A film without much dialogue, in mostly incomprehensible French, but which came with French subtitles which I could just about manage, most of the time. A DVD from Gaumont, with packaging suggesting that it was printed off to order, rather than stocked in piles. And according to amazon this morning: 'Collection Gaumont à la demande en DVD: découvrez une sélection de plus de 250 pépites inédites ou rares en DVD et issues de la meilleure source vidéo actuellement disponible'. Inquiry reveals that a pépite is a nugget, presumably of the golden variety.
Maybe a dozen young men clanking around in rather silly looking armour. With the leg armour only protecting the front of the legs and we had lots of shots of the back of legs in coloured tights, viewed from behind.
A lot of interest in horses, sleek but rather fat looking. Perhaps you needed a fat horse to carry an armoured man. Lots of shots of their legs. Lots of shots of their stables and grooms, these last easily identified by their funny hats. Lots of neighing.
A lot of interest in magpies. With a switch to crows circling over bodies, with a view to dinner, at the end.
A lot of time spent in clattering around what looked like the same bit of forest. Rather a young forest at that, with most of the trees looking quite young.
A lot of rather tidy looking tents in close order rows. Most improbable. Plus, whoever set them up had no idea how their guys ropes should have been staked.
A lot of scenes shot in what appeared to be farm buildings of one sort or another, mostly including carpentry which did not look very medieval. All in all, Arthur's palace was not very palatial at all. Another carpentry angle was Bresson's interest in the lances, wooden with iron tips and looking much more home made than is usual in Arthurian films, with the knights in armour taking an occasional turn with the draw knives themselves. Lances which looked much better balanced than is usual - but which were quite apt to shatter on impact and which were only used once. Perhaps the apprentices got to use the discards.
A modest amount of violence, including the gusher which results from a clean decapitation, rather less sex.
The story is portrayed as a series of fragments, not all that well stitched together. I think the idea is that rather than the film telling us what to think and feel, we have to project our own thoughts and feelings onto and around those fragments. We are supposed to join up the dots. That said the overriding impression was of emptiness. Of pointless violence, leading nowhere.
I associate to the story about extra husbands custom - aka cicisbeo - in the French and Italian Rivieras, picked up from an old Cook's guide to same, noticed at references 1 and 2. So it was an understood thing that King Arthur's queen would have a licensed lover, which everybody knew about and Arthur was not allowed to complain about. Would be expected to have one, with a new one being appointed soon after the old one was killed or damaged. The whole business being the subject of much prurient interest and vicarious pleasure in the Arthurian world portrayed, involving as it does lots of fit young men and just one lady. No wonder they needed to burn off all their energy in battles, or failing that, in tournaments.
I was interested to see that the Italian film poster turned up by google featured a more attractive lady than we were offered in the film itself. Still working on why 'lake' is translated as 'Geneva', there being a lake at Geneva not seeming sufficient reason. Was the film made nearby?
PS: I should confess that this post about the first film follows watching the second film and reading various film buff chatter about it.
Reference 1: http://psmv3.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/just-back-from-short-break-at-lamb-at.html.
Reference 2: http://psmv3.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/cooks-tours.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment