MovieChat Forums > Préparez vos mouchoirs (1978) Discussion > Nobody? Not a single comment?

Nobody? Not a single comment?

posted 15 years ago by Mixalidis
16 replies | jump to latest

I can't believe no one's disgusted?! Nobody? Just like any other movie... Honestly, this is the first time a movie offended me. And it's not like I'm beginner. Plus, I've watched a lot of different Europen and and French movies. So this amount of nudity was ok, but pedophilia? Come on, I really can't understand that people like this move, that it's Oscar winner. Isn't Academy supposed to be conservative?

So, is the ending implying he knocked her up? I mean that's disgusting, plus the boy's father in wheelchair... And he stays with her...

Solange and the kid should be in mental institution, most definitely.

So, I came up here wondering what will I find and.. nothing? Ah... there must be some kind of trivia! Nope, not at all! Ok, wikipedia...Nada, niente! Please, please tell me there were some controversies when released. There must be something... well, I'm sure they banned it in China ...

Except that I'm disgusted, the second half really made no sense, especially with boy's mom making out with that guy. I'd ban this movie

[–] harleyq87 15 years ago

this won a damn oscar!

[–] DHill21 15 years ago

How old are you, for God's sake, on your high horse? This is a light comedy. Pedophilia? Have you no idea of what's going on around you? The kid was precocious, so you think maybe masturbation would have been better, or should he try to get a girl his own age? Getting a 13-year old pregnant, that would have been perfectly acceptable, right?
Most 13 or 14-year old boys are initiated by older women. Have you ever watched Souffle au coeur? I'd like to hear what you think about that. What's important is the way something is presented. It makes all the difference. It could be offensive but it's not, because Blier is a great director and he knows how to handle a delicate situation like this.

[–] Icelander67 15 years ago

Oh really, it's all in the presentation? Ok, so let's say they tried to remake it in America, frame by frame, shot by shot, using not the now-standard 23 year old pretending to be 18 (American Pie, anyone?), but like in this film a _real_ 13 year old _child_ (precocious or not, a child is a child). You honestly think for one second it would not get torn to pieces as cp? ;)
I mean, just look at all the fuss made over that 'Birth' film, and that was just one short bath scene (and we didn't actually see anything, in this one we see _everything_ and we _see_ the boy sees everything, no camera tricks here). And don't get me started on the fuss they made over that 'Hounddog' film, that one didn't even get a theatrical _release_! :P
So why is _this_ one such wonderful piece of art, when it's obvious that an American version showing exactly the same would be branded before it's even released!? Just because it's french & made in the 70's??
Hypocritic snobs! :P

====
"Never finish what you can't start!" ;)

[–] DHill21 15 years ago

Because Americans are puritanical hypocritical bigots. Americans would not vote for president a man who'd been divorced and voted for another man, who everybody knew was a bad president, because of his moral values. What moral values? Killing innocent babies in the Middle East and Iraq, etc.ect. But he is a born again Christian and a former alcoholic who has seen the light, so it's all right. That's the measure of the Americans when it comes to morality.
Back to the movie. It's not a wonderful piece of art, but the sex scenes, or rather the one sex scene is very well presented. I watched The Reader recently, they boy is supposed to be 15 (although he looks 20 and he is 20). No problems there? One year makes a difference?
Americans tried to copy European films, but they only turned out movies. So, no, the same thing made by an American would have been ridiculous and would have rightly been torn to pieces. What Americans lack is honesty. Yes, 13 year olds look at naked women when they get a chance and it's natural. What's the big fuss?
And also there is an element of fun that you missed: a 13-year old did for the woman what the two hunks were unable to do. Lighten up for god's sake!

[–] damien-16 15 years ago

Some people are just too immature to be on a message board concerning a film like this one.

That being said, I have to admit that Blier seems to be into young people being aroused by older people: a very young Isabelle Huppert in Les Valseuses, Ariel Besse in Beau-pere, Anouk Grinberg being groped by the young boys in 1-2-3 soleil...

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] damien-16 14 years ago

Nico wonders: Could you imagine what people would think if the film was about a 30 year old man bedding a 13 year old girl?

Well, Blier made such a film: Beau-pere. Nobody made a big fuzz about it.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mbulamabe 14 years ago

Similar situation in Noce blanche where Bruno Cremer as an older teacher falls for a very young pupil played by Vanessa Paradis who goes full frontal. But I guess she must have been 16. Which can probably not be said of Ariel Besse in Beau-Père. She is born in 65 but the film was released in 81, so...

[–] angelx 12 years ago

A 30 year old man bedding a 13 year old girl would be a different situation. Girls tend to be more emotional when it comes to sex so the damage is more severe. But boys tend to be a little less emotional about it (they just wanna get off, they just wanna score) so they tend to be less traumatized.

[–] mr-murph 13 years ago

Agree with you and the OP (except for his comment that the film should be banned).

Add to your comments that the child's mother is injured in an accident and the father is medically incapacitated with booze so that the two can maintain their relationship. This scenario is amusing and entertaining... why?

I'd reference "Lolita" as a literary source. The protagonist, a classic unreliable narrator, abuses the title character. There is a reason she cries every night, and it's not because of "love."

As a parent and a grandparent, I found the theme appalling. And if calling out a film which glorifies child abuse makes me narrow minded, then I cheerfully accept the charge.

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

Who in their right mind would call being made to look at a naked Carole Laure "abuse"? And "traumatized"...? You make it sound as if the kid was forced to witness an execution. Really bizarre stuff.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] ghibliii 14 years ago

The film is artistic commentary to a wide campaign in France, waged between 1977 and 1979, for the abolition of the laws of consent. More info at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petitions_against_age_of_consent_laws

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Gloede_The_Saint 14 years ago

It's a rather absurd black comedy. I'm not sure why it would offend you. The kid is an evil mastermind so you can hardly say he is abused.

Somebody here has been drinking and I'm sad to say it ain't me - Allan Francis Doyle

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

You said it - if even the Academy found no fault with the material in this film, perhaps it is indeed you that´s in need of a certain attitude adjustment? The least you could do is to drop the self righteous act.

Plus, there was no "paedophilia" portrayed or alluded to in Blier´s film.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan