#austrian interview

Translated interview

Adèle Haenel: Figurehead of the new French Film

by Daniel Kalt, in: Die Presse, 13th of December 2019

Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]

Adèle Haenel talks about her new film, gender roles and a new cinema by women, which oddly doesn’t give much space to men. [T: 😊]

Adèle Haenel came to Vienna for the Viennale [T: annual Film Festival, here: 24th of October to 6th of November 2019], playing the lead role in the opening film ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’. It’s one of those hot almost summer-like autumn days, prior to the photo shoot Haenel is sitting in the scorching heat on the terrace in front of the studio and greets a purring cat, which is passing by, in German. Haenel is the daughter of an Austrian translator, and grew up in [T: Montreuil, in the Métropole du Grand] Paris. According to her, she spoke the [T: German] language as a child, but forgot about it later on, ‘as is often the case’. Only for her role in Chris Kraus’ film ‘The Bloom of Yesterday’, where she plays alongside Lars Eidinger, did she relearn German. [T: Now] in Vienna, the actress, who is one of the most celebrated in contemporary French cinema, is a bit tired after a long promotional tour for her film, which [T: all] began in Cannes. The uproar, which Adèle Haenel will cause a couple of weeks later, when she accuses the French director Christophe Ruggia of sexual harassment that took place during the shoot of her first Film ‘Les Diables – she was still half a child then [T: !?] – preceded Vienna and is therefore not mentioned here. Because of her film projects and her statements as a prominent creative artist it seems obvious to ask whether she considers herself a feminist, to which Haenel responds in a heartbeat: ‘Yes, absolutely. And in capital letters, go ahead and write down FEMINIST.’

Adèle Haenel plays young Héloïse in her new film, which is now shown in cinemas across Austria, and is directed by Céline Sciamma (the two women were a couple for some time, it is their second joint production). After the death of her sister, [T: Héloïse] was brought back from the convent to her family’s home on an island in Brittany. The story takes place in the late 18th century, Héloïse is supposed to be married off to Milan. But first, it’s necessary to send a portrait to her future husband, which should please him. Héloïse refuses the gaze of the painter – the ‘male gaze’ –, who was commissioned to paint her. So, her mother resorts to a trick and hires another artist [T: called] Marianne: She should spend a couple of days with Héloïse as her companion, without revealing her [T: secret] mission. Through gazing at her furtively and catching glimpses of details – lips, an ear, the position of hands –, will she piece together a portrait of Héloïse. But tension builds between the two young women, which leads to a short-lived and passionate affair.

Interviewer: Your new film takes place in the late 18th century – how did you prepare for the role?

Adèle Haenel: This wasn’t my first period film, ‘L’Apollinide’ [T: House of Tolerance, 2011] for example is also from the same era, just before the French Revolution. Besides, I have mainly tried to create the character of Héloïse around a certain concept, a certain image. The historic perspective wasn’t key for me to prepare for the role. Playing in costume was mostly to place this [T: film] in a certain time. But it wasn’t my top priority to lend credence to my character by putting it in a historical context.

I: What is the main theme for you: love, art, liberty, the liberty of art?

AH: The film is mainly about love and particularly about what love can be. It is about desire, the pleasure of intellectual exchange and a blossoming friendship. And then there is also the aspect of art and artistic expression, which leads to an extraordinary relationship between the two main characters. Another important point was also to show love that’s different to what you usually see in films: It is not love at first sight, no ‘coup de foudre’ [T: repeats the same phrase in French], but emotions that are developing slowly and in which you immerse yourself, because they are connected with deep admiration. The film also explores in-depth the central theme of the ‘female gaze’ as counterpoint to the dominating male gaze, which has been prevalent in cultural products for a long time.

I: Does it make a difference for you to be ‘directed’ by a female director, as the term ‘director’ implies in English?

AH: I’d like to state here that I’m an extremely political person. That is why it is important to me to describe the relationship between the actress and director [T: the female form of director is used here] accordingly: It is not a vertical relationship for me, where I’m directed by an opposite, but an equal exchange. We developed this film together, conceptualising love in a way where one character does not dominate the other. I also have a responsibility to carry as an actress, especially in a film like this, which is constructed around the gaze and the person who is looking [T: both genders are included here]. My character is not a passive muse, we tried to break this idea. In fact, it is not the story of an artist [T: male form is used here], who enters a room and sees a woman who inspires him, but something completely different.

I: Would you say that Héloïse is at first motivated by anger about the situation?

AH: You could talk about anger, but this means to break down the bigger issue of resistance to an individual level. It’s not mainly about the anger of this character, but it’s about how she as a woman reacts to her specific situation. Society often denies women the right to live as we want to or our own projects. That’s why I think it’s better to talk about resistance against the entirety of the patriarchal system.

I: How did you express this in the way you acted?

