Discover French Cinema : Of gods and men

I admit, I am by no stretch of the imagination a religious person. Quite the opposite, to be honest. That doesn't mean I do not respect other people's beliefs, as long as I'm paid the same respect. It's easy to see that faith can create extraordinary things, such as at cathedrals and churches for example. Faith can make human being go beyond the reasonable.

 'Of Gods and Men' is the story of a monastery in the Algerian countryside during the Algerian civil war in the mid 90s, where the monks got brutally murdered. It is a true story. It's a shame the movie, which won the Grand Prix at the Cannes festival, along with quite a few other accolades, is not better known outside of France. And it's a shame the event, as well as the historical context are also barely known (outside of France at least).

Yes, you may not have heard about it, but there was a civil war in Algeria in the mid 90s. It's been talked about very little around the world, even in France, in fact the events at Tibhirine have been talked about much more than the civil war. An estimated 150,000 people died during the civil war, so why should have a movie about the death of 7 monks?

In a sad way, the events of Tibhirine perfectly embody the events of the Algerian civil war. Brutally murdering monks who were bringing, amongst other things, medical and moral support to the local community, makes no sense at all. Going against the welfare of their own people is not the right way to lead a revolution, yet this is exactly what happened in Algeria.

And as we don't know much about what happened outside of the big Algerian cities during the revolution, there is still a shroud of secrecy and uncertainty around the murders of the monks. The bodies have never been found, only the heads have been interred (so just enough to identify them). There are still doubts over who committed the crime. The movie clearly accuses the Armed Islamic Group of Algeria, and they claimed responsibility, but the lack of official enquiry does not help in proving this, and there is still suggestion it might have been a mistake by the Algerian Army.

The acting is understated, as you would expect, the subjects being monks. Lambert Wilson, of Matrix fame, in playing brother Christian, shows his range of emotions. The directing style also reflects the subject at heart. Quiet, no unnecessary dialog, a lot of reflective scenes, and in contrast, very noisy, fast shots when the terrorists/rebels appear. It's not all pious reverence, some of the scenes are borderline blasphemous (their last supper is, well, reminiscent...)

Ultimately, this movie questioned my relationship with religion. As the monks had to decide whether they should leave while they still could, or, fully knowing the dangers they were facing, stay within the community they've been living in for so long. As an atheist I would say that men took that decision, because they were good men. A more religious person than me would say that  their religion made them good men, who had to stay. The movie shows the best, and the worst of what faith, organised religion can be and do. But more than anything else, it is, to me, a human movie, the choice of a group of human beings, driven by faith, sure, but mostly driven by their desire to do what's right. And for this, this is an inspiring, if sad movie.

'Of Gods And Men' is available for rent on Lovefilm, and to buy on DVD and Bluray

It's the story of three guys, miles away from home.

The word hero is so overused these days. It's difficult to pin it to one individual, or one team. I dislike the bastardisation of language. Look at the Olympics, the papers, and in the UK, the red tops, were quick at calling the gold medals winners heroes. Are they heroes? They're athletes, they're winners, nobody can contest that. 

I'm writing this today, because Neil Armstrong passed away yesterday. A man who was so unwilling to be called a hero.

Of course, he wasn't the only one involved in that little trip to the Moon. It's the story of a team. It's the story of Nasa, a government organisation that has constantly pushed the boundaries of research for more than 50 years. It is a part of history. It is a story of men.

July 20th. 1969. Three men, in a spaceship barely bigger than your average bedroom, 240,000 miles away from home, had to make a decision. Read that again. 3 men. Orbiting the moon. 240,000 miles away. In the equivalent of a caravan, suspended over a round piece of rock nobody knew anything about. Where they wanted to land.

Now, they didn't choose any old men. Buzz Aldrin (his wife's maiden name is Moon. Spooky!) was a Korean war veteran. A fighter pilot. He declined joining MIT to go to the Air Force. Michael Collins (who decided to stop smoking after a particularly bad hangover in 1962) accumulated more than 1500 hours flight before applying to be an experimental test flight pilot (fair enough, it is the minimum required). And Neil Armstrong? Well, he was trusted to be the captain of Apollo XI. And the first man to walk on the moon. Your average team then.

