Hadewijch (Dumont)

[MacGuffin]

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/2293/hadewijch.jpg

From TIFF website (The film premieres at the Toronto International Film Festival):


Hadewijch is a religious novice whose ecstatic, blind faith leads to her expulsion from a convent. Returning to her former life, Hadewijch reverts to being Céline, a Parisienne and daughter of a diplomat. However, her passion for God, rage and encounters with Khaled and Nassir soon lead her down a dangerous path.

It definitely makes me wonder if this will be as challenging, provocative, or similar to his other stuff. It sounds a bit like maybe Bergman meets Bresson. I hope it's more like the movies he made before Flandres.

[trotchky]

I think this movie will be really bad.

[Boner M]

I think this movie will be really bad.
A Toronto premiere almost guarantees this, and it's been downhill for Dumont since La vie de jesus. I'm still hanging for him though; the latter is one of the best debut features in contemporary cinema.

[Qrazy]

A Toronto premiere almost guarantees this, and it's been downhill for Dumont since La vie de jesus. I'm still hanging for him though; the latter is one of the best debut features in contemporary cinema.

I prefer L'humanite.

[MacGuffin]

1. Twentynine Palms
2. La vie de Jésus

3. L'humanité







4. Flandres

[MacGuffin]

A Toronto premiere almost guarantees this,

Still don't get why people imply this.


and it's been downhill for Dumont since La vie de jesus.

I'll respectfully disagree, although that rivals Twentynine Palms as his best film probably. I have to see it again. They're both masterpieces if I recall correctly.


I'm still hanging for him though; the latter is one of the best debut features in contemporary cinema.

I agree.

[B-side]

I'm anticipating it, for sure.

[Rowland]

The only Dumont film I've seen is Flanders, which I found to be rather dreary in its formally immaculate misanthropy. If that picture captures his worldview, it's one I found terribly reductive and ugly.

[Qrazy]

The only Dumont film I've seen is Flanders, which I found to be rather dreary in its formally immaculate misanthropy. If that picture captures his worldview, it's one I found terribly reductive and ugly.

It probably captures his worldview but I've heard from most fans that it's his worst film. It's the only one I haven't seen. I'm not much of a fan though.

[B-side]

IFC picked it up for distribution in 2010 (http://www.ifcfilms.com/inside-ifc-films/bruno-dumonts-hadewijch-acquired). They're releasing it via On Demand as well.

[Milky Joe]

Recently been reading Hadewijch, so I'm pretty interested.

[soitgoes...]

Not having seen anything by Dumont before this really left me going in to my viewing with little expectations. I was aware of some craziness in his previous films, but I really had no idea exactly what those crazinesses might be. From what I've read Hadewijch was to be different. Still Dumont brings a strong spirituality, but he divorces himself from the violence and sex found previously in his films. The first thing to be noticed is the stunning cinematography and the wonderful performance of newcomer Julie Sokolowski who plays the titular character. There's some roughness here and there, namely a parallel plot line that seemingly has no correlation with the main story, only to conveniently merge at the end, which is itself a thing of beauty. While spirituality, and the excessiveness of it, might be the main theme, more interesting might be the way Dumont paints the dichotomy of the affluent white Parisian world and that of the impoverished Muslim suburban world.

[TripZone]

This (http://tativille.blogspot.com/2010/03/new-film-hadewijch-prophet-co-written.html)mirrored my own thoughts and feelings exactly, as is common with Anderson and myself, even down to the filmic references, all of which entered my mind except for the Rohmer.

I think this is perhaps the finest film of 2009, and the best I've seen from Dumont, which is all except Flanders. As for the alleged 'craziness' in his work, that only applies to Twentynine Palms, which has much sex and some devastating violence. The explicit sexual stuff in La vie de jesus, for instance, carries a nonchalance that is to my mind anything but exploitational. A big cock penetrating a vagina is bluntly and briefly an act of no significance.

Bresson runs rampant in his work. At least stylistically. The end is so beautiful I was moved to tears.