AH: In the beginning Héloïse’s gestures and facial expressions are quite restricted, very much contained. The love story then takes up more space over time, likewise my acting is becoming more generous. That also makes sense from a political point of view:  At first there’s the question how to resist the ruling order: Either you sacrifice yourself, because you’re caught up in the system. Or alternatively, as I chose to do for Héloïse, through absence and withdrawal. This means, I negate my existence and I’m only present as detached figure – as object, so that no one comes close to me as subject. My absence is therefore a way to resist.

I: Was this the first time you’ve structured a role like this?

AH: Yes, although I always ask myself profound questions when preparing for a role. That’s the main theme for me, how to create feelings and emotions that leave behind the screen.

I: Do you have a desired impact in mind with your craft?

AH: I would like to spark off something like a mimetic reaction among the audience, which goes beyond the feelings and emotions in the film. [T: 🔥] Let’s call it a vibration, which resonates in real life and which I would like to set off. That’s all the more important, because it allows for new storytelling. In ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’ we make fun of the patriarchy. A conscious decision was made to almost entirely exclude men from the picture. We don’t convey a political message openly, but instead are very concrete by not showing something.

I: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

AH: Yes, absolutely. And in capital letters, go ahead and write down FEMINIST. And you, are you a feminist? I see the reluctance to openly support feminism among men rather than women. There are of course women who are sometimes reluctant to support feminist demands. But this is the result of a specific system, in which women are oppressed. There was and still is an expectation for us to subordinate ourselves, or even become extinct. The time for women to speak is always less than for men, irrespective of the context. And this is despite the stereotype of women talking more in general: Gloria Steinem quite rightly says that it’s not about the actual time that women are speaking, but about the silence that is expected of them.

Translated snippets

Adèle Haenel in 2017

// Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]. I did something different here, and extracted quotes from three articles as these were quite similar, and frankly, l wanted to make my life a tiny bit easier... but here you go! //

About learning to speak German

[T: As a child she knew some German,] ‘but these were rather useless things’ […] ‘Set the table, for example.’ [T: About German lessons in school] ‘That's the way it is in France. After seven or eight years of teaching, you are totally incapable of building a correct sentence. So I couldn't speak German at the end of school.’ [T: However, she told her agency that she was proficient in the language, and would just learn it when the time comes…]

‘When I met Chris, I could neither speak German nor English. So he had to trust me’ […] ‘I like to learn something new or again. I expected it to be like Latin or math - something to train your brain. I never thought it would be so emotional.’

‘It's weird what it does to the soul to be a foreigner’ […] ‘Even if you understand everything well and can express yourself, you are mostly silent, because you are holding back. That's where your personality changes.’ [T: Learning her father’s language showed her] ‘that I also have an Austrian soul. I always thought I was fully French.’

About the legacy of Nazism

‘My father ran away from Austria in 1966, because this past was still boiling here’ […] ‘I really like the way Thomas Bernhard wasn’t very kind to Austria in this regard.’ [T: see here or here]

About her character Zazie in ‘The Bloom of Yesterday’ and her co-partner Lars Eidinger

‘I don't think it's the artist's job to say what other people should do. What counts is to be honest in your own fragility.’ […] ‘For me, all the characters are stones on my artistic path’ […] ‘They correspond with each other, but they don't answer the same question.’ [T: At the core of ‘The Bloom of Yesterday’ is] ‘fragility and absolute love.’ […] ‘At the end of the day, it's about the encounter between two destructive people and their feelings, which are greater than them.’

‘Zazie is extreme in her feelings. To play that, you have to let go – but I had to do it in a controlled way: because if I let go completely, I speak French and not German.’

[T: Lars Eidinger called Adèle his ‘female counterpart’, a sentiment she shares; also see here] ‘It was the best experience I've ever had. What I like about him is that he wants to invent everything. It's like walking and in the meantime, we're inventing the way.’

‘I always see acting as a martial art,’ […] ‘When someone [T: like Lars Eidinger] is at a higher level, you have to try to improve.’

About the humour in ‘The Bloom of Yesterday’

‘It's not about making shocking jokes’ […] ‘It's about having humour so we can endure our heritage.’

‘Traumatic themes are the heart of humour’ […] ‘Humour makes life easier, and [T: director] Chris Kraus' way of laughing isn't very easy.’

About her character in ‘The Unknown Girl’ and how she chooses her roles

‘I wanted to play a character that is not a character. She is not a heroine; she shows the bare minimum of humanity: we cannot let someone disappear without feeling guilty.’

‘It was important for me that this doctor has no reason to do what she does. Her obsession is just a human obsession.’

‘I never think: How was this person before the film, how will they be after the film? It's so complicated to understand yourself - how can I say what kind of character that is? A character comes into being when an idea falls in a certain time’ […] ‘I play how I feel.’ […] ‘Do I want to make this film? It's not about reasons, it's about emotions.’

