Teyss
"Le Jour se lève" is a French cinema major classic and more specifically the lead title of "poetic realism" genre of the 1930s. Apparently simple in its form, it is an elaborate movie about hidden truth and apparent lies, with social background.*** WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS ***The movie is not the first one with flashbacks, but probably the first to use them so consistently and skilfully, two years before "Citizen Kane". There are three of them, surrounded by four "present" sequences. Interestingly, the latter are relatively consistent in duration and space: they all last between 6 and 11 minutes, occur between evening and dawn of the following day and happen in François' building or around. (As such, the movie follows the rules of classic tragedy: unity of time, place and action.)This contrasts with the flashbacks, which progressively condense time and space, building up dramatic intensity.Flashback 1 (22 minutes). Duration: three weeks. Locations: road to the factory, factory, outside Françoise's house (twice), Françoise's house, café.Flashback 2 (24 minutes). Duration: at most a few days. Locations: François' building, Clara's room (twice), café, greenhouse.Flashback 3 (7 minutes). Duration: real time. Location: François' room only.As we see, the condensation is threefold: length of the flashback itself, duration of the action, space where it happens. While the first and second flashbacks represent some mental escape (duration, exteriors, love, future plans), the third one loops back with the opening scene in terms of action, location and length. All this creates a sense of increasing pressure and inevitable tragedy, reinforced by the fact the "present" sequences also move progressively from exteriors to interiors and notably to François' room: there is no escaping the reduced environment and limited time; we are increasingly confined with François in his room during his last night. "It is a small world. It turns around, we meet again", Valentin says. Indeed: smaller and smaller, faster and faster.Additionally, to augur the tragic ending, the movie constantly hints references to death. François and Françoise both are orphans. François tells her: "It would be nice if everybody were dead and there were just the two of us". Valentin says: "I am coming back like a ghost". Clara tells François: "It seems you are informing me someone died". François shouts at the end: "François is gone!" The teddy bear that looks like him is shot. François is seen through his window and his mirror riddled with bullet holes.The contrast between present and past reveals another opposition: apparent versus hidden. The mystery of the murder at the beginning, behind a closed door, is only explained at the end. François looks healthy but his lungs are filled with sand. He is considered a nice fellow but will eventually commit murder. He has a happy eye and a sad eye. The deputy director has a nice garden close by the factory which inside looks like a nightmare. Valentin's show is a success but he tortures his dogs to achieve it. Françoise gives François her allegedly personal brooch that is actually Valentin's. Clara is understanding but cruelly hurts François on purpose by revealing the secret of Valentin's brooches. François says at the end: "Everybody kills, but secretly, little by little so it doesn't show". In a revealing scene, Valentin tells François he is Françoise's father. It is moving and we feel sorry for him. However, we later on discover it was a lie. But where is the truth? Does Valentin just want to manipulate François and Françoise? Or does he genuinely love her so much that he is willing to do anything? He is an ignoble yet complex character, magnificently played by Jules Berry.The apparent/hidden antagonism is visually illustrated by lights and shadows that frequently divide faces and bodies. Also, many shots through mirrors and windows show us reality is double-sided. And the recurring apparitions of the blind man (a cliché feature introduced with second-degree humour) tell us truth is not what we see.Characters also are antagonised: François (simple, frank, honest) versus Valentin (intelligent, manipulative, sleazy); Françoise (young, shy, apparently chaste) versus Clara (experienced, outspoken, flirty). So is society: opposition between workers and "artists", "simple" people and intellectuals, people and policemen, hard work and pleasure, living conditions and plans for a better life. François is a strong character but denied a proper existence: he dresses like a monster without a body and a face in the factory; he is dominated by Valentin's rhetoric; he lives isolated at the top of the town's tallest building; the police do not negotiate with him, they simply shoot; he shouts at the end, in a memorable monologue, "There is no François any more!"As a result, the movie manages to be both symbolic and realistic: working conditions, living conditions, social context just before WWII, close shots on important details (brooch, gun, burning cigarette). Ironically, at the end when François is dead, his alarm rings so he can wake up to go to work.A last note about the crew. The three main actors (Jean Gabin, Jules Berry, Arletty) are among the greatest ever in French cinema and it is their only common appearance. Notably, it is the only movie featuring all-famous Gabin and Berry together, which makes the contrast between their styles even more striking.Dialogues by Jacques Prévert (a major French poet) are simple, powerful and somewhat poetic. Scenery is the work of the master Alexandre Trauner: efficient reconstitution of the whole quarter, impressive usage of the building (e.g. fabulous travelling shot from top to bottom), minute reconstitution of François' room condensing his past. Cinematography is from another master, Philippe Agostini, and lightings from yet another, Curt Courant. A true dream team.Last but not least, Carné is an acclaimed director and "Le Jour se lève" is considered by many as his masterpiece, ahead of other classics such as "Port of Shadows" and "Children of Paradise".
bandw
The plot device of having a story begin with a pivotal event and then filling in the details as to how that event came to pass can be effective, as is illustrated here. The event is a murder and your interest is piqued as to the circumstances that provoked it. Details are supplied using flashbacks intermixed with events subsequent to the murder. As the movie progresses you can see potential motives develop, but it is not until the actual murder takes place that the mystery is resolved.The appeal of this film for me was in trying to understand the four main characters: François, a blue-collar worker who loves Françoise; M. Valentin, an unctuous older man who also loves Françoise; and Clara, Valentin's partner and François' mistress. John Gabin plays François as an ordinary man, but with a more complex personality than first meets the eye. He can be amiable and easy-going in most situations, but contentious and angry when pushed a little. I thought Gabin did a great job in integrating these disparate moods into a believable character. I am a bit mystified by his behavior after the shooting - I found his reaction of barricading himself in his room to be unusual. The murder was impulsive and, given the circumstances, could have been presented to an understanding jury in such a way as to yield a minimum sentence. So, why did François immediately behave in a manner to insure his doom? Did he see his future as hopeless? Was it anger bubbling to the surface at a society that he felt had kept him down? Was it to give himself time to decide what to do? This is where a novel may be superior to a movie - a novel could tell us just what François was thinking in his time of being holed up in his room.Françoise is played with seeming innocent sweetness by Jacqueline Laurent, but her character is also hard to figure. Her relationship with Valentin is never clear. She seemed to love François, but vacillated in committing to him apparently because of her relationship with Valentin. Jules Berry does a fantastic job in creating a unique and unforgettable character in his portrayal of Valentin. He has an appealingly glib charm but ultimately comes across as being offensive and pathetic. He is aware of his failings and his behavior is due in good measure to his self-hatred. But why did he taunt François in such a provocative and self-destructive way?And then there is Clara. She dissolves her partnership with Valentin and then takes up with François. What is François doing taking up with Clara when he really desires Françoise? That can't help. And what is Clara doing taking up with François when she knows he loves Françoise? As seen by François, Clara is a mistress, but is there more? Clara understands how François views her, but she develops a deeper attachment anyway. However, she is able to break things off with a world-weary detachment. Behavior is not rational I guess.As you might expect from director Carné, the black and white cinematography is creative and engaging. The script is tight; every scene has substance. Consider the scene where François first meets Françoise. François is at work in a line of men who are sandblasting heavy equipment. We see the miserable conditions of his workplace, but when Françoise comes on the scene he takes off his head gear and is quite tender with her. We learn a lot from that simple scene. And the scene showing Valentin's act with the trained dogs is transfixing and gives us a quick insight into his character. And the final scene is a memorable classic.As is shown, life is tenuous - a single impulsive act can change the course of your life.
