An article by Jamie Stuart

The following is a transcript from a conversation I had last fall with French filmmaker Claire Denis. We met while she was in town for the New York premiere of her latest feature “Friday Night,” at The New York Film Festival. She wasn’t feeling well, a bit of a cold, but she certainly managed to embarrass me, unintentionally of course, by repeatedly pronouncing, “Penis,” very loudly in the restaurant. And with a French accent to boot! Later, I attended the Lincoln Center premiere and took some photos of Claire, along with pals and collaborators Jim Jarmusch and Isaach De Bankole.

“Friday Night” stars Valerie Lemercier as a woman who picks up a man, played by Vincent Lindon, while stuck in a Paris traffic jam. Even though she’s preparing to settle down with her lover, she decides to embark on a torrid one-night stand with the stranger. It becomes a night that changes her outlook on life and its choices.

Jamie Stuart: I was watching Chocolat last night.

Claire Denis: Oh, really? Long time. You know, it’s funny because last night we had dinner with the Film Society, and I invited Isaach De Bankole, and he was there with us. It was like a weird flashback to be in New York with him.

JS: The thing that I thought was interesting about it, after watching Friday Night – there were similarities, in that there’s this very subtle tension building throughout. The thing that I noticed though, whereas Friday Night made a great use of music Chocolat had very little music in it.

CD: There are 3 beautiful pieces written by Abdullah Ibrahim that I think are great. In my opinion.

JS: Just that in Friday Night the music is so prevalent. It helped create the mood.

CD: I think the urban night has nothing to do with an African night.

JS: A difference of scenery.

CD: No, I would think that the night of a city is already like a symphony. That’s why I use the music for Metropolis, the Fritz Lang movie, at the beginning. I think the urban night always inspires musicians in a very certain way. I would think Chocolat was more – I mean, I used Abdullah’s music for the pleasure of using it – but I would also have been able to not use it at all, because I think the sound of the land…I don’t know, there is a specific sound of the land. No cars. No planes. As if you hear the vegetation growing. The animals crawling. I would do the same today.

JS: It’s just something I noticed. One of the things that I thought was interesting about Friday Night…

CD: When I did Beau travail 3 or 4 years ago, I used music sparsely because the desert had its sound.

JS: I was thinking that if Friday Night had been made here in America how differently it would have been cast. In America they would have chosen a female with a more traditional movie star persona.

CD: In France, too. I had to fight for this cast. It’s not America, the cinema economy needs a certain type of woman. If you want to change those stereotypes you have to fight for it. Or pay for it.

JS: Friday Night came about because of the novel. What did you see initially in the novel that interested you?

CD: The film is very close to the novel. Almost exactly. The novel is very thin. Very explicit in a way, but with no words. It described a moment, and I was interested in that. Two people who’ve met by chance, because of the circumstances, and they know there is very little possibility… I mean, she even thinks in the next 5 minutes he will leave the car and walk away. I was interested in that.

JS: A friend of mine who I was sitting in the audience with – she had recently seen Trouble Every Day – so she kept expecting something terrible to happen.

CD: In the book, too. There’s some expectation of something terrible happening, as if the girl was so tired and in such a bad mood that she would feel everyone being a danger to her.

JS: A sense of paranoia. Yeah, she said she couldn’t relax while watching it, because of that expectation.

CD: Yeah, but it’s – in a way, I would say, even with that film, Trouble Every Day, we put in the film a certain type of anxiety. All the way through.

JS: The love scenes in the film. They’re incredibly intense, but there’s very little actually shown, in terms of nudity. It’s much more with a long lens –

CD: No, no, no… It’s actually the opposite. It’s close range. The 50mm. I would never do a love scene with a long lens. For me it’s a totally voyeuristic situation. No. We are in the bed with them. That distance. And I would never do otherwise. Otherwise, it’s really cheap.

JS: It loses the intimacy.

CD: Lose, I don’t know. It doesn’t let the actor to forget us. By being so close they forget us, in a way. Because we are part of what’s happening. Long lens in that type of thing is really a bit disgusting for me.

JS: I guess it seemed like a long lens because you were so close with the 50, it just threw a certain amount off.

CD: Well, maybe I see with my eyes that it was made at close range. Long lens doesn’t give that feeling. Long lens gives another feeling. You would feel like we are peeping through the window or something, you know?

JS: Right, right, right…

CD: But I’m surprised. What do you want to see in a love scene?

JS: It’s just because I’m so used to American love scenes, where…

CD: What do you see in American love scenes?

JS: First of all, I think the first time I even remember seeing a breast was in the bed after they’d gone to the restaurant.

CD: They first make love when they get into the room. It’s cold. The first love scene is with the clothes on. Then he goes to the toilet, and when he comes back they take off their clothes and make love a second time. Then they go to the restaurant. But tell me, what do you see in an American love scene? Give me some details. I’m curious.

JS: You’ll usually see a greater deal of nudity. You’ll see wider shots –

CD: You see a greater deal of nudity in American love scenes?

JS: I think so. I think the thing that was so passionate about the scenes in the movie –

CD: Cause me, I watch American loves scenes and I see not much nudity. I see a certain type of nudity, which is breast for woman, and the back. I’ve never seen an American love scene that looks really naked, for me. Unless you mean porno films.

JS: No, not porno. Maybe I’m thinking more in terms of 1980’s love scenes. Cause during the ‘90s, the censors started clamping down on it. But 1980’s love scenes would always have a wide shot where you would actually see the man on top of the woman. Maybe with sheets over them.