[T: Adèle has no desire for stereotypical female roles, and they are no longer offered to her, as her feminist stance is well known in the industry.] ‘The possibilities for women in cinema are super-narrow’ […] ‘Femininity is always associated with being patient, nice and helpful, and I don't like that.’

‘The problem is that many lack imagination. The classic feminine roles are always the same. To think that women must behave like women and men like men is a cowardly way of thinking: you don't have to risk anything. For me, it was never a question that I could do anything.’

About the role of films and French cinema

‘Film has a political responsibility. But a film should ask questions, not give answers. It should be moral in the sense that it does not marginalise people.’

‘I feel like there's a lot to do here in French theatre and cinema’ […] ‘I don't feel like going to the United States.’ […] ‘What I like the most is when a young person comes up to me and says, ‘I saw your film, and then I read your interview and read the books you talked about.’ If it's only two people I've been able to spark up, that's a good thing’ […] ‘then I can retire.’ [T: I hate to say it, Adèle, but I think you exceeded your target! 😄]

—

Articles:

Adèle Haenel, „Schauspielerei ist immer auch Kampfsport“, Angelika Prawda/APA, in: Tiroler Tageszeitung, 10th of January 2017

Adèle Haenel: „Ich spiele, wie ich fühle“, Katrin Nussmeyer, in: Die Presse, 12th of January 2017

Adèle Haenel: "Nicht geduldig und nett", Alexandra Seibel, in: kurier.at, 14th of January 2017

Translated interview

Viennale Star Adèle Haenel: ‘Equality is sexy’

Wolfgang Huber-Lang/APA, in: Salzburger Nachrichten, 25th of October 2019

Adèle Haenel (30, Paris), who is a protagonist in the opening film ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’, was the star guest at yesterday’s Viennale. She is also starring in Pierre Salvadori’s comedy ‘The Trouble with You’, which will be released in cinemas [T: across Austria] from the 8th of November. The talk about film, theatre, lies and clichés alternates between German, English and French.

Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …].

Interviewer: Ms Haenel, the opening of the Viennale, which was dominated by women, seems to have been the perfect environment for your film?

Adèle Haenel: Indeed, I actually hadn’t noticed: There were really just women, who held speeches. That’s not often the case. Super! It was a really lovely atmosphere. The audience apparently liked the film [T: … they didn’t like it, they loved it 😜]. I don’t like red carpet events too much, but it was quite charming here, it is a festival for the public and people even dress up for this evening.

I: In ‘Portrait’, men only play tiny secondary roles. Is the film also making a political statement? There is also a heated debate about gender equality in the film business.

AH: It is a good experience that men are not centre stage for once. The film centres around lesbian lovers and is not making a political statement at first glance. But there is the opportunity to show something that may have been neglected so far. Why was something like this not told before? After all, it is about half of the population. Equality is sexy, consent is sexy. What can we do with this? The political is derived from cinematic questions. But essentially, it is about emotions that are slowly developing. The film builds the love story on different levels: Desire, intellectual exchange, friendship. These give rise to what we call love. That is the heart of the film.

I: [T: In Austria,] you are known for films like ‘The Unknown Girl’ from the Dardenne Brothers or the Anti-AIDS-drama ‘120 BPM’ from Robin Campillo. But ‘Portrait’ takes place around 1770. Is a period film another challenge?

AH: I have already made three films that took place in the 18th century. It doesn’t really make a difference for me. I think that ‘Portrait’ is closer to ‘Water Lilies’ (Céline Sciamma’s film, which was Haenel’s breakthrough in 2007) than to other period films. But I like costumes, because they make it necessary to reinvent yourself. They not only change the way you move, but also how you speak.

I: ‘En Liberté!’ will shortly be released here with the weird [T: German] title ‘Lieber Antoine als gar keinen Ärger’ [T: literally – Better to have Antoine than no trouble]. This film seems to be completely different from ‘Portrait’.

AH: That’s true, but it was also a remarkable experience. I learned a lot while shooting ‘En Liberté!’ – for example, how to bust clichés. When you’re doing a comedy, you really have to pay attention to the rhythm, and what is underneath. I believe, being aware about the conflict between what you say and what you mean has helped me perform the subtext in ‘Portrait’ later on. Although [T: these films] are quite different, there is a continuity for me. I love this film.

I: You play a [T: lieutenant]?

AH: It is about lies and people who try to survive their own lies. It is about a mafia-like structure and about guilt. The film is very funny – and very successful in France.

I: In Cannes, you were not only featured with ‘Portrait’, but also with ‘Les héros ne meurent jamais’ [T: Heroes don’t die], a combination of fiction and documentary about the war in Bosnia. Your range is broad. What is the kind of screenplay that sparks your interest?

AH: With ‘En Liberté!’, I knew intuitively that I wanted to do the film, even before I read the script. But I often try to figure out if there’s something behind the story that is left unsaid. In ‘Les héros ne meurent jamais’, there was also a connection between reality and fiction, a need to invent something and to tell stories that particularly interested me. This is something I truly love.

