I agree that Presque rien can be frustrating, but I found that it had an inner beauty that comes with the second viewing.
It's been said that the movie could be frustrating to American viewers, who are used to films that emphasize stories and/or character development, and that have beginnings, middles, and ends. I normally refrain from generalizing across nationalities (full disclosure: I am an American), but I would tend to agree that Presque rien can be a confusing movie on the first viewing to those who are used to that "American" style of movies.
The movie jumps around in time, and certain events that would seem to be important are intentionally omitted. Time is very difficult to sense. (Was the breakup before or after the suicide attempt?) And I'm sure that there were people who were scratching their heads at the ambiguous ending.
Even the extras on the American DVD had a "something's missing" feeling for me. The extras consisted of two trailers for the movie, silent written biographies of main cast members, and a short film about Jérémie Elkaïm's promotional visit to Chicago (including an interview with him about the movie). The extras seemed incomplete to me; I would have also wanted to hear from Stéphane Rideau and director Sébastien Lifshitz.
In an interview, Sébastien Lifshitz stated his intentions for the movie:
http://www.picturethisent.com/minisites/comeundone/director_fr.html
My view is that Presque rien was an "emotional" movie. Its goal was to latch onto the viewers' emotions and carry us along. We have to insert our own life experiences in order to produce our own reaction. There is no right or wrong answer here. With some people it will click; with others it will not.
Further, an aspect that I have seen with a lot of French movies is that they make you work. You have to put things together in your own mind. You have to think hard about their meaning. They have symbolism. Most notably, there can be brief moments in the movie that have great significance but will be missed on the first viewing. Specifically, after watching Presque rien the first time, one may have to watch it again a second or third time (or even more) to find things that one missed earlier. The movie may be better to own on DVD than to see in a theater.
Because everyone has different emotions, different people will have different reactions to the movie. As Jérémie Elkaïm said on the DVD, Presque rien is like a book, in that it doesn't exist except in the mind of the viewer. Two different people can see it and have completely different reactions.
The movie seeks to appeal to emotional levels within us, and, yes, to make us work. If you care about the characters, you'll be drawn along, and you may even see parallels in your own life. Why did Mathieu attempt suicide? Why did he and Cédric break up? We're not told. Insert your own answer.
Consistent with the attempt to make us work, there are hints for the viewer to put together. As for Mathieu's suicide attempt, the age of 19 can be a very dangerous time. He also had a missing father, a depressed mother, a baby brother who just died (though he said that he didn't know him much), and the relationship with Cédric. As for the breakup, there are hints that they were simply too different. When they visited the castle at Ranrouët, Mathieu was interested in the architecture while Cédric dismissed the castle as a pile of rocks (and wanted to make out). Cédric also asked whether Mathieu's resistance was because of "what happened yesterday," but we're never told what that was.
There was also the separation from his family that could have contributed both to the breakup and Mathieu's emotional trauma. In a "blink and you'll miss it" moment right at the end of the movie while he and Pierre are walking on the beach, Mathieu said that he and Cédric had not returned to Pornichet the previous summer because Cédric did not want to see Mathieu's family. That could have caused further trauma (evidenced by Mathieu's lovingly looking at his family photos when he returned to the summer home).
On a different note, there were also some cinematic plot devices in the movie that gave it the feel of an experimental film. At the beginning, it was Cédric who pursued the relationship. At the end, it was Mathieu. At the beginning, we had the sunny summer scenes on the beach. At the end, Mathieu and Pierre are walking alone on the deserted beach in the winter.
There were the scenes with the cat. I saw this is Mathieu starting over. It was like Ernest Hemingway's short story "Big Two-Hearted River," in which the character Nick Adams, after having been gravely wounded in combat, returns to the woods where he and his father had hunted and fished before the war. Mathieu was trying to get himself together, and he was starting over at the simplest level. I think that people who have gone through a trauma can appreciate this.
The scene of Mathieu eating pasta with the cat was juxtaposed with the scene of Mathieu eating pasta with Cédric.
We see a tender scene when Mathieu "came out" to his mother. This was after he was in the position of announcing his sexuality to a total stranger (Cédric's father) before he had told his parents. After that, Mathieu knew that it was time.
There are scenes where viewers have to insert their own meaning. For example, while Mathieu and Cédric are at the fair, they see that Annick has sneaked out of the house with a man. What does this mean? I saw it as meaning that straight people are just like gay people. In an American movie, one of the gay characters might have sarcastically said at that point, "Those straights. They're just like us." In Presque rien, it's for the viewer to decide.
As for the final scene with Pierre playing soccer with the boy, yes, it was intentionally ambiguous. Take your pick. I saw in it hope for Mathieu, finding a kind man in Pierre. It also showed not to judge people by first impressions; Mathieu's first impression of Pierre was seeing him fight (and then follow) Cédric. Again, Mathieu is trying to put his wrecked mind together. There is hope for him, but his sitting quietly on the beach shows that he has a long way to go.
And, of course, part of the intended "emotional" reaction stems from the actors themselves. There is a reason why Stéphane Rideau was not wearing underwear while singing "Libertine."