CD: So here, she’s on top of him. So, that’s the big difference?

JS: I also think American love scenes are more interested in form. The form of their bodies – the physical form of what they’re doing. Whereas this was more intimate. More involved in their emotions.

CD: They show nothing, American love scenes. Unless, maybe, a love scene I remember is in Little Odessa you see nothing but 2 heads. One love scene in Lost Highway. You always see an above shot with the man on top of the woman, I think. To me, it sucks.

JS: That was the thing. This was much more emotional. Intense. Perhaps, because it was coming from… See, this might be the difference –

CD: I’m going to ask you a question. People ask questions about love scenes without using their own intelligence or their own experience. Would you go with an unknown woman in a hotel room? You met her 15 minutes ago. It’s cold. You don’t know her. Don’t know who she is. The woman doesn’t know who you are. And you would rip off your clothes like that with the light on? You know? And walk naked? I bet you won’t. I think you would be like every human, shy of your body, I’m sure. Like I would. And maybe you could do that the second time, or maybe the third time. But I can bet the first time you would show as little as you can. Like all human beings, maybe it’s stupid, but you don’t have the body of any woman’s dream. Any woman would think she doesn’t have the body of any man’s good dream.

JS: I was gonna say, I think the difference is most love scenes in America are filmed by male directors.

CD: It’s not because of male or female. What I said of Little Odessa or Lost Highway, they’re both male directors, but they know a little more about love and sex. So, they don’t start doing the above shot of a stupid man…Why do they always do this stupid above shot? Because it doesn’t show what the actor doesn’t want. Maybe his butt is not as perfect as he wants. And maybe he has a little bit of belly. Maybe his penis is not so big! No? Something you must know that the problem of a man in front of a camera, he has no erection. Even though you accept that he has no erection. His penis is not very big, either. So, men and women, when you do love scenes, you have to consider what is important. That’s why I mentioned those 2 films. They are made by men, and they are very normal and clever. They don’t show that above, you know? The only real interesting thing is when you have nudity with a real erection. And an actor and an actress that are ready to stand it for a long time. Make it maybe accepting to have breasts that are not perfect. To have an erection that is maybe not the most amazing in the world. No? This is very rare. And it’s so important, after all. That’s why a porno movie is interesting. You know? But in between a porno movie and movie movie, then you have to consider a love scene is something you do with your brain. You can be a female. You can be a male. You know always that the real problem is the man is not going to have an erection.  And that’s it. You can be female. You can be male

JS: After the 2 back to back scenes, broken up when he goes to the bathroom…after the second one, in the audience there was this moment where you could just hear people shifting in their seats. This woman sitting in front of me, I remember she put her hair back in a ponytail at that point.

CD: Love scenes are something you need to consider at close range. With men it is the penis problem. At least with women, they don’t show their real dimensions, no? So, you always have this problem, no? Unless you film a lesbian movie. That’s probably another solution. I don’t know.

JS: Then you have Mulholland Drive…

CD: Normally it’s even worse than no erection – they’re petrified to be naked in front of the crew. So, males go backwards so you don’t see the penis. With a female from the front, her breasts, once you have filmed that what else can you do? A love scene with clothes is much more interesting. Then you don’t have this problem.

JS: You were saying at the press conference that with this film you had to plan it more than you normally like to, simply because of the Paris locations.

CD: Oh, yeah. When you shoot at night. When you shoot inside a car there’s not much space to move the camera.

JS: So, you normally don’t like to plan? You like to just figure things out as you go along?

CD: Of course, you have to plan. But this time I had to plan very precisely. I would say to the police, “I’ll film from there to there.” And if suddenly I realized I needed this, then it was not permitted, so I had to think twice. Then I would say, “From there to there I will need 12 cars. Plus the parked cars here.” When you deal with a big city like Paris, it’s not like if you shot in the country. You have to be extremely precise. Everything also has to be timed. I was supposed to stop when the first bus stopped. Which is 5 in the morning. So, it’s kind of, instead of shooting 8 or 9 hours, I will shoot only 7 hours.

JS: What’s your normal approach when you shoot a film? Do you arrive on the set knowing all of the shots you’re going to do, or is it something you work on while you’re there with the actors?

CD: No, I know what I want to get. But the thing is, I’m ready to change my mind on the set if I find out I missed something or if it’s raining and I didn’t expect the rain. Filmmaking is funny. You have to prepare yourself. I will do drawings for myself and my partner when we are writing, but I don’t storyboard. When I write the script I do a lot of drawings. But on the set I would rather – I know what I want, but for me, on the set, it makes me very happy, very free, very interested. You have prepared something, and because of one actor’s position or because something’s missing like a prop, you radically change. Sometimes my mood is so bad I have to change it completely. That change is one of the things I like best, because I’ve prepared something, then I can destroy and forget and go in a new direction. It’s a kind of freedom. It’s not good for my assistant if I storyboard, because then he will be destroyed in his organization. So, only I know. He knows what he has to know. I tell him, “Look, I have a new idea. Instead of 5 shots, I’ll do 2. But don’t worry. Don’t worry.” I don’t want the people I work with to worry. When they worry it becomes a little heavy on the set. I’d rather manage change on my own. But to change easily, you must be prepared.

-Copyright 2003 by Jamie Stuart


 

Return to Movie Navigator