I: You also play theatre. But your current project with Gisèle Vienne on Robert Walser was postponed.

AH: Yes, until next year. Maybe it will also come to Austria. I love to act, but not the stuff around it. For me, it is about exploration, that is even more prominent in theatre than in film. I did a lot of theatre when I was a child. Then I stopped and started again in 2012 with ‘The Seagull’. Since then, I did more theatre. I love it. I think, Céline (Sciamma) is one of the most important contemporary female directors, and Gisèle is the same for theatre. I believe what we do with her is exploring movement, emotions and time. But for that you also need time – and I take it.

I: Finally, about your Austrian roots: Your father is from Graz?

AH: Yes, but he left when he was young. He has lived in France since 1968, I believe, and he doesn’t have the Austrian citizenship anymore, as you cannot have both. I sometimes went on vacation in Styria when I was a child. We primarily spoke French during my childhood. When we were young, he still spoke German with us, but we stopped pretty quickly. I only started [T: to speak German] again when I did the film ‘The Bloom of Yesterday’ with Chris Kraus. It was quite exhausting, but also funny how quickly my German came back.

I: You also received the ‘Prix Romy Schneider’.

AH: Indeed, but I didn’t really grow up with her films. I watched anime or films with [T: Jean-Paul] Belmondo as a child. I wasn’t a cinephile. That is why I didn’t think of Romy Schneider, when I started to act. I really didn’t have any actors/actresses as role model. I wanted to act not become a film star.

I: The new [T: controversial] Nobel laureate in literature, Peter Handke, has lived in Paris for a long time. Have you read anything by him?

AH: I remember for example a passage from ‘Über die Dörfer’ [T: literally – ‘About the villages’], where it says: Forget about your family and learn to love what is foreign… [T: das Fremde is difficult to translate, it’s the opposite of home] But I don’t have a strong connection with his works. I feel more connected with Elfriede Jelinek or Thomas Bernhard.

[T: Omitted short bio]

Picture sources: [1], [2-3], [4], [5], [6], [7]

Translated interview

Forgotten women

Matthias Greuling, in: Die Furche, 13th of December 2019

// Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]. It’s a very short interview, but a good excuse to post pictures of these three 😎. The interview is only with Céline. //

Céline Sciamma made a period love drama with ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’, for which she won the Best Screenplay in Cannes this year.

[T: Omitted description of the film]

Interviewer: Observing people is always at the centre of your work. Why are you interested in this?

Céline Sciamma: Cinema is inherently more appearance than substance. And the people, who observe others, are always at the centre of my films, at the same time we as an audience also watch these people watching others: a merry-go-round of gazes, you could say, a roundelay. I also make sure that each film creates a fresh and independent look on the characters and the story. That may seem experimental, but I see it more as an individual voice for each project.

I: You were heaped with praise for the film in Cannes, where you won for the Best Screenplay this year. Does this flatter you?

CS: Of course! It is the most important place for cinema in the world. At the festival in Cannes, you act is if there is nothing more important in the world than cinema for two weeks. And in this context, I am very pleased if my film is well received.

I: What was the starting point for making this film?

CS: I started from different desires that I wanted to make a film about. I thought a very long time about this film before I could even put it on paper. Just the title ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’, it existed very early on. It was like a road map to the film for me. In terms of content, I wanted to talk about an artist, and it immediately crossed my mind to portray a painter. The late 18th century was a productive time for female painters, they had great successes at that time, were respected, but were later erased from art history. That made me incredibly furious when I researched it. All these pictures that have been withheld from us! It was not only the realisation how art history forced them into invisibility, but also the consequences which annoyed me: when I look at these pictures, they disturb and move me, because I missed them all my life. That's why I told this story: to make these forgotten women visible. [T: Also see here, here, or here]

I: How many more films can you make about love?

CS: It was a desire, really. There was this desire in the beginning, to do a love story. When I was writing, two contradicting desires were fighting within me. On the one hand, I wanted to show step by step what it’s like to fall in love, the pure experience, all the pleasure. The staging was focusing on confusion, hesitation, the romantic exchange. On the other hand, I wanted to catch the echo of a love affair, how it lives on within us in full.

Translated interview

A new politics of love - An interview with Adèle Haenel on 'Portrait of a Lady on Fire'

By Barbara Fohringer, in: The Gap, 28th of October 2019

Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]

The film 'Portrait of a Lady on Fire' not only shows a same-sex love but also an equal one between two women in the 18th century. The Gap met with Adèle Haenel, one of the two leading actresses, for a conversation.

Marianne (Noémie Merlant), a painter in the 18th century, is commisioned to do a portrait of the aristocratic Héloïse (Adèle Haenel) - without her knowledge -, as Héloïse already refused to sit for another painter. Héloïse, whose sister has recently died, is promised to a nobleman in Milan, her portrait is meant to illustrate her future marriage. In Céline Sciamma's ('Water Lilies', 'Tomboy', 'Girlhood') new film, it is two women who fall in love with each other, two women who are equals.

