Bluebeard

I did not think well of Catherine Breillat's 2010 follow-up 'La belle endormie' with its baffling "interpretation," and on that basis I had poor expectations of this. Why not give her a second chance, though? Everyone deserves one, right? Frankly, to watch 'Barbe bleue,' I'm all the more mystified at the choices Breillat would make for the subsequent feature, for this is at least one thing its successor is not: good. It's still distinctly flawed, mind you, but among this film's discernible faults it at least is internally consistent, with a sensible, solidly written narrative. This may not be a total must-see, but it's modestly enjoyable and fairly worthwhile.

The tale on hand is a simple one, but duly engaging, and made easier with the charm and restrained nuance of chief star Lola Créton. All the while the picture is crafted with tremendous care, with lovely filming locations, and superb production design and art direction to dress them up. The costume design and hair and makeup, not to mention props, are all splendid, helping to cement the period setting. Breillat's direction is excellent in terms of orchestrating shots and scenes - tight and focused, accentuating the small world and limited scope of the fairy tale - and I admire Vilko Fila's mindful cinematography. Though I wish something more were done with it, I rather love the low-key pensiveness of the final shot, what I believe to be a strong finish.

I did say 'Barbe bleue' is flawed, though, and I surely mean it. It struggles with pacing; it feels like stretching this out to 82 minutes was excessive. This is pointedly emphasized by those cutaways to the two children reading a storybook; while possibly worth exploring on their own, here they provide framing that intermittently breaks the flow of the plot instead of meaningfully adding to the movie. The subdued tone I can easily forgive as a matter of stylistic choice, though I can understand how it would be one that's off-putting to other viewers. On the other hand, just as would be seen much more discretely in 'La belle endormie,' some scenes suffer from a weakness of execution (presumably direction) that make them come off as halfhearted, as though the take were only a rehearsal. For that matter, the acting across the board is muted to the point of too often feeling hollow, even from Créton. For as long as Breillat has been making films, such moments are perplexing.

Passably entertaining as this title is, there's nothing remarkable or special about it. Earnest adaptations of other fairy tales have been made that were far richer and more grabbing. This isn't to inherently disparage this rendition, but the disparity is notable, and for lack of any quality that's especially striking it's not something likely to stand as being particularly memorable. I nonetheless appreciate all the work that went into 'Barbe bleue,' and it's suitably satisfying as something to watch on a quiet day. Don't go out of your way for it, but if you're looking for a light feature that doesn't require any form of major investment, this is a decent way to spend 82 minutes.

I can't tell you how disappointed and bored I was while watching this movie.

I kept hoping with all my heart that it will pick up its feet at some point and start delivering some feeling, magic, action or whatever. But alas, that was all in vain.

It keeps the same slooooooow pace from start to end, the actors keep showing the same inexpressive faces and delivering the same emotionless dialogs.

That is when they bother to speak. In the rest of the time they keep staring in some more or less distant point for quite long periods (I suppose it's meant to show us how deep they feel or think).

I don't know how the book ends... but the end of the movie looked pretty fuzzy and stupid to me.

You're never told why Blue Beard did all those horrible things or how did the little girl managed to escape.

The only good things in this movie were the costumes and locations, I guess.

All in all, if you expect some bit of fairy-tale, of magic, of fantasy or anything at all which would glue you to the chair in front of the screen, I think you'll be pretty disappointed.

Despite possibly the most charming child performance in a movie ever (no I have not watched all movies ever) by Marilou Lopes-Benites, I didn't allow myself to fall for Bluebeard, though this little girl narrator is so winsome that on occasion her charm has the audience gasping.

The way that Bluebeard is shot is very casual, almost matter-of-fact and Rohmerian, strangely for what is potentially such an atmospheric story. The level of graft going on is very low, more befitting a conversational type film a la Rohmer. I also took badly to a scene of animal slaughter that seemed inhumane.

I think comparisons with Tarsem Singh's wonderful movie The Fall are beneficial. In both movies there have two timelines, the first, the timeline of narration is set in the early Twentieth Century, the second is a period fantasy being narrated. In both movies there is a charming child actress, in The Fall it's Catinca Untaru. Where The Fall succeeds in my view is that the fantastical narrative really feels like a product of the narrators' minds. In Bluebeard, even though the girls are reading from a book, the resultant fantasy doesn't feel like a product of their minds, but distinctly a product of Catherine Breillat's mind, too knowing and sophisticated. Quite clearly for example the children would not have been imagining the squirming of a dying animal. Even though the narration is less ostentatious, and takes up less screen time, as with The Fall you really can make a case for it being the most moving part.

I think Breillat did manage to access the essence of the Bluebeard story which is that if you are a big ugly sensitive oaf, you are condemned to not participate in life, one of my fondest quotes, from Le Quai Des Brumes / Port of Shadows (in French it's more eloquent) is "It's horrible to love like Romeo when you look like Bluebeard!". I think that's what worse is that women often don't acknowledge that it's possible that such a man could have the feelings of Romeo, as if only pretty and graceful men could feel like that. Something that should never be forgotten is that passion is something everyone feels.