So, that's my take on Presque rien. Again, there's no right or wrong answer here. It's up to you, as it is with all movies. I'll agree that this was no Citizen Kane. It was not even a Beautiful Thing. But underneath its jumbled structure, I did find a beauty that resonated with me.
reply
share
leftbanker
17 years ago
Thanks, Keelton, for a very interesting and helpful discussion of the film. You were thinking along the same lines as I in my very brief response, and you did a great job of fleshing out your thoughts with examples from the movie. Below is a reprint of the imdb review by jobseeker which reinforces and expands upon your thoughts. And I certainly agree with you that repeat viewings enhance one's understanding and appreciation of Presque Rien.
3 February 2004
Author: jobseeker95479 ([email protected]) from Quincy, MA
Let me first say that I don't think Presque Rien is the best gay movie ever made. Looking at the cover with two naked young guys, I expect it will offer little more than "tasteful" eye candy. But I came away feeling this is a lot better than I expect, and for the exact reason so many other complain about, the plot.
The story unfolds with Mathieu, after suffering from depression; revisit his family summerhouse to pull his life together. It is the same place where two summers ago he met his first boyfriend, someone he just broke up with. Upon arriving, Mathieu pick up a wild cat that's roaming on the street. In the flashback, when Mathieu arrives his family summerhouse for vacation he "picked up" a wild child, Cédric, who basically lives on the street. Instantly we can draw the connection between Cédric and the cat: Mathieu said to the cat "You are cute but you stink". It reminds us in the flashback how he rehearses his introduction line to Cédric to the mirror: "I must admit you are pretty cute". After Mathieu bathed the cat he said you are my little prince charming, just as the carefree and attractive Cédric would be to any gay teenager falling in love for the first time. But there is the less fortune comparison: like the cat, Cédric, as much as he wants Mathieu, is unable to reciprocate the kind of affection Mathieu needs in a relationship.
There is one key scene I find surprising that no one mentions is when Mathieu and Cédric visited a historic ruin. Architecture student Mathieu is interested in reading the background of the site but Cedric is only interested in a private intimate moment together - to him it is just a bunch of rock. Mathieu complained that Cédric has single track of mind and he doesn't like it when Cédric is like that. It is a telling sign of the difference between the two and how problematic the relationship could be. However, Mathieu (and many audience I bet) are so charmed by the good-looking and sexually uninhibited Cédric that he (and us) are blinded to the fact that Cédric is unable to bond with Mathieu in a non-physical way. Recall that Cédric was totally oblivious to any of the Mathieu's emotional problem when Mathieu's psychiatrist asked him, except that Mathieu is not interested in having sex in the past month, again only in a physical way.
The ending, so many of the comments have criticized, is actually very satisfying for me. While it seems contrive that Mathieu should reach out for his boyfriend's ex, it is not hard to understand what draws him to Pierre. Cédric doesn't believe in family and would rather be a renegade than being introduced to Mathieu's father. But outside of his house, we see the domestic Pierre helping out his mother in setting up dinner. Mathieu himself longingly browsed through the family photos, including his pain-in-the-ass sister, the first thing he arrived his family home in years. When Mathieu asked Pierre why he didn't have his own place, Pierre as-a-matter-of-factly said "Why? To be All Alone?" The Mathieu who impulsively moved in with Cédric to a total strange city can certainly understand that sentiment. (When Pierre asked Mathieu if he think he is lame, Mathieu replied that he thinks he seems `really together')
The movie concluded with Mathieu and Pierre coming across a lonely child in the beach (presumably his dad is also present but he was intentionally excluded from the frame). Pierre showed his paternal side by teaching the kid how to play football/soccer as Mathieu knowingly looking on. In the flashback, the naive and love-struck Mathieu was totally captivated by Cédric as he sang and danced in the buff at the beach, the post-depression, wiser and more mature Mathieu (something Pierre didn't fail to notice), once again sitting on a beach, now saw the side of Pierre that he knows he wouldn't find in Cédric.
I don't dare to say my interpretation is THE interpretation. But I hate to see people dismiss scenes as pointless and boring, went on to accuse the movie has no plot and provides no answer when the very scenes they dismiss provide the clues they are looking for. For that, I feel I have to put down my view.
reply
share
Keelton
17 years ago
You're welcome, leftbanker, and thank you for the kind words. I also agree that jobseeker's comments were excellent and thought-provoking.
You made a good point below when you said that it could be useful to concentrate on the emotions that Mathieu is feeling in each scene rather than to try to string the story together.
I would add this about the ambiguous ending. Yes, it's ambiguous. One could see it as a symbol for life itself. When you're 19 years old, who knows what's going to happen in the future? Nothing is tied up in a neat little bow, because the future is never clear. What's going to happen in the future in any of our lives, no matter how old we are? It harkens back to what Stéphane Rideau's character said at the end of Les roseaux sauvages, "There is something even tougher -- tougher than war. It's that life goes on."
After I watch a movie, I regularly come to IMDb to see what the good people here have said about it. The discussion here about Presque rien was very productive.
reply
share
vispateresa
11 years ago
@Keelton: very well said. As an Italian, neither I like the kind of "didactic" American movies where everything is explained to the viewer.
reply
share