'Portrait of a Lady on Fire' received the Best Screenplay award and 'Queer Palm' at the Cannes Film Festival this year. The film opened the Viennale a couple of days ago. Adèle Haenel ('Water Lilies', 'The Bloom of Yesterday', '120 BPM') came to Vienna for this event - and answered some of our questions.

Interviewer: Why did you choose this role? Why did it appeal to you?

Adèle Haenel: I've known Céline Sciamma, the director, for a long time. We met twelve years ago and did our first film together, and I think, she is currently one of the most talented directors in France. [T: 🥰] I then read the screenplay, and thought it is a wonderful love story. When I finished reading it, I cried.

I: How did you approach the role? How did prepare for it? It is after all a period film, which takes place at the end of the 18th century.

AH: I never think like that. The fact that it is a period film doesn't influence the way I'm acting. It would be the wrong approach, to think about acting in that way. It doesn't matter in which period the story takes place, but it's about the problem that this film deals with. You cannot say: This is the way to prepare for a period drama. I was interested in the key question of the film and that it's centred around queer people. We wanted to tell a new love story, because it's about the love between two people that are equals. It's two women of roughly the same age. They are of similar height and intelligence. None of them dominates the other. This was our foundation. We asked ourselves, how this collaboration - in love - could work and how we could show love without possession. It's about a new politics of love. It was important for us to show a certain sexiness in equality, consent and non-possession. This opened up new concepts, as we are not yet used to these kinds of stories. We are used to think of submission as sexy - but not of equality. That was the main thing. When I took on the role, I considered it as a journey from object to subject. That is the character's journey.

I: The film not only shows the equality of the characters in terms of its content, but also visually, it virtually creates a female gaze, a new perspective on female characters. How was the shooting, and how did you, the director and you, approach the characters?

AH: Yes, that was the plan. It really is a Post-#MeToo-film. I don't think it would have been possible to make the film beforehand, because there was little understanding about the concept of alienation between women or rather solidarity between women. We talk more with each other now, there are more alliances between women. You can see this with the character of Sophie the maid. She is a maid, but she is also much more than that and has her own story, independent of the two main characters. The film consists of many long shots, and has its own rhythm. I think, the framing also demonstrates the relationship between the characters. Sometimes we as actors didn't have much room to move, sometimes we had more.

I: The aspect of class was also interesting for me, as just discussed for the character of Sophie, and also the fact, that it's about art and how you create this image of another person. How did you approach this theme?

AH: Art is part of the love story in this film, although you could also say the opposite. The film is also about working on a piece of art. The character of Marianne asks herself what qualifies as a good portrait - does it have to contain the soul of a person or is it rather about capturing a moment in time. Marianne didn't ask herself these questions before that, she followed the rules in her way, so when she meets Héloïse she is forced to question herself and to become aware of her choices. Of course, I don't have anything to do with the pictures, but Noémie Merlant took some lessons with Hélène Delmaire, who made all the pictures that you can see in the film.

I: What other female roles are you interested in?

AH: I'm more interested in the dynamics of a film. So every character intrigues me and there is no topic that doesn't appeal to me. The dynamics and the point of view are close to my heart. Sure, you can also say that fight scenes or riding a motorcycle or whatever are interesting, but that's not really the point.

I: What did you learn about yourself and the business since you became an actress?

AH: I don't know about that, but I do know: If a do a film, then I have philosophical and political questions that I'm asking myself at the time. Every film that I made since 2012 tried to answer one of those questions. It's not necessarily about me. But rather pursuing an idea. Younger actresses and actors, who want to learn the trade, need to listen to what brings them joy. [T: Mari Kondo vibes, she actually says inner joy] The feeling for acting you can, you have to feel. It's not just in your head, but also in your heart. Many have that and they must not let go of it. Don't follow the rules and stay true to yourself. But you also have to be careful, there can be problematic situations.

I: Right now, it's the Viennale in Vienna. Do you have a connection with Austrian films?

AH: My father is from Austria, that's why I have a special connection with this country, but I'm not that familiar with the Austrian cinema. But I'm interested in working in German. I would like to do more films or theatre plays in German.

I: Your German is quite good already, especially, when you consider that you learned the language quite late.

AH: I learned German when shooting 'The Bloom of Yesterday'. But when I'm tired, everything is kaputt (laughs) [T: broken]. I'd rather speak in English then. However, I did the Q&A in German in the cinema yesterday.

I: Can you already tell us something about your new projects?

