it could perhaps have
been handled with much greater subtlety and effect without adding the distraction of an
additional story strand.
Although Stavisky
is widely regarded as one of Resnais’ best films, it had an unfortunate debut. When
it was first shown at Cannes in 1974, the film was violently pilloried by the critics.
Resnais was accused of prostituting himself to service Belmondo’s popular cinema.
Although Jean-Paul Belmondo was the film’s producer, Resnais was oblivious of the fact
when making the film and he denied being diverted by Belmondo. The critics
won a partial victory, however, and the film was far less successful in France than it
deserved, attracting just over a million spectators. Away from this debacle, the
film proved to be a staggering success when it was released abroad, particularly in the
United States and Italy.
© James Travers 2001
|
|
Ce qui me plaira dans
la mort, c’est la paresse de la mort, cette fluidité un peu dense et engourdie
de la mort qui fait qu’en somme il n’y a pas de morts, mais uniquement des noyés…
|
|
