La Faute à Fidel! (2006)NR
Running Time: 99 minutes
France
For a really long time I couldn't get over the acting of Victoire Thivisol of Ponette. It's really good, and she was 4 years old. Nina Kervel-Bey, however, gave Victoire a run for her money in 2006 with her sullen yet sassy role in Blame it on Fidel. I would be bitter too if I grew up in the comforts of bourgeois France only to be deprived of these things because my parents decided to become activists.
The story is probably hard to relate to. It might be offensive to some because of the film's glorification of radical (not liberal) ideals. It is even arguable that Anna (Victoire), who voices all the objections a spoiled capitalist would raise, embodies an infantile and inferior view to that of the radicals. (i.e. liberal = sophisticated, fiscally conservative = not yet educated on the matter.) This may, however, be a poor interpretation. It is important to remember that Anna is the protagonist.
In 1970, Anna's parents decide to go to Chile and help their comrades establish a new order. I'm not going to tell you the whole story because I'm lazy, and I have class soon. Essentially, the parents throw themselves into their work and neglect their children. Anna, in particular, resents this.
Anna is very perceptive. She questions her parents current and past actions, articulately observing the hypocrisy in their lives. The father is inconsistent in standing up for causes (he missed out on the 1967 French student revolt because he had a cushy job.) The mother jeopardizes their roles in Chile by getting involved in an advocacy group to legalize abortion.
Anna is also selfish (capitalist?). She has a conversation with "les barbus" (bearded men) who often congregate at her home about the merits of capitalism (you get lots of money for yourself) verses the merits of communism (there is no self interest). As much as the film is black and white or left and right, it is subtly complex in how it portrays the way the characters have to relate to each other given their ideals.
The film is pretty heavy handed. So, if you hate liberal ideals, don't watch it. You will be distracted and perhaps infuriated by the ideology.
The film ends on a very optimistic note. Anna transfers to a public school, and unwittingly the other children invite her to join them. I think the symbolism is we always ought to remember that a human being is more important than any ideal, left or right. I don't think that Julie Gavras really got the point across in any explicit way, but this is alright given that Hollywood beats us over the head with whatever they think is important. ( I have to disagree slightly with DC's review of Wall•E. The first 30 minutes were amazing. When the humans come along it was like we had to be bludgeoned to death with the fact that if we don't eat healthy and exercise, we will be obese, or the fact that the earth is nearly dead, but if a little plant can do it, (do what?!?) we can too! I absolutely agree that these are important issues, I just feel that the film was a little didactic. But, barring that barrage of if-you-didn't-get-the-point-we-will-reiterate-it-over-and-over-just-to-make-sure, Wall•E was great.) Okay, I better end the review there...