Still, imagine being in a caravan hovering over a very distant land. No SatNav. There was more processing power in my first computer, the ZX81, that there was in the CM-107, or the LM-5. 

And yet, Neil Armstrong still didn't want to be called a hero. 

There are nearly no pictures of Neil Armstrong on the surface of the moon, but one picture, I think, I hope, shows who he was, and what he wanted to convey.

To me, this is the picture of a man, of an engineer, of a professional, of a groundbreaker. This is a picture of a team member , of a team captain clearly showing "We did it". This is a picture of a man who didn't want to be a hero, but wanted to be an inspiration.

This is how I will remember you Mr Armstrong. You did it. Again. An inspiration.

Edit : Here is the full transcript of Neil Armstrong's speech at Nasa's 50th year anniversary. Just in case you weren't sure the man was an inspiration.

Discover French Cinema : Buffet Froid

And you thought the French didn't do dark comedy...  

Buffet Froid. An UFO (unidentified filmic object) of a movie, directed by an UFO (unidentified filming object) of a man.

Bertrand Blier. it's fair to say that he has spent his career courting controversy, challenging, and more often than not, downright insulting French society. But we always forgive our geniuses, and Bertrand Blier's cinematic output is nothing short of genius, at times even flirting with perfection. It was incredibly tough to pick one movie to introduce Bertrand Blier. "Les Valseuses", "Too beautiful for you", "Grosse fatigue" or "Beau-pere" were all very good contenders, and I'm not saying I might not post about them on a later date. I chose Buffet Froid simply because I had the DVD handy. 

How do I even start describing Buffet Froid? As most of Bertrand Blier's movies, it is based on a story as threadbare as possible. An empty residential apartment block, three main characters, a slow descent in the absurd, the paranoia and the murdering madness, there is simply no movie long connecting story thread, it just goes wherever it needs to go, wherever the characters want to go. And yet it makes complete sense. In no particular order, within the movie you will have 9 murders, a widow raping doctor, a (pretend) heart attack at a Brahms concert in a bourgeois house, a blatant abuse of police force, a not so relaxing forest getaway, a double crossed, train loving hired goon, a rowboat assisted killing, a cold avenging daughter and a nightmare laden nymphomaniac. Amongst many other things. And yes, it is a comedy, albeit a very dark one.

It is, of course, not a laugh out loud comedy. This is a constant drive towards insanity, but more importantly, this is a constant drive to absurdity. None of the characters in the movie react to the events as you would expect. In fact, their reactions being so diagonal to the situations is the main source of the buffoonery, the absurdity which makes this movie a comedy, and not a thriller or an horror movie. It is pretty close to the "Grand Guignol" French tradition. It lulls the viewer in a strange, alternative, absurd reality, where we question the right and wrong, as we want to cheer the characters despite their ever increasing lawlessness and amorality.    

Are they even characters? The three main protagonists are played by a triumvirate of French legends. Gerard Depardieu (a self confessed useless police fearing unemployed) is the most known outside of France, Bernard Blier (a classical music allergic police inspector, and yes, he is the director's dad) and Jean Carmet (a deceitful, conniving and ultimately cowardly women murderer). Bertrand Blier, the director, leaves a lot of leeway to the actors. As in most of his movies, it's difficult to tell if they are playing a character, or just being themselves thrown in an absurd situation (he will eventually push this idea to its logical conclusion in "Grosse Fatigue" and "Actors" where the actors play themselves while not being themselves. It makes sense, I promise!) He blurs the line between acting and reacting. The result is an absolute tour de force in acting, not only from the three main actors, but from everybody involved. The opening scene, featuring Depardieu and another French acting legend, Michel Serrault, sets the stage with its near perfect acting, dead pan humour and overall absurdity. One of the best, most memorable opening scenes in French cinema.

