Ouiiiiiiiiii!!!!!!! |
Genre: Biography/Historical Drama
Directed: Andrzej Wajda
Stars: Gerard Depardieu, Wojciech Pszoniak, Anne Alvaro, Roland Blanche, Patrice Chereau, Emmanuelle Debever, Krzysztof Globisz, Ronald Guttman, Gerard Hardy, Tadeusz Huk, Stephane Jobert
Production: TF1 Films Production
I’ll be the first to admit I am far from an expert on the French Revolution. While my minor in college was history and I read regularly on the subject, the dismaying period of upheaval and chaos doesn’t fit into the narrative of clean-cut history defined by the reigns of Kings and the administrations of Presidents. What I do know about it are the basic causes, the main factions and the end result. I am familiar with the names Maximillian Robespierre, Jean-Paul Marat, Louis XVI and Jean-Jacques Rousseau but I have never heard the name of Georges Danton. If I were to take a class on the subject I’d probably fail.
It is the year 1793; the second year of the Republic and the
infamous days of terror are in full swing. Danton, who is portrayed in the film
by French actor Gerard Depardieu, makes his way into Paris to take his seat in the fractured
General Assembly. His possible political machinations frighten the
Revolutionary Tribunal headed by the cautious Robespierre played by Polish
actor Wojciech Pszoniak. They all want to place his head promptly on the
chopping block but Robespierre demands an audience with Danton first.
Directed by Polish auteur Andrzej Wajda, Danton (1983) is a crash course in
Republicanism run amok. Robespierre looks to create consensus between Danton’s
rival faction and the Tribunal. He doesn’t like Danton but he understands his
value as a man of the people and therefore is hesitant to simply round up his
allies and take them to the guillotine. Yet the clanking machine he and Danton
helped create is forcing him to take severe action to provide order. At one
point in the film Robespierre laments no matter what course he takes, the
revolution is dead.
Depardieu’s Danton is a boisterous foil to Robespierre’s
uptight revolutionary zeal. When he speaks, the whole room listens and his
public bloviating is tempered by a genuine need for good. Yet Danton isn’t a
blind idealist like he claims the Tribunal to be. “People want peace, stability
and bread, they don’t care where it comes from,” he mutters. He trusts the
people of France
to deliver him from execution and holds on to that ideal until the bitter end.
The film’s depiction of the reign of terror was meant to
mimic the Solidarity trade-union struggle in Poland happening around the same time
as the film’s release. Solidarity was the first non-party controlled trade
union in the Soviet block and was instrumental in spearheading free and fair
elections in Poland .
The foibles of that struggle were better highlighted in Wajda’s earlier film Man of Iron (1981). Yet that film was
released on the cusp of the martial law crackdown while Danton was released on the tale end of said crackdown. During that
time Wajda fled to France
after his production company in Poland
had been pushed into bankruptcy by the Communist party. He directed two films
before returning, the first was Danton
and the second was A Love in Germany
(1983).
Unfortunately while Wajda’s passion and personal bias are
prevalent in Danton, his technique
seems less assured than Man of Iron
or his other political works. Part of it may have to do with his habit of
employing Polish cinematographers including the famed Edward Klosinski. Outside
his element in France, his cinematographer Igor Luther (Who also worked on A Love in Germany) likely wasn’t on his
wavelength.
What results is an interesting history lesson and a lively
discussion on political theory but a film that feels static and overly
talkative. It provides little action or intensity and apart from the gravitas
of Depardieu and Pszoniak, there’s nothing holding it together. Even if you
were to settle for an old-school cloak and dagger flick, Danton only delivers
on the bare necessities. There are political maneuverings, alliances forged
then displaced, etc. But it’s all C+ work put together by an A+ director. As
for the subversive elements that define political drama? Let’s just say it needs
improvement.
Final Grade: C-
No comments:
Post a Comment