By James Bowman on 7.5.05 @ 12:02AM
No romanticizing the bourgeois criminal.
In his previous film, Read My Lips (Sur Mes
Levres), of 2001, the director Jacques Audiard presented us
with a Sartrean hymn to criminality as the route to personal
authenticity and moral and existential purity, so it is not
surprising that he should have seen in a remake of James Toback's
Fingers (1978) an opportunity to explore the connection
between criminality and art. The original, one of those
atmospheric, sub-Scorsesean films of the 1970s that seem to have
been made with no other end in view than putting their sheltered,
middle-class audience in touch with the sordid "reality" of the
mean streets, looks badly dated now. A young Harvey Keitel in
romantic black with a white scarf, carrying around his boom-box
like the chip on his shoulder and listening to classic rock 'n'
roll on cassettes, can only have become a figure of fun, rather
than menace.
The French re-make, The Beat That My Heart Skipped
(De battre mon coeur s'est arrete), is more ambitious,
attempting to superimpose upon the material a psychoanalytical
rationale in the form of the Freudian idea of sublimation. Like
Keitel's original, its hero, Tom Seyr (Romain Duris), is an
aspiring concert pianist, but Audiard makes more of an effort to
forge a link between his musicianship and his criminal career.
Freudian thinking also comes into it in the form of Tom's father,
Robert (Niels Arestrup), who represents his criminal present while
his deceased mother, also a pianist, represents the higher
aspiration. The moment of Oedipal acting out comes at the climax of
the picture, which masquerades as an epilogue, wherein he must
symbolically kill dad if he wants to be with mom.
Well, the thing is nicely put together and splendidly acted by
Messrs. Douris and Arestrup, but the rather amusing vitality of
Read My Lips is suppressed here by an important political
difference. Audiard's earlier hero was a Saint Genet kind of
criminal, but Tom comes from the other side of the ideological
tracks. He and his pals, Fabrice (Jonathan Zaccai) and Sami (Gilles
Cohen), are real-estate investors who periodically resort to
illegal means, including their fists and baseball bats, to remove
legally protected immigrant squatters from Parisian apartment
buildings. In other words, they are bourgeois criminals,
not the good, working-class kind, and so presumably their
criminality becomes something for Tom (though not the others) to be
redeemed from, not something that is itself redeeming.
That's where the art comes in. One day by chance Tom meets Mr.
Fox, formerly the manager of his, Tom's, late mother's career as a
concert pianist. Mr. Fox asks Tom if he himself still plays, and
when Tom gives a non-committal answer, casually invites him to come
round to the office for an audition some time. Tom has replaced
Keitel's boom-box with more up-to-date but less aggressive
headphones, though the only clue as to what he might be listening
to is his rock 'n' roller's Chelsea boots. Now, suddenly, he
becomes obsessed with the idea of playing the piano, and he hires a
Chinese student at the Conservatoire, Miao Lin (Linh Dan Pham), to
get him up to concert standard on Bach's Toccata in E minor. He
engages in a sort of dance of sublimation with Miao Lin, to whom he
is also sexually attracted. As she speaks no French and he speaks
no Chinese, their lessons are conducted without words. Or rather,
the words between them become another sort of music, as each is
forced to act out a charade of artistic passion as a means of
arriving at the real thing.
Tom's rediscovery of music is also a rediscovery of his mother
and perhaps, with the help of Miao Lin, of his feminine side. This
naturally involves a corresponding rejection of his father, a shady
"investor" like himself but one who is now unable to provide his
own muscle and calls on Tom to help him with some debt-collecting.
Shades, you might think, not only of Freud but of Sir James
Frazer's The Golden Bough, since the old king now weakened
must be killed by his younger and more vigorous replacement if the
tribe is to be preserved. But as the tribe is a bourgeois one,
Audiard isn't interested in its preservation.
Just as we know pretty much from the start that the
artistic-mother impulse is going to get all the good press at the
expense of the aggressive-father impulse, so we know that there can
only be one right choice for Tom to make. The film would have been
much improved without this creeping moralism -- if, that is, we had
been given more of a sense of the equality of the forces at work in
the hero rather than the superiority of one of them. I hope it's
not giving too much away if I say that the crucial choice for Tom
comes as he confronts a Russian gangster (Anton Yakovlev) with
vengeance in his heart and a gun in his hand and Miao Lin waiting
for him as she is about to give a public recital. No prizes for
guessing what he does.
Audiard's screenwriter, Tonino Benacquista, is quoted in the
press materials as saying that they decided to give the film the
ending they did because it would have been to "trivialize" it to
give it "a leopard-can't-change-its-spots kind of theme." But it
seems to me that in avoiding that misfortune, they trivialized it
by giving it a redemption-by-the-power-of-art theme. One banality
drives out another. On the whole, I'd rather have had the former
than the latter.
topics:
Russia