AH: I'm currently working at the theatre. We just started with the rehearsals and will perform next year. [T: 🙏🏿] The play is called 'The Pond' by Robert Walser [T: which is directed by Gisèle Vienne and also stars Ruth Vega Fernandez, see here]. We originally wanted to do this play in German, but we will do it in French now - I think. If we do perform this play internationally, then we might switch to German. Either way, I know the text in French and German. 'The Trouble with You' by Pierre Salvadori will be released in Austria soon. (Editor's note: [...] from 8th of November 2019.)

I: Many French films are quite successful internationally but also in Austria. What do you think is the reason for this success?

AH: France has an exceptional financing system for films. Every film that is successful in cinema gets funding afterwards, which can then be invested in new film projects. We produce a lot of films, even though we are not such a big country. The French film has a very good reputation. I believe, this benefits arthouse films as well as commercial ones.

I: What profession would you have taken, if you hadn't become an actress?

AH: I think, I would give acting classes then.

Translated interview

Love and let love

Pamela Jahn, in: ray Filmmagazin, October 2019

// Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]. //

Céline Sciamma’s brilliant ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’ opens the Viennale 2019. A talk with the French director about her ambitions, love and why you can do without men in her film.

She likes to think of herself as film activist [T: also see here], and looking at her work confirms this. Céline Sciamma is a force in French cinema, but this hasn’t yet created a ripple effect internationally. After her coming-of-age trilogy (Water Lilies, Tomboy, Girlhood), the French director and screenwriter Céline Sciamma now created an elegant but also radical period film with Portrait of a Lady on Fire. [T: Partly omitted short description of film] The two women slowly get closer to each other, determination turns into restraint, curiosity into desire, and Sciamma’s great skill is in making the intimacy between the characters tangible in a very sensual manner. Her brilliance and experience in utilising the cinematic art of seduction of all kinds make this film special, and it opens up a new perspective on the art of looking and thinking.

Interviewer: Part of the fascination for this film is in the process of discovery, the way that we, the audience, slowly get to know the face, the body, and the gestures of Héloïse. How did you develop this process from your perspective as screenwriter and director?

Céline Sciamma: First of all, it took a long time to write this. I don’t actually mean the writing itself but rather dreaming about it. The idea for the film came right after Girlhood, about five years ago. But then I allowed myself to just daydream about it for two, three years, without writing anything down, apart from a couple of notes, a page here and there, where I tried to find the right balance between the different approaches that I had in mind for the film. On the one hand, there was the idea that you implied, developing a choreography of discovery to show how someone falls in love with another person, and at the same time accurately convey this process through cinema with all its possibilities, step by step. In other words, I was interested in the joy of discovery, but also in the delay and frustrations that might occur with this. On the other hand, I also wanted to show the progression of a love story, its past, its future, this epic period of time where everything seems possible. I wanted to make a film about the dialogue of love, about its philosophy and poetry. And this takes time, to find the necessary balance, but also to steer the film in a direction that seems radical enough to me. It was important for me to find the right structure, in order to both integrate the dialogue of love and dialogue of art. That was my task, my personal mission. I had the ambition to convey all these ideas without becoming too theoretical. The film should seem playful instead, be exciting and fun – fun while filming and watching.

I: Were you inspired by certain paintings for the aesthetics of the film?

CS: My cinematographer and I, we discussed the lighting and the framing for a long time, and at one point [T: she] said: ‘Okay, let’s do this, we won’t consciously set it up like a painting, but secretly we both know it’s exactly like that.’ This means we didn’t tell ourselves that the whole thing should look exactly like a painting by Georges de La Tour or whoever [T: also see here, a pipe and a candle, hmm]. Quite the opposite. Our references came primarily from cinema, especially when it was about lighting a film with candles. But we were of course aware that everyone would say afterwards that it looks like it was painted. Cinema is about similar things after all: It is about lighting, composition, faces and silhouettes. There were no real references to paintings apart from one, but it was rather anachronistic, because it wasn’t from the same period as the film was set in. However, we always had to think about [Jean-Baptiste-Camille] Corot, a French painter from the 19th century, who mostly painted landscapes. But he also did a few paintings of women, women in landscapes. And we were quite thrilled about the way that the light seems to radiate from the figures in his pictures [T: also see here]. The figures somehow illuminate the painting, and we worked hard to create a similar effect with the colours and the clothes of the characters. [T: Also see here for an in-depth article on the cinematography of the film]

I: What were your film references?

CS: Barry Lyndon had certainly the biggest influence, not only on me, but on cinema in general, when it comes to lighting a period film. It doesn’t mean that we should do exactly the same as Kubrick did. Barry Lyndon is a film with an incredible amount of ideas, which make you think, and it’s a film that gives you more courage in what you do. That means, instead of duplicating something it’s rather about developing a standard, which you don’t have to necessarily adopt, but you can work towards it. And for that we developed our own methods to create a certain mood and aesthetics. Just like Kubrick who invented a lot for his film. He even came up with his own lens, so that he can produce the atmosphere he wanted. We made things and thought about finding a way to manage without candles in the picture, which was decided very early on. [T: also see here, here or here for Barry Lyndon]

I: The setting plays an important role in both films, Kubrick’s and yours. It develops its own character, in a way.