Brief summary of the plot is that Bluebeard is a rich man rumoured to have murdered previous wives. He takes new wives without dowry, and persuades Marie-Catherine, a child bride, to marry him. There are some funny post marital scenes, like when Bluebeard is sat eating an ostrich egg, and Marie-Catherine is sat eating a quail egg side by side.

I really am fond of the movie, but I would have liked to see more mise-en-scene, the movie as I say, is far too casual. There is a feeling of great boredom that arises from the last scene of the fantasy strand, in a scene that should perhaps be incredibly stirring.

Infused with a sumptuous elegance, Catherine Breillat's eerie retelling of the Charles Perrault fairytale Bluebeard is very sensual and highly stylized while adhering to an almost literary interpretation of the story. Shown at the Vancouver Film Festival, the film operates on parallel levels, both involving two sisters. In the first story, two young sisters play in the attic of their home in France in the present time. Catherine, who according to Breillat's autobiographical material, represents the director, plays power games with her older but more withdrawn sister Marie-Anne by tormenting her with readings of the classic horror story "Bluebeard".

While young Catherine is reading the story, the drama plays out on the screen in a setting that looks like the 16th century. Another pair of sisters Anne (Daphne Baiwir) and Marie-Catherine (Lola Créton) (note the similarity in names) receive sad news at a convent from a coldly unfeeling Mother Superior that their father was killed while trying to save a little girl. Without means to continue at their private school, the girls are unceremoniously thrown out. On the way home, they pass Bluebeard's Castle and comment on the local aristocrat who, rumor has it, married many wives who strangely disappeared.

It is not long until the corpulent Bluebeard (Dominique Thomas) begins to court the young and attractive Marie-Catherine. Without money for a dowry, Marie-Catherine, undaunted by the whispers, agrees to marry the wealthy Bluebeard. The film then moves back and forth between the two stories, with the younger girls' reading and commenting on the fairytale providing comic relief for the heavy drama of male power and female sexual awareness unfolding at the castle. Marie-Catherine seems to have charmed Bluebeard who appears loving but whose intimidating frame towers over the slender virgin.

Marie has, however, cannily set things up in her favor. She has chosen for herself a room so small that the hefty Bluebeard cannot enter but she can tiptoe down the hall and peek into the room where he is getting undressed. When he goes away on an unspecified trip, Marie-Catherine invites her sister Anne to the house and they have much fun but Marie is sad until her new husband returns home one month later. Before leaving on his second trip, however, he gives his wife a key to a mysterious room in the cellar with the impossible instruction not to open the door. Frightened of disobeying her husband but tantalized by the secret, Marie-Catherine unlocks the mystery chamber only to be confronted by her worst fears and the story plays out in Breillat's provocative and unpredictable fashion.

Bluebeard's setting immerses the audience in a world that is far removed from today's realities, yet teenage newcomer Lola Créton gives Marie-Catherine a playful confidence and pride to go along with her natural purity and innocence in a way that speaks to today's feminist sensibilities. Going backwards and forwards in time also highlights the universal qualities inherent in the Gothic fairy tales that, even when they are decidedly dark as in this case, have a lot to teach us about confronting our fears, lessons often hidden by the pandering of Walt Disney animation. Resonant with wit and sexual tension, Catherine Breillat has, in Bluebeard reestablished the reality of the world of children both full of terror and untold beauty and, in the process, has created a minor masterpiece.

Blue Beard (2009)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

Incredibly disappointing adaptation of Charles Perrault's fairy tale has sisters Marie-Catherine (Lola Creton) and Anne (Daphne Baiwir) being taken out of a rich school after the death of their family. Moving back with their mother, the three are now desperately poor and this is when they're invited to the castle of Lord Bluebeard (Dominique Thomas) and soon after Marie-Cathrine agrees to marry him. This story has been told countless times before but I had high hopes going into this one because I'm always impressed with the work of director Catherine Breillat. I'm sure some might be able to say this film spoke to them or that it was deep in some fashion but to me it was just a complete mess from start to finish and the worst thing is that it's totally lifeless. I'm really not sure what the director was trying to do here but no matter what the goal was it certainly didn't succeed. I was rather shocked to see how lifeless the picture was as it doesn't contain a bit of energy and after a while the viewer just grows tired of the slow pacing. Even worse is that this thing clocks in at 78-minutes, which feels twice as long. It was impossible to care about either of the sisters and all the flashbacks to a couple girls playing in an attic just doesn't work or add anything to the picture. The one thing I did like about the film were the performances. I thought Creton was very effective in the role of the strong sister who will stop at nothing to get what she wants. I also thought Thomas was extremely good as the ogre Bluebeard. He brought a certain sympathetic nature to the role that I thought worked very well. With that said, the film is a major letdown and it's a real shame because it should have been much, much better.