I found it interesting the cloister was shown visually to be burdened and overtaken by cranes and scaffolding. What drives Christianity today? The nuns expel Hadewijch for being too devout. She discovers Islam with some light contriving, and responds to its followers' extraordinary faith, obviously found lacking in Christians. But it leads her down a path she obviously rejects ultimately as a humanist.

[MacGuffin]

I think this is perhaps the finest film of 2009, and the best I've seen from Dumont, which is all except Flanders.

Good to hear. I didn't really think Flandres was all that impressive... quite disappointing really. I'm looking forward to this though. Twentynine Palms used to be my favorite Dumont, but now it's probably The Life of Jesus. For whatever reason, I don't get as excited about him as I used to, but I still think he's a major talent that never got the national recognition he deserved.

[soitgoes...]

This (http://tativille.blogspot.com/2010/03/new-film-hadewijch-prophet-co-written.html)mirrored my own thoughts and feelings exactly, as is common with Anderson and myself, even down to the filmic references, all of which entered my mind except for the Rohmer.

I think this is perhaps the finest film of 2009, and the best I've seen from Dumont, which is all except Flanders. As for the alleged 'craziness' in his work, that only applies to Twentynine Palms, which has much sex and some devastating violence. The explicit sexual stuff in La vie de jesus, for instance, carries a nonchalance that is to my mind anything but exploitational. A big cock penetrating a vagina is bluntly and briefly an act of no significance.

Bresson runs rampant in his work. At least stylistically. The end is so beautiful I was moved to tears.

I found it interesting the cloister was shown visually to be burdened and overtaken by cranes and scaffolding. What drives Christianity today? The nuns expel Hadewijch for being too devout. She discovers Islam with some light contriving, and responds to its followers' extraordinary faith, obviously found lacking in Christians. But it leads her down a path she obviously rejects ultimately as a humanist.I agree with a lot that both you and your link have to say. I haven't seen Mouchette to compare endings, but now I have a good reason (as if I needed one). A lot is handled so beautifully, it just makes me wish some of the smaller things were too. The David plot, while necessary to the film, was clunky and didn't seen to fit with the flow of the rest of the film, especially the mid-section. Her acceptance into an Islamic extremist group also comes off as far-fetched.

Overall, this is a film I really want to love, but I can't get by some of its faults.

[TripZone]

I agree with a lot that both you and your link have to say. I haven't seen Mouchette to compare endings, but now I have a good reason (as if I needed one). A lot is handled so beautifully, it just makes me wish some of the smaller things were too. The David plot, while necessary to the film, was clunky and didn't seen to fit with the flow of the rest of the film, especially the mid-section. Her acceptance into an Islamic extremist group also comes off as far-fetched.

Overall, this is a film I really want to love, but I can't get by some of its faults.

I think this so-called roughnes is excused for parable reasons. I also found, without knowing how his arc would come into hers, the ex-crim's independent scenes really nice, and curious. None of it felt off to me. I knew it meant something, or would at some point.

[soitgoes...]

I think this so-called roughnes is excused for parable reasons. I also found, without knowing how his arc would come into hers, the ex-crim's independent scenes really nice, and curious. None of it felt off to me. I knew it meant something, or would at some point.
Oh definitely. The randomness of it screamed to me that there was a point to it all. It's just his scenes break up the pacing of Céline's story after their lives part ways at the nunnery, she going home and he to jail. Those scenes, two I think, feel off regardless of their need, to me at least. I guess it can be dismissed due to the overall simplicity of the film. Dumont does a good job at times of trimming all the excess. The shot of her and Nassir on the train right before the explosion is probably the best instance of this. Her back turned to him, clearly stating that she has moved past this fanaticism, without having to vocalize or draw the scene out by pounding this home to the viewer. I guess I just want David's scenes to be more fleshed out in order to fit within the film better.

[soitgoes...]

One thing's for certain, this film will definitely attract a following. My own concerns over the film are just quibbles that I can't look past, but won't be a bother to others.

