MovieChat Forums > La fille du RER (2009) Discussion > why?

why?

posted 14 years ago by thebucketrider
5 replies | jump to latest

I thought it was a real weakness of the film that it didn't offer an intelligible motive for Jeanne's charade. Her lie is positioned as the culmination of the "Circumstances" section, yet doesn't appear to be an intelligible consequence of what preceded it. The effect, for me, is to bisect the movie into two unrelated halves. The same girl is onscreen in both, yet for narrative purposes, it would hardly make a difference if it were a different one. Well, that's my initial perception--I'd very much like to be wrong about it. Did someone find that the events in the first half provided intelligible motivation for what follows? Jeanne's only explanation is that she wanted to be loved. Possibly she felt unloved after Franck ran her out of his room in the hospital but what she does hardly seems likely to mend that relationship. If anything, it would deepen the rift by showing him he had correctly pegged her as a liar. Am I missing something?

[–] billhk 14 years ago

I think Jeanne's motive is subtly positioned although we aren't shown her inner narrative - other than when she reveals to the boy that she thought she would be loved. If you put this in context: no money to go on holiday, can't write a resume without her mother's help, can't get a job, can't keep her boyfriend,... she has very low self esteem. As her boyfriend tells Bleistein at the end of the film: "She just says yes to everything". His "airhead" accusation stuns her and causes her to take action.
So in general I agree with your comments, but not your conclusion. For me this narrative ambiguity is a strength.
My main problem with the film, and this was mentioned in one of the user reviews on imdb, there are many lost opportunities with the editing. Several times I was thinking, oh, if only they had put those shots together like that.

As usual I love André Téchiné selection of music, it always evokes an era for me, Bob Dylan's "Lay Lady Lay" in the skating sequence in particular. (Although I didn't get the bagpipe music in the RER tunnel sequence at the start.)
One more comment. The French title "La fille du RER" says more than the English translation. In US terms perhaps it would be "The Girl on the Suburban".

[–] valis1949 14 years ago

Jeanne is someone who 'skates' through life, and avoids confrontation at all costs. This is why she says 'yes' to everything. Although the thug refers to her as an 'airhead', I think that he doesn't understand that she is using this attitude as a way of coping.

Jeanne has no 'inner narrative', because she is only 'surface'. She just glides through life with the least conflict possible.

Her motivation is primarily that she doesn't have or want one.

Excuse My Dust...

[–] PoppyTransfusion 11 years ago

Jeanne has no 'inner narrative', because she is only 'surface'. She just glides through life with the least conflict possible.

Good point. It reminds me that her self-inflicted wounds were described by the police doctor as superficial.

Why do you refuse to remember me?

[–] michaelexarkun 14 years ago

Even though she is onscreen for most of the film the audience isn't really told why she is the way she is, which is direction-less.
The only rationale to be discerned is that she wants to "matter", to be of significance, but the way she tries to achieve that is through lying instead of actually accomplishing something of note.

[–] spookyrat1 11 years ago

I think the film infers that she's been that way for a long time and circumstances have seen fit that she's never been brought to account over her compulsion to lie. I also agree with earlier posters who argue that her skating is a metaphor for the manner in which she approaches life, not really wishing to commit or fully engage with tasks and people.

I suspect Louise knows more about Jeanne's inner self than she reveals to other characters, but for her own reasons doesn't confront the issue with Jeanne.