a dying society: abel gance’s end of the world
by Douglas Messerli
Jean Boyer, Camille Flammarion, Abel Gance, and André Lang (screenplay), Abel Gance (director) La Fin du Monde (End of the World) / 1931
Abel Gance’s 1931 film End of the World
certainly did represent the “end” of a very important thing: the director’s
career as a great cinema pioneer. The original film, lasting more than three
hours, was edited down by his producer Vladimir Ivanoff — with a janitor, so
Gance quipped — to 105 minutes. The acting, moreover, as a critic of the day,
Philippe Soupault, wrote, “is a mixture of the pretentiously naïve and the
blatantly unrealistic, of the pompous and the trivial.” Gance, playing the role
of Jean Novalic, a suffering philosopher-actor idealist, helplessly in love
with the film’s heroine, Genevieve de Murcie (Coloette Darfeuil), was
particularly morose and melodramatic in his declamations. Darfeuil’s
performance was also more in line with the gestural acting traditions of silent
films.
In
fact, had this movie been a silent film, it might have gotten away with its
melodramatic conventions, but as one of the first French talkies, released just
as Jean Renoir, René Clair, and Jacques Feyder were coming into their own, it
was doomed. Gance’s acclaimed career quickly took a nosedive.
Yet, for all that — and despite the fact that the acting and plot both
are, at moments, nearly unbearable to watch — End of the World is a
fascinating piece of filmmaking. Very much of its day, with World War II
fulminating across the European landscape, the film is based on Camille
Flammarion’s pre-World War I novel, Omega: The Last Days of the World.
Gance
and his co-writers took the science-fiction drama of that novel as a metaphor
for what was happening in world politics, suggesting that perhaps only the
impending death of everyone on the planet — in this iteration through the
cataclysmic crash into earth by Lexell’s Comet — might possibly bring the
nations together just long enough to escape the devastation of the impending
World War. In short, Gance uses science fiction as a potential avenue to avert
the inevitable destruction that actually faced his own audience.
The
film is, at least in its metaphors, quite prophetic: the world is almost
destroyed, devastating numerous cities and cultures, yet is saved for its
tortured survivors. Forget the twisted plot, wherein the idealist Jean’s
brother, Martial (Victor Francen), a great scientist and Martial’s financier,
Werster (Georges Colin) attempt to save the world from the Machiavellian forces
of the (unstated but obviously Jewish) wealthy munitions supplier, Schomburg.
The blonde beauty Genevieve, in a series of reversals that strain credulity,
falls from grace to decadence — and is punished with death in the elevator of
the Eiffel Tower.
The
story is simply a froth stirred by Gance (and Flammarion before him) into their
moral denunciation of impending war(s) and the end of the world as they know
it.
The
real issue of this movie is the salvation of mankind in a manner that few
filmmakers of the day might have bothered to express it. For comparison one
might just mention Renoir’s — far aesthetically superior but entirely satirical
— The Rules of the Game released at the very edge of the war in 1939. In
1931 Gance was entirely serious; he clearly saw the dangers and was willing, at
least, to treat the issue with a dire seriousness, perhaps to his own
detriment. (I should note that by the time The Rules of the Game reached
French audiences, they could no longer laugh at the approaching devastation. It
makes one wonder whether anyone looked back at Gance’s drama with regret for
having mocked it.)
There is the night scene in which the lights from a flotilla of boats
are paralleled by a sky lit-up by fireworks — just moments after Novalic has
discovered that the Earth is to be destroyed by a comet in 114 days. Even if
one ignores the surrealist, slightly disturbing, symbolism of white pigeons
perched on the body of the dying Jean Novalic, who can dismiss the dynamic mese-en-scène
during the attempts by Novalic’s forces to take down the broadcasting tower
atop the Eiffel Tower. Few films before the 1960s can compare with the sheer
technical intensity of this battle. Here the film cuts are incomparable.
Too
bad that this movie came at a moment in French culture when people were
desperate for something “new”; by decade’s end at they would be doomed by the
old.
Los Angeles, May 30, 2016
Reprinted from Hyperallergic Weekend (April
10, 2016)
No comments:
Post a Comment