[TripZone]

Oh definitely. The randomness of it screamed to me that there was a point to it all. It's just his scenes break up the pacing of Céline's story after their lives part ways at the nunnery, she going home and he to jail. Those scenes, two I think, feel off regardless of their need, to me at least. I guess it can be dismissed due to the overall simplicity of the film. Dumont does a good job at times of trimming all the excess. The shot of her and Nassir on the train right before the explosion is probably the best instance of this. Her back turned to him, clearly stating that she has moved past this fanaticism, without having to vocalize or draw the scene out by pounding this home to the viewer. I guess I just want David's scenes to be more fleshed out in order to fit within the film better.

From what I can remember, after "linking" the two with the crane through the window, as Anderson speculated, we just see him go back to prison for a bit, and there's a scene with his mother. Surely, his arc is not meant to be fleshed out. We learn that he is a "sinner", and then that he vows to not sin again, if you will. This leads to his act of humanity at the end. I don't ask for anything more from his character in a traditional narrative sense, because he completely serves his purpose, and for my money, the total simplicity of his arc makes his final act all the more exquisite.

I certainly agree with the trimming of excess. This is nonexposition of the highest order. I did not consider what Anderson said of her "testing God" in that terrorism "scene" (shot?), but I think it's probably apt. There's clearly a piece missing after the explosion in which she leaves her newfound religion and returns to the cloister. I find this curious because I was informed that the Cannes cut was 20 minutes longer than subsequent screenings and this DVD release. I wonder if there was narrative padding there he ultimately, as again Bresson would, cut out for the inferrence on the audience's behalf that is enough.

[soitgoes...]

I certainly agree with the trimming of excess. This is nonexposition of the highest order. I did not consider what Anderson said of her "testing God" in that terrorism "scene" (shot?), but I think it's probably apt. There's clearly a piece missing after the explosion in which she leaves her newfound religion and returns to the cloister. I find this curious because I was informed that the Cannes cut was 20 minutes longer than subsequent screenings and this DVD release. I wonder if there was narrative padding there he ultimately, as again Bresson would, cut out for the inferrence on the audience's behalf that is enough.I had a hard time following the last 20 minutes or so because of this, but looking back on it it makes complete sense, and really helps contribute both to the power of the film and to what I was saying about the simplicity of the film. At first I couldn't comprehend how she went from being on a train, to explosion and then end up at the convent. He makes the viewer work to follow the progress. At first I thought she was on the train that blew up, both that didn't make sense. They planted the bomb in the station before the scene showing Céline and Nassir getting on the train. I also thought she was readmitted back into the convent, but I don't think this happened either. I think this is just where she ran to after she realized what she had done. I don't think there needs to be any more expository scenes added. Everything Dumont needed to say in the film at that point has already been presented to the viewer. I commend him to wrapping everything up. The scene I mentioned before, the one right before the explosion, was the one where Céline learned what she needed to learn. All that was left to do is ask for forgiveness (praying at the chapel) and receive redemption (the pond). There's no sense in dragging things on any more.

Ack, I just rewatched the ending again and it really is wonderful. I've convinced myself of bumping it up half a star.

[TripZone]

I had a hard time following the last 20 minutes or so because of this, but looking back on it it makes complete sense, and really helps contribute both to the power of the film and to what I was saying about the simplicity of the film. At first I couldn't comprehend how she went from being on a train, to explosion and then end up at the convent. He makes the viewer work to follow the progress. At first I thought she was on the train that blew up, both that didn't make sense. They planted the bomb in the station before the scene showing Céline and Nassir getting on the train. I also thought she was readmitted back into the convent, but I don't think this happened either. I think this is just where she ran to after she realized what she had done. I don't think there needs to be any more expository scenes added. Everything Dumont needed to say in the film at that point has already been presented to the viewer. I commend him to wrapping everything up. The scene I mentioned before, the one right before the explosion, was the one where Céline learned what she needed to learn. All that was left to do is ask for forgiveness (praying at the chapel) and receive redemption (the pond). There's no sense in dragging things on any more.

Ack, I just rewatched the ending again and it really is wonderful. I've convinced myself of bumping it up half a star.