The characters impersonate the superficiality of modern city living, fast becoming what appears to be friends, while at the same time having no qualms leaving one of them behind, attempt to murder each other, or even falsely pointing one of them to a contract killer.  Despite that unusual relationship, the bond they form is of the "us vs them" variety, a Sartrian "Hell, it's the others" view of the world, where everybody else is a suspect, and a threat. I could write for pages about the critic of high rise living, about the release date, 1979, being at the door of the 80s, the materialism decade, but it is so obvious, so prevalent in the movie that there is no need to. Maybe this is the real story.

Bertrand Blier is one of my most cherished French director, one of the most, if not the most accomplished, and yet he is barely known outside of France. Buffet Froid may not be the best introductory movie ("Les Valseuses" is more of an out and out comedy), but in his filmography it is the beginning of his more involved work, deeper and darker, approaching difficult subjects with a surprisingly light touch. Without "Buffet Froid" there wouldn't be "Tenue de soirée" or "Too beautiful for you". I am surprised he is not known more, especially in the UK. His very particular brand of absurd comedy has a Pythonesque quality to it. You owe it to yourself to discover Betrand Blier. You'll thank me for it!

Treat me with the respect I deserve, I am a customer

"Salesmanship is the gentle art of letting the customer have it your way."
Ray Kroc (1902-84) Chairman of McDonalds

Online life. Some say that cyberspace is better than meatspace. And sometimes it is. More and more of our time, and our money, is spent online. I have to fill my phone with apps. I buy books. I buy tickets. I join social networks. I try new cloud based services. With mixed results, I have to say. And some of my recent experiences online prompted me to write this post. Why are customers treated so badly online?

I recently bought an app for my iPhone on the App store (myPad, if you want to know). I quickly found out that the reason I bought it, to get a better Twitter client than the official one, was broken. It couldn't connect to my Twitter account at all. Of course I tried to get some support. The developer of the app only have a Facebook page. Hardly a shining example of customer support. After about a week, they suggested a dangerous fix (disabling the secure browsing from my Twitter account) and it still didn't work. It will be fixed in an upcoming update, apparently. Needless to say, I'm still waiting.

I don't think it's unreasonable of me to conclude that I have been sold broken goods. And when sold broken goods, I do expect my money back. So I took the plunge and read the iTunes store terms and conditions (I lie, I searched for "refund"). It makes for an interesting reading. If I understand it correctly, the only way you will get a refund from Apple, is if they physically can't deliver the app to you. No mention of refunds for broken apps. Sure, the app was only 69p, but as a customer, aren't I to expect to be treated with a bit more respect?

Last year I attended the Internet World expo in London. The event is free, you just have to sign up. And that's where the trouble began. I kept getting emails from them. A lot of emails. I tried to unsubscribe from their mailing list, only to find out I seem to end up on another mailing list. I've unsubscribed 6 or 7 times so far, I've lost count. As the event calls itself the "biggest annual event for digital marketing", it's very ironical that they themselves use spammer tactics.

These are only a couple of the many annoyances that can be found when being a customer online. As I have mentioned before in my post about the cloud, technology moves a lot quicker than legislation, and we now found ourselves in a situation where the customer has very little protection online. In general, these seems to be a constant race to the bottom when it comes to dealing with customers.

So here are a few tips, from consumer me, for online businesses startups. 

- Don't sell broken goods. I'm rather amused I have to mention it. That's the foundation of a sound business. 

- Facebook is not a support portal, don't use it as one. Twitter even less so. Having an online forum, or at least a support email address is not exactly expensive these days. It's a natural reaction to question the seriousness of a company without a solid online presence.

- In general, offer some responsive, useful and personalised support. Promising an update "in the future" is not support. 

- Let me try your product without strings attached. I know, it's not possible to have a demo on the app store, but when I see a site like this , I'm not really compelled. I don't know what the product is, whether it would fit my needs, so I don't see why I would sign up. It's like you really don't want to sell me something.

- Unregistering should be as easy as signing up. If you can develop an easy way to sign up, you can develop a similar way for me to unregister and remove my details from your site. Anything else, like having to email, or worse, phone is like taking me hostage. It's your job to make your service compelling enough to keep me interested.

- Be sensible with what access rights you are asking when signing up with Facebook or Twitter. I can't see why you would require write access to my wall or timeline. And even less  why you would require access to my friends list. I will assume you want to spam them.