CS: That’s true. The building where we filmed had an unbeatable advantage: It hadn’t really been touched for years. It’s an old suburban city hall in the municipality of La Chapelle-Gauthier, about 70 km from Paris [T: also see here, h/t @podcastofaladyonfire]. When we found it, [T: we] weren’t quite sure. It seemed like a place from another time. But as soon as we stepped into it, we knew how it was. We also knew that everything should remain as it was. That’s not very common, because it’s usually about reconstructing the period in a period film, in which the story is set, so that you achieve the highest possible degree of authenticity and truthfulness. Apart from that, I mostly made all of my films in the studio. The apartments, where my protagonists lived, were all recreated. And now I suddenly had to struggle with a fourth wall. It would have made more sense not to film on an original location. It’s a paradox, but I really like it.

I: You made another conscious decision, which was mostly excluding men from your film.

CS: Yes, that was already clear from the outset. It wasn’t like I only killed the men in the cutting room. The main reason for this was that I wanted to tell a love story that is lived. And I wanted to talk about the possibility of their love, not about the impossibility. If I had included men, then it wouldn’t have worked, because the limits of what is possible would have been all too visible. We are very familiar with these limitations and I think, we don’t have to constantly talk about them. I wanted to give these women the necessary space to express themselves and fully live out their love. In other words: I wanted to give them time to imagine what their lives could look like in a world where they don’t have to constantly assert themselves against men.

I: Especially against men that try to interfere with their love.

CS: Exactly. I consciously avoided this conflict. I also didn’t want the two of them to question whether their love story is really possible or not. But that is a question of dramaturgy, not of gender. For me, it was about telling the story in a way that gives them the greatest possible liberty, but which they don’t have in reality. This is not only an imagined liberty but a very tangible one. Fundamentally, it is just another way to point out the limitations that clearly exist for both women. It’s just that we don’t show [T: these limitations], because they are quite obvious. I had the feeling that both women couldn’t imagine another life. Why should I put them in a situation where they fight a battle they cannot win anyway?

I: It seems that going back to the 18th century gave you more liberty to tell the story.

CS: Yes, it really was a liberating process for me, too. A process that made me more courageous as director. Even though, my films were always strongly anchored in the presence, and were in that sense bold, because they were politically motivated. This time I wanted to go a step further, not least because it’s about a female artist at work. The film was meant to playfully deal with the theme, so that you also see my own love for cinema. This is why it seems so intimate at times. Not because I tell my personal story, but because I keep my work less under wraps, treat it less like a secret but reveal it more as a gift.

I: It’s interesting that you not only excluded men but also didn’t include music so much.

CS: That was also a choice that I made in the beginning, or rather had to, because it meant that I had to write the script with this [T: exclusion] in mind. It doesn’t mean that a film without music cannot be musical as well. But you write differently. And it means that you have to show a strong sense of rhythm on set. That wasn’t a problem for me, because I’m anyway obsessed with rhythm. Deciding against music wasn’t meant to be for the challenge, but I wanted to put the audience into a state, where art is also inaccessible to them. So that listening to music will also become precious. The film is about the relationship between art and love, and how important art is for our lives. Listening is therefore meant to become an organic experience. For me, it was about showing that you can reclaim cinema with the power of music [T: also listen to this or this… I have no regrets 😁]. If you really think about it: The piece by Vivaldi, which is in the film, is a hymn, but it’s also typical music when you’re put on hold. It was really exciting to create an atmosphere where you rediscover this piece, which you heard so many times, and in a completely different context and with a new image in mind [T: the most heartbreaking scene ever, here goes Vivaldi, also see here].

I: The last scene of the film is breathtaking. But I can also imagine that it was a huge effort for you as well as for Adèle Haenel to hold this shot for such a long time.

CS: To be honest, that was the most important and most difficult shot that I ever filmed. And with difficult I also mean technically, because you have to ensure that the focus is retained. The poor guy, who had to take care of that, was in a cold sweat during the entire take. It’s not Hollywood after all. This means, he had to sit on a small chair, which was attached to a self-made vehicle that a couple of other men had to slowly move across the room towards Adèle. Everything was extremely improvised. But that’s what cinema is also about: technique. You create something with whatever you have at your disposal, so that there is this brief magical moment on screen, which moves people.

I: Did you also know from the beginning that you wanted to conclude the film with this shot?

CS: Yes, it was the first image that I had in mind, when I started writing. It is one of those images that push you forward, when the doubts overwhelm you. And believe me, I gave up on this film more than once [T: 😱 😌]. But I always knew that if [T: the film came to life], then it should end like this. For me, this image represents a mix of joie de vivre and ancient dream [T: the text says ‘pures Leben’ or pure life, which has more of a positive connotation in German]. I can’t describe it any better. Perhaps it is the last secret that still remains for me.

