
(Apologies for the break this feature took over the Easter weekend — blame the holiday spirit and the London sunshine.)
The director: Alain Cavalier (France)
The talent: The internet is currently not rife with details on this entry, but we do know that the film is a two-hander of sorts, headlined by the veteran director himself and sturdy 51 year-old French star Vincent Lindon (seen most recently in last year’s “Mademoiselle Chambon”), both seemingly appearing as themselves. Producer Michel Seydoux, who has worked with Cavalier for the past decade, has a notable résumé, including “Cyrano de Bergerac,” “Burnt by the Sun” and last year’s “Leaving.”
The pitch: In the last decade, Cavalier has shifted from narrative cinema to more self-reflexive video diaries straddling drama and documentary. His latest, pitched as a comedy, appears to be a further excursion in that vein, though the synopsis offered by French distributor Pathé is otherwise cryptic, promising viewers a glimpse of the director and his leading man “at once in real life and in the fiction they have invented together.” (My translation.)
French newspaper Le Monde, meanwhile, fills in some context: in 2009, Cavalier informed them of his plans to make a film about “the return of the prodigal son to his father,” which they would shoot “for a year, without a crew, in (Lindon’s) free time.” Festival director Thierry Frémaux has described the film as both “inventive” and “very bizarre,” which sounds plausible enough.
The pedigree: At 79 years of age, Cavalier is the most senior filmmaker in the Competition, but much of his work will be unfamiliar to non-Francophiles — his last film to receive US distribution was 1986’s “Thérèse.” That secular biopic remains the high-water mark of his career, winning the Jury Prize at Cannes and going on to sweep the César Awards. He has contended for the Palme d’Or once since, but was relegated to Un Certain Regard two years ago with “Irène.”
The buzz: With such vague details of the film to work with at this point, and Cavalier’s recent work having travelled so little, the word is understandably quiet on this one — with many predicting it’ll play better to the home crowd than to the international critics. Some Cannes insiders appear surprised at Cavalier’s re-promotion to Competition status.
The odds: The film’s Palme chances don’t look strong on paper, though Cannes juries often like to reward veteran directors with a special prize of some sort — particularly if said director is a native son. (Alain Resnais received exactly this treatment two years ago.) If the film’s meta games prove sufficiently interesting, a Best Actor prize for either or both of the self-playing leads would be the kind of playful move juries sometimes favor.
[Photo: Pathé]
Features
Archives


7 responses so far
1 4-25-2011 at 8:40 am
Nicolas Leblanc said...
If I understood correctly the fiction part would involve Cavalier as the President and Lindon as his Prime Minister.
2 4-25-2011 at 9:28 am
Guy Lodge said...
Yes, I read that in the synopsis, but I thought it might have been meant figuratively.
3 4-25-2011 at 10:04 am
Nicolas Leblanc said...
That would be odd.
What I get from the (laconic) synopsis and the Le Monde capsule is that it’s an exploration of a father/son dynamic between two politicians, as well as between Lindon and Cavalier themselves. It’s still pretty vague, though.
4 4-25-2011 at 10:07 am
ez6 said...
I really appreciate this entire series; having clear background information on each of the entries will make festival coverage and reviews more absorbing and less removed for all of us watching from across the pond.
5 4-25-2011 at 2:38 pm
Wheels said...
I’ll second that. This site’s Cannes coverage is indispensable, and this series is a nice way to anticipate it.
6 4-26-2011 at 5:27 am
Michael said...
I’m loving these articles Guy! I think it might be your most extensive pre-Cannes series yet. I can’t wait for Cannes to actually get here b/c I know your coverage is going to be flawless.
This film is one of those that really has to be seen by critics or else it could never live on its own. The interest in this film will depend on what the actual reaction is post screening since on paper nothing about it really jumps out.