I never thought that Jean-François knew it was St. Luc with him in the boat; his interior monologue implies otherwise, and it would make sense for the 'top man' in the Resistance to disguise his identity except with those he most trusted. When Jean-François says, 'The top of the pyramid meets its base; interesting mathematics; I must discuss it with St. Luc after the war', this might possibly be a subtle hint that he recognises his brother, but I find that a bit 'cute' and think it's much more dramatically satisfying to see it as ironic. It contributes to the sense of alienation that pervades all the relationships in the film - it's a situation where two brothers can be working side by side and not know each other, where the leader of the Resistance seems to be the person most completely detached from worldly cares, where the most heroic figures can be regarded as traitors, and where the Resistance end up killing one of their own just in case she gives them away; and of course, they think they 'know' that Mathilde would want to be gunned down, but her reaction when they encounter her on the street clearly indicates that she doesn't. But the moment in the boat is certainly open to interpretation.
Could be, and I like your reading of it thematically, but in simple practical terms
Spoiler
it's hard for me to believe that he wouldn't have been recognized. When we do see his face, he's wearing no disguise - did he take it off on his way down the ladder into the sub? He couldn't have left it in the boat. I also wouldn't describe his internal monologue as "cute" - it's his acknowledgment that, as much as he'd like to talk to his brother about all this, the timing is simply egregiously wrong to do so. It's a sign of his dedication to the cause above himself - which was questionable up to that point, I'd say, given that he's portrayed early as something of a thrill-seeker - and his willingness to deny his brother if the circumstances merit, which in turn foreshadows his eventual decision to give himself up.
(You've also omitted the first part of that quote, where he says something to the effect of, "Strange how the big chief looks just like anyone else", which implies that he did get to look at him.)
I actually think final scene with Mathilde is ambiguous, by the way, or at the least inconclusive. It's not like she tries to turn and run, after all, and no matter how mentally prepared she might have been to be gunned down, the actual realization that it's happening must come as quite a shock. The look on her face is appropriate either way, I think.
Yes, 'cute' was the wrong word - I suppose I just feel it compromises the specifically tragic irony that I like so much in the scene, but the way you put it just now makes me think your reading may be just as valid as mine. I think what Jean-François says in the boat is that the boss is a man of 'ordinary dimensions'; it's certainly 'dimensions' on the French track, which I took as referring simply to the man's size and shape. Also, the scene is meant to be taking place at night - the big difference in the submarine is that St. Luc's face is illuminated. But still, you're right that the practicalities are a bit awkward, and looking at it again Jean-François does seem to be glancing up at his passenger's face quite a lot. So it could work either way.
And yes, you're certainly right that the moment with Mathilde is ambiguous. I do think there's a look of surprise/horror in her face when she sees the gun: the men in the car stare at her as if waiting to see how she reacts, and then her eyes suddenly widen as if she can't believe this is really happening. Maybe she is choosing not to run, or maybe she is paralysed with fear. I seem to remember there was some ambiguity in the preceding conversation where Gerbier or St. Luc had said (to Le Bison) that Mathilde would want it this way, but then privately admitted to having doubts; they say she wouldn't be able to kill herself if she wanted to, but she obviously isn't under a 'suicide watch' or anything. This is one aspect of the story that always makes me feel as though I've missed something. Anyway, it's a perfect ending whether I fully understand it or not.
sloper wrote: I think what Jean-François says in the boat is that the boss is a man of 'ordinary dimensions'; it's certainly 'dimensions' on the French track, which I took as referring simply to the man's size and shape.
I did not realize this, but you're right, that does possibly change the meaning of what he says.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion. I still think he probably knows, but watching it again, I think I'll appreciate the potential ambiguity; if nothing else it adds the possibility of potentially fatal compromise to the situation on top of the irony.
Here's official confirmation that Studio Canal now has the rights to Army of Shadows. I'm sure we'll be seeing the other OOP Melville Criterion titles being released by Studio Canal now:
One of my favourite presses, Contra Mundum, is publishing a new translation of Joseph Kessel's Army of Shadows, the novel on which Melville based his movie. Apparently this is not only the first translation in 70 years, but the first edition since the movie's release.
That excerpt is quite intriguing if somewhat timely. It's good that Contra Mundum is still in business - and with recent translations of Godard and Baudelaire!
Since Godzilla got a better encode in the new set I figured maybe this could be slightly better, but that isn't the case. Other than the film now opening with the new Studio Canal logo (dropping the old one and the Rialto title card) it looks the same. So it's "okay," but that's about it.
Just out of curiosity, when Pierre Lhomme supervised the 35mm and digital restorations that were used for the belated U.S. release (2006 and beyond), was he able to match the look of the original 1969 release, or did he make any tweaks or changes?
hearthesilence wrote: Wed May 17, 2023 11:05 pm
Just out of curiosity, when Pierre Lhomme supervised the 35mm and digital restorations that were used for the belated U.S. release (2006 and beyond), was he able to match the look of the original 1969 release, or did he make any tweaks or changes?
[Lhomme] reveals that Melville wanted to shoot the picture in black-and-white, but the financiers mandated color. The filmmakers subsequently strove for images that were as desaturated as possible, leaning toward the blue tones. “Melville hated warm colors, so every effort was made to avoid them, and bright colors in general,” says Lhomme. In addition, a thin orange-yellow wash of paint was sometimes added to the set walls and later timed out by adding blue; this allowed the filmmakers to achieve paler skin tones while keeping the walls gray.
The restoration of Army of Shadows was initiated by Studio Canal with assistance from the CNC, the French National Center for Cinema. Lhomme was involved in the timing of the restored print and the digital master, working with restoration supervisor Ronald Boullet and color timer Raymond Terrentin at Eclair Laboratories. (Beatrice Valbin of Studio Canal shepherded the project from start to finish.) When asked whether the restored version matches the original 1969 print, Lhomme replies with a laugh, “I don’t remember what the original print looked like anymore!” The truth underlying his jocular response is that because the prints have faded, there is no absolute reference for the look of the timed print.
During production, Lhomme shot a reference shot, called a “Lily” in France, with a small grayscale for each setup. He kept a few frames of the negative of these Lilys and stuck them to the appropriate pages of his script. Prints from these Lilys served as a reminder of what was on the negative, and as a starting place for timing.
Lhomme notes that the digital-intermediate (DI) process allowed him to create a restored negative that is perhaps more faithful to Melville’s vision than the original print was, in that he was able to further desaturate the images and increase the blue tonalities. The DVD might be even more faithful, he continues, because it was a further refinement of the DI created for the new “digital” negative. “By doing the restoration of this film, I restored my own memories — no joke,” says Lhomme. “To restore is to discover, and 35 years [after I shot this film], I rediscovered it on the big screen and saw its extraordinary cinematic qualities.”
Original source: American Cinematographer, July 2007 pp. 62-70
I wonder what they'll do with the new 4K restoration announced by the CNC? (A 4K restoration was done several years before the pandemic, so this would be a second 4K restoration.)
It looks like StudioCanal will only be releasing this on UHD in France. In the UK it's only getting a remastered blu-ray for the time being. That's interesting.