- In advertising, sometimes less is more. A site with two or three autostart video ads do not make sense to me. it all ends up a noisy mess, and I have to run around the page stopping all of them. It goes against the purpose of advertising, really.

Attracting customers is a perpetual battle in our online world. Most companies do a rather good job at differentiating their product from others, but for some reason, when it comes to how they treat their customers (or potential customers) they elect to offer no more than their competing companies. I don't think it's merely a question of costs. It's an accepted, or maybe tolerated state of affair. A lot of these companies are startups who probably don't have long term plans, just to grab the money and run. However, with an ever increasing amount of businesses fighting for the online consumer, it is necessary to offer more. To offer better.

Respect is mutual. Respect your customers, and they will respect you. It's a simple concept.

Steam room politics

One thing I look forward to after a good training session, is a relaxing moment in the steam room. I do alternate the sauna and the steam room, but I have to admit the steam room is my favourite. At least it was until recently. Apparently some people complained that the steam room was too hot, that it was too steamy (well duh!). So the management changed the steam machine settings, and now the steam room is, well, less steamy. A lot less. Which, somehow, makes it a lot less satisfying. The whole point of a steam room, is to be, well, steamy, right? Some people complained, and now my post training treat has disappeared. And apparently I'm not the only one, because I've noticed the steam room is now empty most of the time, whereas it was constantly in use before the change.

What am I to do? I'm a customer after all. Of course the first thing would be to point to the empty steam room, and suggest that maybe changing the settings was not such a good idea after all. Which is what I did. No dice. The management washes their hands off the issue. I can understand their point, It starts like this, and then the people who originally complained would do so again... And that's the start of a never ending loop. So they're going to leave it like that. Empty. Unused. That's a blow to my post training treat. But I don't give up that easily. I am a customer, and damn you I want my steam room relaxation time! So I asked. How many people complained? Two. Yes, you read that right. A vocal minority robbed me of my treat. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for minorities being able to express themselves, and to be heard. But just because these two complained, they not only got their wish, there is now no way back. The complainers won because they were the first to do so. Us steam room users perfectly happy with the previous settings never said a thing. Well, we didn't have to, did we? Shall we remind the management every day that we're happy with the way things are going? Don't change a thing, it's all fine! 

Or maybe they just complained repeatedly? Were they lobbying? Was there a powerful, if small, lobby behind the decision to make the steam room benefit the minority rather than the majority? Some dark forces at work?

As you may have noticed, I'm not a fan of lobbying. It is a necessary evil. As a principle, it's not a bad idea, it's probably better to have knowledgeable people defend the interest of a specific group by having a direct relation with the government. It slightly goes against the idea of politicians defending the interests of their citizens and voters by giving more importance to these specific groups. My biggest problem with it though, is that it is money driven. Lobbying costs, so no prize for guessing who the lobbyists defend. The wealthy minority, the corporations, and certainly not the public interest. There is, in my opinion, a very fine line between lobbying and corruption, one which is too easy to cross.

Have you ever wondered why the nutrition information labeling system is so confusing in the UK? The food and drink industry has been lobbying the government for years to avoid making it too clear... It would go against the interests of quite a few large companies making a lot of profit selling unhealthy foods. There is also lobbying in the other direction, so law is changing now, but until I see it in action, I will remain dubious (my natural state). How about those new nuclear power stations? Yup, the nuclear power lobbyists worked very hard on that. In fact, right now, and despite the Fukushima disaster, lobbyists in the UK and France are working even harder to water down the safety checks... Makes sense, right? And definitely in the interest of the majority. (If you want more information on lobbying in the UK, this is the site to visit)

I'm not foolish enough to believe that lobbying will disappear anytime soon (that would be like believing that banks will be regulated soon! Comedy, right?). In fact I am increasingly a believer in the power of businesses over government. Lobbying is just one evidence of it. And I also believe that this involves all businesses, not just the big corporations. And even though in the last few years we have seen the limits of an abused economical system, I do not believe that capitalism is in itself a threat. Just as guns don't kill people, capitalism does not create inequality or greed. People do. 

