Existentialism through S&M, Psych 101 and Chandeliers…

Friday night I went to see “Special Treatment” with the amazing Isabelle Huppert.  This Film is a fantastic study in Existentialism and after reading the puritanical description of this movie and after reading a few movie reviews, which completely missed the entire point of the movie, I decided to give my own deux centimes. 

Regarding the title.  A mon avis, the original french title is existentialist.

“Sans queue ni tete.” “Neither tails nor heads” which arrives at nothing. I have no idea who decided that “Special Treatment” would make a good title when it has nothing to do with anything in this film. Special Treatment was a term used in WWII when someone was being sent to their death. No one dies in this film. If the English title is referring to the individualized treatment that the clients are receiving then that would make slightly more sense; however, no one truly is receiving special treatment in that sense since they are paying for their treatment/services being rendered to them. Alors, a more existentialist title would have been more appropriate and would have set the right tone for the film.  Par example, like “Without Sense” ou bien “Arriving at nothing”

Oui, bad translations abound in the film. The beginning is the best example. While Huppert is walking through an antiques shop with her friend she begins a witty conversation about laying pipes and blowing pipe. I don’t think I have to explain what the conversation truly was about. Yet, the film’s translations really do not hint at the double entendre going on. It seems like they are actually talking about a bunch of pipes.  Since my French friend was the only one laughing I am assuming no one in the theatre quite understood what was going on there.

The movie reviewer of the New York Times pointed out that Huppert has contempt for her client by calling him “chandelier” because his money was going to pay for the chandelier that she wanted. “For all of Alice’s deference to her clients, her contempt for them leaks out like a bad smell. She refers to one as “chandelier,” because the money she makes from him will cover the cost of a glittering ceiling ornament she has recently purchased.”

It is not contempt but rather indifference that she holds for others, she simply doesn’t care anymore. She calls him chandelier as a way to detach herself from him, as a way to distance herself.  Like the lead in Albert Camus, “The Stranger.” “Aujourd’hui, maman est morte.”

There is a detachment there, he wasn’t cruel about his mother’s death, he wasn’t cold , he was stating her death as a fact. He, like the prostitute in this film & like the Psychologist, is detached.  Violà existentialism.

 “…Ms. Huppert conveys an iciness verging on cruelty. When she matter-of-factly regales one potential customer with a list of her fees and services — 400 euros (about $575) for 30 minutes, with a minimum of 10 sessions — you wonder why any man would sign up for fun and games with someone so forbiddingly chilly.”

Again, she is just delivering the facts, it is a business deal. If a man were sitting down and about to make a transaction with someone how would he act? This is sex, this isn’t dating, this is purely a session for someone to acquire something that they are not getting in their everyday existence. Besides, the Psychologist isn’t exactly warm to his clients and the above scene shows that parallel perfectly.

“it is because man’s condition is ambiguous that he seeks, through failure and outrageousness, to save his existence.” Simone de Beauvoir

As far as the New York Times critic writing that she was too old. Mon dieu, she was incredibly sexy and strong. There is a reason why the french have more sex and the women are considered sexier, it’s because they embrace their humanity and beauty is in their naturalness. This way of thinking allows the incredibly talented and lovely Kirsten Scott Thomas to still be working over in France and why we haven’t seen much of her in the States. This way of thinking is unlike the Hollywood Film industry’s “youth culture” way where some look fake young, waxed, shiny, with a subtle shade of orange and a rigidness that makes them uncomfortable to watch.

From the Village Voice: “The film, starring Huppert, quickly telegraphs that its ideas are too shallow for a talent as deep as hers.”

Again, this is existentialism,  life is absurd and shallow and we have to create meaning out of our lives ourselves.

Again from the Village Voice:  “They’re both assholes, but he’s a bigger one.”
Not assholes, just lost. Assholes are people who deliberately treat people like crap, these two leads are simply drowning in their everyday life & do not know where to turn next. Then they find one another which leads them down a new path. Through new relationships they are able to find different paths to take.

En bref, disregard the puritanical descriptions of this film because it truly is intellectual and any glimpse into the high class prostitution world is just that, a glimpse.  Seeing the parallels between lying on the Dr.’s couch and lying on the call girl’s bed is very thought provoking. It actually reminds me of the book that I am reading now by Coehlo entitled “Onze Minutes.” Mais oui, I am reading him in francais, pourquoi pas?