—

Translated interview

Director Céline Sciamma: ‘I try to create new forms of eroticism’

Dominik Kamalzadeh, in: Der Standard, 15th of December 2019

// Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]. Almost zero here, Céline said it all 🙂. //

‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’ tells the love story of two women in the 1770s. Her much acclaimed film is about the present, says the director.

A painter (Noémie Merlant) arrives on an isle in Brittany with a secret commission. She is supposed to paint the portrait of a young noble woman (Adèle Haenel) without her knowledge. But they meet on equal terms, and soon they share an idea of liberty, they fall in love with each other. The portrait is made under new conditions.

Céline Sciamma’s ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’ (Portrait de la jeune fille en feu) is not a typical love story. Artistic and focused, the film allows access to a female counterfort [T: literal translation of ‘Widerlager’, which is borrowed from here], where the laws of the outside world are turned upside down. Sciamma’s award-winning work was much debated, she emerges as sharp advocate for her own film during the conversation in Hamburg.

Interviewer: Roles and morals are always clearly defined in period films. Was it therefore more appealing to talk about liberties?

Céline Sciamma: I didn’t really set out to transform the genre. I wanted to observe the background of the period as any other. When you’re delving into the past, then you’re officially dealing with a clearly defined society. In the present, people act as if that’s not the case anymore – but that’s wrong. You also take decisions, whether it’s about the framing or the costumes. When the codes are official, my decisions certainly become more apparent. Everything seems bigger. It was really fun, because it made me pay more attention to do a contemporary film.

I: But the opportunities for women were much more restricted than today. When you leave them alone, without a chaperon on a desert island, does that not reinforce the utopia?

CS: As the film is set in the past, it is official that women are oppressed. We know the grid of oppression. I didn’t need to spend much time on it. At the same time, it allowed me to create another story, in which it is not about giving women freedom that they don’t have. For me, it was about sharing their intimacy. And when we share this intimacy and drop out of this world for a few moments, then we see what is possible. It is not a biopic about strong women, it is also not about repressed feelings. It is a whole new story: a love story with equality, without dominance. There is no intellectual dominance, and no social hierarchy anymore.

I: The class conflict with the maid, the third one in the group, is also suspended.

CS: Sisterhood allows this. And it is also true. Cinema is the only art, which allows us to share somebody’s loneliness. It creates intimacy and experience. Utopias are not futuristic dreams, they emerge because of local experiences. I have experienced a world without men for myself. It happens, not often, but it happens. To a certain extent, this is embodied in myself. The world that we dream of: It exists.

I: You approach the cinematic gaze through the painter/portrayed configuration. It was often said of cinema that it prefers the male gaze – how do you escape this?

CS: For me, it was above all an attempt to deal with the ideas in a generous and playful manner. I didn’t want this film to appear theoretical. There’s a lot to harvest, there’s also an entertaining story. The mirror relationship was also meant to be comical. It is always my dream to create a language, a rhythm, aiming for the audience to learn this language while watching.

I: You share a perspective and with this an emotion. But the film also permanently deconstructs the act of looking.

CS: The point is to stop the objectification. I wanted to present all characters as subjects. This creates an intelligent viewer. That’s not meant to be educational: I assume that my audience is smart. It’s just that you don’t often cater to this.

I: This is the first time that you work with professional actresses. You are close to Adèle Haenel, how did the casting of Noémie Merlant happen?

CS: I was indeed thinking of Adèle when I was writing the script. I wanted to suggest something new to her, so that she discovers a new version of herself as actress – also from a technical perspective, how she uses her voice for example. The fun was of course that I knew the ‘model’ very well and that the painter would now look at her…

I: A reflection of the directorial axis…

CS: Exactly. Noémie has often looked at me to confirm how she would in turn look at Adèle. This merry-go-round of gazes was really cool. I didn’t want to go for a second famous actress, because in a lesbian relationship this would feel like a performance. You should be able to believe in the couple and the relationship. A newcomer succeeds in this with greater freshness. I was also looking for a physical contrast between the two, the blonde and the brunette, which was good for filming.

I: The relationship between the model and the painter also includes the one between the muse and the painter. But there’s not much left of this…

CS: That is not really difficult. Most people are just too lazy. I genuinely asked myself how I can avoid to objectify these women. The male gaze is just about conventions. You leave the world as it is. That is more comfortable. I don’t feel like I’m part of that, so I don’t have to feel comfortable. Maybe that’s why it’s easier for me.

I: You pursue this path consistently. For example, in the scene where the mirror in front of the genital of one is reflecting the gaze of the other.

CS: I try not to erase anything, but to create new forms of eroticism. New tingling. The sex scene of the film is not simulated. You can see the penetration of an armpit. I find that sexy. And everything is based on consent – that is also very sexy.

—

This doesn’t look like great picture quality  - I haven’t had time to check - but here you go.