Of course, it would be very dishonest of me to pretend I'm anti-capitalist. After all, I work in technology, both a consumer, and generator, of large amounts of capital. I have had my own business (though it turned me into a pauper rather than a capitalist) and will certainly do so again. I enjoy working for small, growing businesses when generating revenue becomes the priority. It doesn't make me any less of a man of convictions. Let's say my convictions are, well, slightly leaning on the left. These two parts of me do not have to be antithetic.

Capitalism, and as a natural extension, businesses, do get a lot of bad press. Fat cats, golden parachutes, bonuses, tax avoidance, I will not pretend that these are in any way acceptable. It does not have to be that way. We can have a responsible capitalism. The sole pursuit of profit is a stale system, one that needs to be kicked and shaken into the 21st century. One that benefits both businesses and the general interest, the community. 

Point in case : education. At the moment, high tech businesses struggle to find enough employees. Experienced developers are extremely expensive and in short supply. Graduates are very rarely up to date with the latest technologies, so the businesses have to finish their education at a large cost, while the students get into debt studying for out of touch degrees. How about these businesses fund their education? Part time university, part time on the job training?

Here's a change businesses can do RIGHT NOW. Divert some of the large pile of money you spend on marketing, and use that money to benefit the community. Fund a local school, a charity, train some down and out kids, start a food bank, the possibilities are endless. I guarantee that people will be talking about your company. You'll get the same results, if not better than with marketing, and you'll have good karma. Something in short supplies these days.  

I know what you're thinking. I've gone off the rails again. Gone completely loopy. All this is impossible. It's your opinion. Getting a seemingly impossible result does require supernatural amounts of dedication and conviction, and a certain amount of insanity. Enough insanity to doubt the established order, to question the current status-quo. In dreams begins responsibilities is more than a short story. I could also quote Einstein "If the idea is not at first absurd, then there is no hope for it". I dare to dream of absurd ideas. Frankly, it beats standing alone in an empty, steam free steam room. 

Post-scriptum : The people have prevailed, the steam room is nearly back to its best and I can now again enjoy getting sweaty after, well, getting sweaty.

Discover French cinema : Boudu saved from drowning

For the first post in my new "Discover French cinema" series, I attack straight on with a movie which is certainly not the easiest, or the most watchable I could have selected. To start with "Boudu saved from drowning" is to start with an absolute monument of French cinema. The French title is now an integral part of the French language, an expression we use to mock slightly eccentric people. Released in 1932, and adapted from a play, directed by Jean Renoir and starring Michel Simon, both heavyweights in French cinema, it is what is considered one of Jean Renoir's masterpieces. Jean Renoir himself is a controversial figure in French cinema (he was renown for his large porn collection and his strange sexual practices), and it is sometimes suggested that he had more than a little of Boudu's character in him. One of the controversies surrounding the film is the change of ending from the play to the movie, radically twisting the meaning of the play. Its author, Rene Fauchois, even threatened to remove his name from the credits. 

In fact, it is so famous in France, that I have to admit that I have always assumed, and I'm sure a lot of French are in the same case, that I had already seen it. Until recently, I hadn't.  

Boudu is a tramp, who one day, after losing his only companion, his dog, in a park, decides to end it all by jumping in the river Seine. He is saved by Mr Lestingois, a bookseller, who invites him home to recover. Mr Lestingois, amused by the antics of the decidedly unrefined Boudu, takes the man under his wing, and tries to convert the marginal Boudu to the ideal of the Parisian Bourgeois etiquette, with mixed, and most of the time hilarious results. Not short of a few laugh out loud comedy moments, "Boudu saved from drowning" is, however, much more than a rags-to-riches, simple feel-good comedy. There is a very, very dark undercurrent running throughout the movie.

This is, first of all, a 30s movie, a fact that should not be forgotten. That includes the rampant sexism of the times, the house maid is also Mr Lestingois' mistress, while the wife spends most of her time just looking good, being moody and concerned about the house's decoration, and the man, Mr Lestingois, is thoroughly bored of his repetitive life (I feel sorry for him, having to juggle a good looking wife and a young mistress). So when Boudu, the rebel, the iconoclast, the anarchist, but also the lost soul invades his life, he sees him as a nice little project, one that can drag him out of the boredom of his daily life. While Boudu's behaviour shocks the women, Mr Lestingois seems very amused by it all. Saving Boudu, educating him, making him a stand up man becomes his hobby. It would be fair to ask,however, who is really saved here? Boudu? or Mr Lestingois?