I briefly considered that she may have died in the explosion, a suicide bombing, and that the final part was set earlier before she was ousted. I'd have to watch it again to see if that's even possible. But the look the mother superior gives her in the greenhouse suggests that they didn't even know she had returned to the cloister, and is thus set after the attack, but I could be wrong. Also, that would ruin the whole redemption thing unless seen as narrative-shaping-as-redemption a la Pulp Fiction.

I'm glad! :P

[soitgoes...]

I briefly considered that she may have died in the explosion, a suicide bombing, and that the final part was set earlier before she was ousted. I'd have to watch it again to see if that's even possible. But the look the mother superior gives her in the greenhouse suggests that they didn't even know she had returned to the cloister, and is thus set after the attack, but I could be wrong. Also, that would ruin the whole redemption thing unless seen as narrative-shaping-as-redemption a la Pulp Fiction.

I thought this too. The shot of the black crow in the garden when it was raining would also be a foreshadow (backshadow in this case) of her impending death. It would have to be placed before the actual beginning of the film. It doesn't work if inserted during the events of the opening scenes. The film's power works best if she doesn't die though. An interesting idea for sure, and if there are expository scenes that were cut after the bombing, perhaps it makes sense that the ambiguity was something that Dumont was going for.

I had also thought that the entire bombing sequence was an imagined event. The scene prior has Céline staring off over the Arab city, and then Dumont employs a fade to black. The explosion scene happens followed by another fade to black.

[TripZone]

I thought this too. The shot of the black crow in the garden when it was raining would also be a foreshadow (backshadow in this case) of her impending death. It would have to be placed before the actual beginning of the film. It doesn't work if inserted during the events of the opening scenes. The film's power works best if she doesn't die though. An interesting idea for sure, and if there are expository scenes that were cut after the bombing, perhaps it makes sense that the ambiguity was something that Dumont was going for.

I had also thought that the entire bombing sequence was an imagined event. The scene prior has Céline staring off over the Arab city, and then Dumont employs a fade to black. The explosion scene happens followed by another fade to black.

Very possible. It would achieve something similar...in that she rejects the idea of extremism, but out of consideration as opposed to practical means. But the police do pop up again in the final part, presumably for her. Speaking of the part where she meets the Islamic elders or whoever they were, she is wearing white, a stark contrast to the (I believe) uniformly blue of the rest of the film. Blue is commonly known as the colour used traditionally in religious works of art on prominent female figures (Esp. Mary) due to its relative expensiveness and thus denoted importance. That it derives from that traditionality is apt, being such a thoroughly religious work.

[soitgoes...]

Very possible. It would achieve something similar...in that she rejects the idea of extremism, but out of consideration as opposed to practical means. But the police do pop up again in the final part, presumably for her. Speaking of the part where she meets the Islamic elders or whoever they were, she is wearing white, a stark contrast to the (I believe) uniformly blue of the rest of the film. Blue is commonly known as the colour used traditionally in religious works of art on prominent female figures (Esp. Mary) due to its relative expensiveness and thus denoted importance. That it derives from that traditionality is apt, being such a thoroughly religious work.That could be explained away as they want to question her and her ties to her Muslim friends. I tend to think that our original thought, the most simple and straightforward thought, is the correct one. It works best in the context of the film, and is well, like I said, the most simple and straightforward. There's no sense convoluting a story that seems to be striving for simplicity from the start.

As to the colors, I think you're on to something. Blue is the color that most often represent Mary. White would be the color worn by a Muslim on the Hajj. I'm sure there is more that can be made of this.

[TripZone]

That could be explained away as they want to question her and her ties to her Muslim friends. I tend to think that our original thought, the most simple and straightforward thought, is the correct one. It works best in the context of the film, and is well, like I said, the most simple and straightforward. There's no sense convoluting a story that seems to be striving for simplicity from the start.

As to the colors, I think you're on to something. Blue is the color that most often represent Mary. White would be the color worn by a Muslim on the Hajj. I'm sure there is more that can be made of this.

Oh yes, pure speculation, and I too still think it's all quite literal.

Someone who studied religious art might be able to shed more light on those elements. I did take a subject in highschool on just that, but, you know.