Comments on: Au Revoir, Les Enfants: Reflective Motifs

By: The Cineastes #4 Au Revoir Les Enfants « Allan Gray’s Imagination

The Cineastes #4 Au Revoir Les Enfants « Allan Gray’s Imagination — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 18:54:52 +0000

[...] Crap Monster @ YGG’noise [...]

By: Joshua W

Joshua W — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 04:55:35 +0000

You make a great point there about the black market, which is sort of the flip side of the priest taking in the Jews in the first place. Both digressions into lawlessness are for completely separate reasons, so the fact that one leads to the others discovery and annihilation works as a kind of indictment of selfishness. Which ties into Malle’s constant questioning of the actions of the well off, it seems like Malle can forgive the children (even Joseph) who don’t understand the scope of their actions, like you say, but he’s intensely critical of the rich who put their blinders on, so to speak, so they don’t have to act benevolently.

By: Neil

Neil — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:48:51 +0000

Some interesting theories here… I’ll have to rewatch with all this in mind!

By: Crap

Crap — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:59:18 +0000

You may have a point. I too saw him as pitiful but I guess I sympathized with him to an extent because mainly the age difference between him and the younger boys. Then again, he was never really a redeemable character to start off with as you mention. Even though I mention that Julien himself is somewhat ambiguous in this regard especially at the beginning of the film, the mere presence of the surrogacy expresses a deep acknowledgment of Malle’s flaws, of which become redeemed at film’s climax.

I have to admit its not a point I dwelled on too long as it had little bearing on what I wanted to discuss holistically but found it an interesting facet of the film nonetheless.

I think overall, I saw the character of Joseph in a larger scheme that blurred the lines between a good/bad morality. Even the Nazi soldiers at the restaurant and the ones that pick up the boys after a game of war, seem redeemable in some way. There’s also lastly the sense that the boys are a microcosm for the war outside. People unaware that small actions lead to big consequences.

If we really delve in, we could argue that Bonnet would have been safely kept if Joseph and the other boys such as Julien himself did not practice the Black Market. Thus, Joseph would never have got kicked out and felt a need to sell out to the Gestapo. I wouldn’t put too much weight into this theory but its one that crossed my mind and thought Id mention.

Either way, appreciate the insightful comment and always welcome the criticism!

By: Joshua W

Joshua W — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 13:52:34 +0000

I always enjoy reading your posts, especially how you always seem to have a different vantage point, either historically or aesthetically.

I agree with you on most of your points, and as the general buzz on Au Revoir, Les Enfants has been overwhelmingly positive, I daresay there’ll be little dissent in the ranks of The Cineastes this time around.

That said, I’d like to disagree with you on one point, namely that Joseph receives as much sympathy as Julien. Perhaps it’s just me, but I’ve always seen Joseph as a pitiful character, never really coming at things straight ahead. When he’s being bullied we see him resist but only in a very superficial fashion, as if he accepts his inferior status. This is emphasized by the scene where he brings up his leg injury as if he’s given up before he’s really put forth an effort. The ending goes along with this as he takes a superior standpoint to Bonnet, proclaiming that he’s “just a jew”. He can’t take anything on an even keel despite his ability to be an average, relatively understandable person, and so he only justifies his betrayal by pretending to be above him, something that makes him even more despicable. Were he to admit his weakness I would’ve found him just as sympathetic as Julien, but he makes no effort to come clean, something which Julien (as Malle’s surrogate) does in making the film.