It is fair to say that for a movie dating from l'age d'or of cinema, the characters are far more complex than they originally appear.

Mr Lestingois, despite living the typical Parisian Bourgeois life, aspires to a more exciting life. He wants to remain inconspicuous, mostly so he can carry on his affair with his live-in mistress, but the bookseller's interest in philosophical books from the French revolution era hints at an unsettled and angry man. Boudu is genuinely a mystery. It is very difficult to comprehend Boudu's character. Is he a simple man? Is he an idiot savant? An evil genius? At times charming, at times disgusting and at times genuinely frightening, we are not given a definite answer. Despite being hidden behind the sheer brilliance of Michel Simon's physical comedy, the complexity of the man pervades the entire movie.

And the movie itself is a mystery. Even though it sometimes gets close to the myth of l'enfant sauvage, the wild child plucked from nature to be educated by the bienveillant bourgeois, Boudu is not a child, and seems to know exactly what he's doing despite the appearances. Is he manipulating the Lestingois?

Behind the comedic appearance, the movie is a strong critic of class struggle in the France of the early 30s. Let's not forget that only four years later, the popular front and government of Leon Blum would sign the Matignon agreements, still the cornerstone of French workers right, with such advances as the right to strike, the 40 hours week and paid vacations. It is a movie with an anarchist background, rather than converting Boudu to the Bourgeois etiquette, he fully subvert the Lestingois, people he doesn't need, but who need him in return.

Technically, Renoir's photography is painfully beautiful, and way ahead of its time. Some of the shots, especially towards the end, really emphasize the dreary feeling that not everything is quite right in the world of the Lestingois, and especially the forced four-way relationship between the main characters. There is a particularly ground breaking scene where none of the characters (each one of them in a different room) can fall asleep until Boudu falls asleep. The translation from French to English is decent, even though it misses the point and rhythm of most of the best quotes from the movie. However, I admit it is incredibly difficult to translate the grammatical mistakes in Boudu's speech, which defines much of his character and also defines an aural separation from the bourgeois Lestingois.

Complex, deep, revolutionary, beautiful, funny and ultimately a very entertaining if slightly draining watch, "Boudu saved from drowning" is a defining cornerstone of French cinema. It is far more than what it appears, and develops a story and characters with great mastery and an ever present sense of exultation. It is an opulent movie, moral, educational without being elitist. And that, for me, defines great French cinema as it has been since and as it still is now. 


Here is a little sample of the movie : Boudu is asked to polish his shoes.

Discover French cinema : An intro

A while ago, I posted a review of "The Artist", and it was a reasonably successful post. As a film buff born and bred in France, it has always been a slight disappointment to know that some of my favourite movies never left France and are stuck behind the language barrier. 

So it always gives me great pleasure when I discover that some French classics are made available outside of France, usually with subtitles, either in the cinema or on DVD or Bluray, or in the UK for example, on streaming services such as Curzon on demand. The demand for more, and better quality content, and with the democratization of foreign culture I hope we will see more and more.

So I decided to start a little series about some of my favourite French movies, most of them famous in France but virtual unknowns in the UK (or elsewhere). I will limit myself to review movies I know are available n DVD or Bluray in the UK (and they are generally available in other territories too), and also to movies I personally love.


I will try extremely hard to not be elitist in my choice of movies. From black and white classics to comedies, no movie is out of my range. It's not like I'm short of options anyway. The French cinema industry has always been very creative and productive, and has a very diverse output. Sure, these movies are not Hollywood blockbusters, but you'd be amazed at the amount of Hollywood movies and directors inspired by French movies. And of course, now, quite a few French directors work in Hollywood, but got their movie education the same way I got mine : By watching French movies.

I hope you will find these reviews interesting and that they will inspire you to discover these movies, and more of the output of the French cinema industry. It needs all the help it can get!