Summary
A large house in a respectable suburb of Paris is the residence of Dr Cordelier, an eminent
psychiatrist who has withdrawn from society to pursue his secret research into the functioning
of the human brain. His lifelong friend, the lawyer Maître Joly, becomes concerned
when Cordelier draws up a will in which he bequeaths his entire estate to a stranger,
Monsieur Opale. When Joly discovers that Opale is a misshapen, sadistic brute,
who willfully attacks children and women, he cannot understand why Cordelier defends him,
allowing him sanctuary in his house. After Opale kills a colleague of Dr Cordelier,
Dr Lucien Séverin, Joly has no other option but to confront Cordelier, convinced
that he is under the influence of the evil Opale. In Cordelier’s laboratory, Joly
discovers the terrible truth of his friend’s strange behaviour...
Review
Jean Renoir’s first collaboration with French Television yielded this quirky yet faithful
adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic novel, The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll
and Mr Hyde. In contrast to previous cinematic adaptations of that novel, Renoir
sets the story in a contemporary setting (France of the 1950s) and manages to make the
good doctor (renamed Cordelier) more of a villain than his brutal alter ego (Opale).
Whereas Opale’s violence is spontaneous, a thoughtless response to an uncontrollable impulse,
Cordelier’s actions are far more calculated and wicked, and so it easier to sympathize
with Opale than with Cordelier. In this respect, Le Testament du Docteur Cordelier
is closer to Stevenson’ novel than most film versions.
One of the most striking aspects of this film is how it rigorously defines and contrasts
the moral positions of the two principal characters, Cordelier and Opale. This is
partly down to a well-written script, which allows us to get into the minds of both characters,
but probably has much more to do with the performance of the film’s lead actor, Jean-Louis
Barrault. Throughout the film, it is hard to believe that both Cordelier and
Opale were played by the same man. With very little make-up, Barrault manages to
transform himself from a cultivated and charming man of science into a loutish, carefree
monster - an extraordinary achievement even for an accomplished actor.
Renoir’s decision to have Barrault playing both characters so distinctively can be interpreted
as a reference to the theories of Jung and Freud, that an individual is made up of two
distinct personalities, one civilized, the other untamed - two forces in constant opposition
Renoir goes beyond this and, with Barrault’s skilful complicity, manages to convince us
that neither of these two aspects of a person’s ego has moral superiority over the other.
In many ways, Renoir is re-treading ground he has already covered in his earlier masterpiece
La Bête humaine
(1938). In both films, good and bad character traits are shown to exist side-by-side
in the same individual, but the conclusion is that such characteristics do not necessarily
make that person good nor bad; they are merely two sides of the same coin.
In both content and form, Le Testament du Docteur Cordelier is in marked contrast
to those films which most people associate with Jean Renoir (La Grande illusion,
La Bête humaine, La Règle du jeu, etc.). However, when
you consider the range and diversity in Renoir’s oeuvre, this film appears scarcely out
of place - it isn’t even his first foray into science fiction. One symptom
of Renoir’s genius was his flair for innovation and experimentation. Not all of
his more radical experiments were a success, but the fact that he was able to take a chance
and try something different surely reinforces his standing as a director of great stature
and importance. Le Testament du Docteur Cordelier represents one of Renoir’s
most daring experiments - to make a cinematic film using the techniques and processes
of television. This was, after all, a film which was intended to be released
in the cinemas at the same time that it was screened on French television.
Renoir’s idea of merging television and cinema into one film is typical of the director’s
imagination and daring. The film was recorded using the non-stop, multi-camera technique
which was widely used for television dramas at the time. A scene would be pre-rehearsed
and then shot in its entirety with several cameras and the minimum of recording breaks.
This approach adds to the sense of modernity and disorientated atmosphere of the piece
but it also weakens the film’s credibility, since its faults are more apparent.
A number of scenes look rushed and amateurish and would have benefited from another take,
and the pressure the actors were under does is palpably apparent in a few places.
The film’s production faults were so noticeable that even Renoir felt unable to defend
it. Indeed, he believed that the venture was damned from the outset - a view which
could only have been reinforced by the torrent of invective which film critics dished
out once the film was released. In addition, a dispute between the film’s
distributors and the television company that produced it resulted in transmission of the
film being deferred to 1961, two years after it was seen in the cinemas.
To this day, Le Testament du Docteur Cordelier remains one of Jean Renoir’s most
obscure and underrated films; yet it also one of the most revealing about its creator.
Not only does it show Renoir’s courage to take risks - even at a time when he was finding
it more difficult to get financial backing for his films. It also shows us - as
many of his earlier films did - his acute understanding of the human psyche, his fascination
with all aspects of human nature - particularly that tragic inability of human beings
to control their own destinies, in spite of their intelligence or status in society.
For those who are prepared to forgive the film’s imperfect presentation, this is an insightful
and thought-provoking work, one which boldly addresses that universal conundrum about
what it means to be human.
© James Travers 2003
|
