Peter von Kant

The film shows a successful director who works from home with the help of his mute, endlessly submissive assistant. The still fresh pain of his breakup with his love partner makes him feel lonely and unhappy. His explanation for the breakup is envy from his boyfriend. His daily life is associated with work on scripts, alcohol and drugs. A ray of hope is his introduction to Amir, who is a young and handsome actor, separated from his girlfriend ( which is in Australia )and waiting for his star moment. Peter offers him to leave the hotel where he is staying and move into him. This is the beginning of their brief romance, the finale of which will make Peter's life even more bitter.

We cannot feel there connection in depth. Even when Amir leaves him, there is no sense of the great separation that would lead to Peter's immense suffering. Peter tries to stop him from leaving, but it doesn't look good, it's not finished clearly. There is a moment when Peter's mother asks him about something strange with grave of father, and Peter doesn't answer anything. The audience cannot explain this moment. He sits, like a hole.

Otherwise, the film is mostly shot in close-ups, which makes it chambered, and this trick works because approaching us to the full melodrama. It was shot almost entirely in interiors.

In my opinion, François Ozon has never made a bad film, and this one is no exception. This is his twist on the film Petra von Kant's bitter tears by his role model Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Several reviews I've read point out how brilliantly Ozon interprets the original film. As I have not seen Fassbinder's film, I must judge Ozon's film for what it is.

This is not a film for the masses. Most of the film takes place inside an apartment, with three people. Especially the main character Peter Von Kant, played masterfully by Denis Ménochet, makes an impression. He is the great director who appears both eccentric, very self-absorbed, but also vulnerable. The film is about Von Kant and his great love/infatuation Amir (Khalia Gharbia). The two are wonderful together, showing the complexity and challenges of relationships. Fassbinder's regular actress Hanna Schygulla also appears in the film in a cool supporting role. Last but not least, I must not forget Stefan Crepon who plays Peter Von Kant's oppressed butler/servant/helper. What an amazing achievement to have such a presence, without almost a single line! As you may have gathered by now, I enjoyed the film very much. I'm already looking forward to what François Ozon comes up with next.

Hanna SCHYGULLA and the bitter tears of Peter von Kant

Christmas 2023 is also the 80th birthday of the exceptional German actress Hanna SCHYGULLA. Whether she played for Rainer Werner FASSBINDER Effi Briest, Lili Marleen or Maria Braun (Silver Bear at the BERLINALE 1979), or for directors like Marco FERRERI (Silver Palm in CANNES 1983 for LA STORIA DI PIERA), Kenneth BRANAGH and Francois OZON: This German diva has fascinated her audience for more than 50 years.

In OZON's homage to Fassbinder, which virtually turns his classic THE BITTER TEARS OF PETRA VON KANT on its head, SCHYGULLA gives her version of Fassbinder's mother Liselotte EDER. Already there in the original, SCHYGULLA of course knows all the dramas that are told in fiction. However, she is still going strong and there is no end in sight to this outstanding career.

The French director OZON shows the berserk director Fassbinder (or his alter ego Peter von Kant) in a milder light than the German director Oskar ROEHLER did in 2020 in ENFANT TERRIBLE. Free! The only important thing is that Hanna SCHYGULLA can exude all the warmth in her small role that only she is capable of. It's a shame that she and her colleague, the three-time ACADEMY AWARD nominee Isabelle ADJANI, were unable to walk the red carpet together in February 2022, when PETER VON KANT was the opening film at the BERLINALE, due to Covid 19!

Speaking of ADJANI! The daughter of a German mother can be seen in the role, which was probably intended as a homage to the great Ingrid CAVEN. And then Isabelle ADJANI sings "Everyone kills what he loves" (once sung by Jeanne MOREAU in QUERELLE) in GERMAN! Beautiful to melt away!

This is a weak achievement from François Ozon - otherwise a brilliant director. Although the movie is watchable without effort and there is great acting, you may feel that something is missing. The intense dramma that fills the 1972 Fassbinder movie has been turned into grotesque comedy. Both films are strongly theatrical, but the tone in Ozon's movie works less satisfactorily. Stefan Crepon's character Karl, however, is superb.

Where is the main flaw of this film in my opinion? The author was betrayed by the belief that an easy transcript of the Fassbinder mise en scène (changing sexes and adding some comedy) woulf be enough to yield a significant remake.

For instance, what is the reason to maintain the action in the seventies as in the inspiring movie? The only explanation that I am able to find is a wrong feeling that much of the dramatic tension would disappear in a world full of mobile phones. The fact that Petra Von Kant becomes a prisonner and an anxious slave of her land line phone after being abandoned by Karin is naturally inserted in the action of the 1972 version. Extra work would be required to recreate the plot in terms of mobile phones: I believe the result might be innovative and interesting. Instead of harming the script, it could appear as a welcome refreshment. Just think of how many episodes of jealousy, lies and betrayal could be manufactured with resource to contact lists, text messages and what more you can think of.

I must say that, following all the male roles taken by women in, eg, modern interpretations of Shakespeare (will a man ever again be permitted to portray King Lear?), it makes a nice change to see a man take a female role, as François Ozon adapts Rainer Werner Fassbinder's play/film/opera for a male lead. Denis Ménochet gives a good portrayal of the mercurial, self-indulgent film-maker in what turns out to be an at times uneven production.

A constant presence in the background is Karl, von Kant's assistant. Played by Stéfan Crépon, he has no lines but instead conveys his emotions by facial expression. This would be a difficult task for any actor, and at times Crépon over-does the eye acting as Karl gazes, hurt, at von Kant, following yet another example of his employer's disregard of his feelings. The other male character is Amir, object of von Kant's affections. In this role Khalil Gharbia provides the weakest performance of the film, at times too obviously acting even in such a mannered production as this.

The film was worth seeing once, but I doubt I will bother watching it again.