The curtain opens behind the scenes at the May 1913 premiere of the Rite of Spring at the Thétre des Champs Élysées, immediately setting the tone of the movie with its honeyed light, the syrupy amber of an old bottle of Chanel No 5. Primal and epic, the stylized groin-thrusting of Nijinsky's choreography later echoes the Klimt-elegant sex scenes. The rhythmic violence of Stravinsky's music is brought to the fore and we see, as well as feel its effect: The theatre soon boils sickeningly over, the detractors and defenders, no longer urbane Parisians, come to blows.
The film’s long opening scene is a necessary tool to transport one into the extreme magic of the movie. Because this is very much a fantasy. The long camera takes drift through the backstage tension, sneaks through the curtains onto the stage and the audience and the warm, drowsy lighting creates the sensation between waking and sleeping.
Is couture an art similar to music? The imagined (unverified) affair between the woman who was to become the Grande Dame of Couture (Anna Mouglalis)and the rebellious Russian composer (the dour and cruel-looking Mads Mikkelsen, whom TB finds 'so sexy' - I don't understand this, of course) asks this question. Director Jan Kounen creates an extraordinary set of moods throughout his film, often muted and melancholic, broken by moments of intense energy or passion. The emotional distance give the sensation of detachment from reality, exemplified by the sex scenes, which are coldly unromantic, carefully art-directed acts of stylised eroticism. They are symbols and the actors do a great job of bringing some semblance of essential life to their roles.
The careers of Igor Stravinsky and Coco Chanel took a remarkably close course: The Rite of Spring was launched just as Coco opened her first shop; They revolutionised the worlds of music and fashion respectively; They died within a year of each other in 1971. The missions of composer and couturiere were similar - he set out to re-write the rulebook of classical composition, she sought to democratise women's fashion. These are the facts, the rest is fiction (the movie is based on Chris Greenhalgh's impressively researched novel) set in the tantalising imagined encounter in 1920. The ruined and exiled composer comes to stay at Bel Respiro (the Chanel perfume is named after this villa), Chanel's art nouveau villa outside Paris. The ailing wife, Katerina (a wonderful performance by Ms Morozova), and four children are emotional baggage made visible. The beautiful black and beige villa again stresses the dream-like - hardly a stage for conventional behaviour, the affair seemed fated. Stravinsky is the proverbial struggling artist, while Chanel is rich, feared and successful (also model-thin and archly elegant, in skirt suits or silk pyjamas). Under the nose of his wife, Chanel seduces Stravinsky (is this a rebound affair from the death of Boy Capel?). The beauty of the staging brings to the fore the sordidness of all affairs of the sort. It's not a sign of being fiercely independent, it's not a political gesture but a vulgar whim. That Stravinsky doesn’t do too badly out of it, depicted enjoying the benefits of a loving spouse who suffers in silence while correcting his scores, as well as the luxury of Chanel’s patronage, makes this particularly ugly.
While the sets and costumes are stunning, the stylistic triumph is the cinematography. The careful, disciplined cinematography evokes the stylised Art Nouveau visuals immaculately (even the woods look like a Klimt painting!). The creation of mood and style make the film so much more than a biopic. Ms Mouglalis does not look anything like Chanel, but that makes her acting even more remarkable because she convinces as a revolutionary genius. Mr Mikkelsen delivers a chillingly repellant, yet sympathetic (why?) rendition of Stravinsky.The film explores many issues, the clash between two 'artistic' personalities, between the artistic movements of the period, between the moral and the immoral, between the conventional and the unconventional, but I left pondering this question: Was that long segue into Grasse and the creation of Chanel No 5 quite necessary?
I think not.
No comments:
Post a Comment