Das umgekehrte Leben

Like many youths I was once fascinated by existentialism. At the centre is a simple idea, you are responsible for creating your own meaning in life; this idea sounds more radical when you define who is not responsible for creating your meaning: meaning does not come from outside of you, for example you are not responsible to God or society. There is also an ethical component to this religion-free philosophy, if you freely take on a responsibility, it is your duty to live up to it. In the philosophical novels of the existentialists, where practical examples are given, it might mean developing an interest in the circus (authentically becoming an enthusiast for certain niche subects or activities), or a lack of (feigned) grief at the death of a family member (failure to display the correct emotions required by society). There is also a mental healh connection in that the works of the existentialists have appealed to the depressed, or maybe to be more even-handed, to those who are upset when they first realize the hollowness their social environment.

Jacques Valin, protagonist of La vie à l'envers, tires of his relationships and shuts himself away in his apartment. In doing so, he takes the concept of existentialism much further, here there is no requirement to keep to one's freely accepted responsibilities, no requirement to even accept the existence of the material world. Except for keeping the body warm and nourished, Jacques becomes a creature of pure meditative exploration, an oneironaut.

We can of course write him off like some write the existentialists off: they are depressed and Jacques is psychotic. But to some extent many mental illnesses are social constructs, for example a child diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, because they can't sit still in a classroom, may be perfectly aligned with an outdoors life. Society in that case is the "illness". Jacques then, would not be viewed as psychotic, simply as clear-minded.

Much of his journey away from the world is beautiful, a significant amount of time is taken to show his appreciation of form without meaning. The filmmakers show a close up of a slice of bread, which rather becomes a landscape of forms (extrusions, blurtings, sponginess, contrasts of light and dark), and Jacques also spends time staring at a particular tree, marvelling more at its form (its whorling, branching, fractality) than at its conceptuality (photosynthesiser, taxonomic item, provider of shade, provider of carpentry materials).

Despite the beauty there is also a whiff of suphur, in, for example, Jacques' easy misogyny. His philosophy, as shown in the movie, did indeed remind me of some hot springs, clear, beautiful, sulphurous, and incredibly dangerous. The point, however, is the ease at which Jacques withdraws from society, the ties that bound him were weak. The movie then is viewed best, as a critique of the ways and mores of 1960s French society, undergoing a descent into consumerism. It is also a cleansing watch, that helps one to take stock of one's own situation and root out the sources of angst.

Jessua has never achieved the fame of Truffaut and Resnais, but he was at least their equal in talent. In this, his finest film, he explores a young man's withdrawal from Parisian bourgeois life into a world of his own. Is the man going insane? By conventional standards, yes, but it's clear that the life he's fleeing is madder still. Moreover, since we hear and see the events from his point of view, and since that point of view is unfailingly witty and astute about the underlying if not the literal truth, we even come to accept his delusions as more "real" than reality. The writing finds humor in the bleakest situations, while the direction reveals a Zen spirituality in the most banal images. Denner's performance is enough to give "psychotic charm" a good name, and he manages to be heartbreaking without ever resorting to obvious pathos. In short, a masterpiece.

I saw this movie on television in the late 19sixties - and was mesmerized - and haven't seen it since. I just checked Amazon and there is someone selling a video of it for $198.00. It is a very sweet film. Charming. Intelligent. Poetic. If you like taking walks in Springtime in a local uncrowded park, you might find it refreshing. There is a subtle ardor about it. It doesn't seem to 'pretend' anything. The 'Mystery' of it unfolds delicately, bit by bit, frame by frame. The 'Sorrow' of it is not built on mountains of angst, but rather a humorous metamorphosis that compares ordinary life to a pure renunciation of the trappings an ordinary life instills and sustains. Not a movie for 'Followers'. The 'Hero's' mindset or mental condition is obviously clinical, yet there is a simple beauty in it, something a person who grows up on a diet of 'Malls' will never understand.

1st watched 11/17/2001 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Alain Jessua ): This is a plodding French film which seems to be about self-discovery but is more about self-indulgence and ruining relationships with others by not acknowledging anyone to be of any importance except yourself. In some ways it appears like a descent into madness, but the main character chose this madness(it least it appears this way). I'm not sure I've seen more of a navel-gazing movie then this and this seems to be a norm of French films in this era. I'm sorry but as a movie-going expreience this is bothersome and gives no answers. I hope the film-maker got some psychiatric treatment(as it seems the character did near the end) after making this movie and found something more important in his life than himself(which the character did not).

Alain Jessua was one of the great mavericks of the French cinema;he was too modern to be labeled "old school" but he had ,fortunately,nothing to do with Godard,TRuffaut and co.Simply ,from this debut to "Paradis Pour Tous" (1982),he has never produced anything mediocre (let's be nice and forget the final works ).

"La Vie A L'Envers " begins with a tape played backwards ;a man is tired of his girlfriend ,of his nine-to-five work and decides to live without the others -I'm watching you,but I don't see you" -and the things ;it was the beginning of the sixties and France was entering the consumer society ,a society which was omnivorous in its appetite for apartments ,cars ,food ;and the main character turns this down;he has made his this sentence from " fight club" 'the things you own ends up owning you" ;and his bubble head girlfriend is a nuisance to live with at home,with her petty ambitions ("there's one of my movies just out ,let's go to the theater":the "movie" in question is an unbearable commercial )and her longing for a bourgeois life .It's not only misogyny:he even can do without his best friend ( "a friend I never see;"it's better that way" ).In an empty room ,he's never been so happy .When the doctor (the last human being he meets ) tells him he has a friend who can give him a nice place to live provided he continues his "work" (his recorded frame of minds),we think of an insane asylum right now.

Charles Denner gives a great performance of this rebel without a cause :no political or sentimental reason for such a behavior,and we never have the impression that the character is going insane . When he begins to enter "his" world ,he walks through a subway corridor covered with posters which read 'trust yourself".

In his sophomore effort ," Jeu De Massacre " ,Jessua would continue his study of deviancy: this time the hero,who makes up incredible stories , disappointed by a routine life and under an over possessive mother 's thumb,tries to live as a comics' hero; "Armaguedon" is " Vie A L'Envers " in reverse:the hero tries to attract the crowds ' attention by becoming some kind of terrorist ;and in his (at least to my eyes) final important work "Paradis Pour Tous" ,a shrink has found a new way of treating depression.

Between 1963 and 1982,Jessua only made six movies ,but they are all interesting ;to someone who would discover him,I 'd suggest "Traitement De Choc"(1972) ,his most accessible effort.