The Bridesmaid (2004)

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

As Good As It Gets

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

About ten years before he decided to venture again in Ruth Rendell universe, Claude Chabrol had transferred to the screen "a Judgment in Stone" entitled "la Cérémonie" (1995). It was his last great masterwork although he somewhat betrayed the novel. The choice of Sandrine Bonnaire for the main role was ill-advised. Afterwards, his career followed a creative downswing with rather mediocre works such as "au Coeur Du Mensonge" (1999) or "Merci pour Le Chocolat" (2000). So, could a new excursion in Ruth Rendell territory boost his career again?Alas no and the title of my summary should give you an inkling about my thoughts on the Chabrol 2004 vintage. However, there were some good elements to make the film compelling and to grab the attention. The first sequence showcases Benoît Magimel and his family in front of the TV news that reveals a murder. Perfect to weave an eerie climate. The big, imposing, eerie house in which Laura Smet lives seems to shelter dark secrets and the "bridesmaid" lives in the basement. Chabrol was also interested in the games of truth and lie that link his two main actors and real suspense lies in Magimel's personality dangerously attracted to the bridesmaid. The filmmaker's touch is also discernible at the wedding ceremony where he ridicules its crucial steps. See the church sequence and the feast which echoes to the one in "Le Boucher" (1970). While I'm evoking this meal, the gastronomy dear to Chabrol has three sequences devoted to it in the whole film. But let's come back to the bulk of the plot. Like "a Judgement in Stone", "La Demoiselle d'Honneur" was an exciting novel to read and again Chabrol skipped over some important points, notably the reasons which prompt the hero to steal the bust from Gérard Courtois (Bernard Le Coq). In the novel, he stole it because he thought that Courtois was a vulgar man, but here Magimel's motivations to steal the bust remain blurred.The thrust of the novel and so of the film is a man who gradually loses the control of his everyday life facing a sensual, attractive disturbing young woman. However, things aren't looking good because there's an absence of unnerving climate and the scenario seems to have been sedately written, especially near the end. In another extent, I know what I'm going to write is questionable but I do think that Chabrol contemporary films suffer from the choice of the actors (see bland Jacques Dutronc in "Merci pour Le Chocolat" or Jacques Gamblin in "au Coeur Du Mensonge") and sadly "la Demoisele d'Honneur" isn't an exception to the rule. Magimel's character isn't credible at all. He should get bogged down in madness as he's deeply in love with Smet but it isn't discernible on the screen. Laura Smet (Johnny Hallyday's daughter) has a monotonous acting while Bernard Le Coq's part is underwritten. Michel Duchaussoy who was brilliant in "Que la Bête Meure" (1969) is relegated to a minor tramp role unworthy of his wide acting skills.So, an absence of interest for this story of manipulation is surely due to its actors and also because like for "la Cérémonie", Chabrol made dull Rendell's novel. Mr Chabrol, let's put it this way: the best of your work is far behind you in time (roughly the dusk of the sixties and the dawn of the seventies) and you will probably never reach this scale again. How about contemplating retirement?

This is yet another take on Chabrol's ongoing exploration of French suburbia and on balance it's no better or worse than most of his others. From the outset - Philippe Tardieu returns home to find his mother and sisters watching a news report involving the mysterious and possibly tragic disappearance of a young girl and turns the TV off - it's obvious that Philippe (Benoit Magimal) is destined to wind up on the TV himself having descended from an initially healthy to an ultimately unhealthy state of mind so that all we need now is a catalyst. Chabrol makes us wait and doesn't introduce Senta (Laura Smet) until about 30 minutes into the movie. From that point it's a case of watching as Senta eats into Philippe's brain the way maggots eat into a cadaver for, to all intents and purposes Philippe is a dead man from his first encounter with Senta. Chabrol likes to take his time and dallies over a situation involving Philippe's widowed mother Christine (Aurore Clement) and a possible replacement Gerard Courtois (Bernard Le Coq). Chabrol clearly sees Le Coq as 'heavy' material; in his last film Fleur du Mal Le Coq had a much bigger part as a much bigger villain and Suzanne Flon suffers a similar fate segueing from a main supporting role in Fleur to little more than a cameo here. Benoit Magimal is the kind of French actor I've never been able to warm to, a kind of Vincent Cassell-lite, seething with contained violence, trying for 'cool' and emerging as 'sullen' though in fairness Magimal here gets nearer to playing an essentially 'nice' guy than Cassell managed in L'Appartement. Laura Smet is excellent as the not-quite beautiful but very sensuous with it Senta as well she may be given her pedigree - the daughter of the great Nathalie Baye and, somewhat improbably, Johnny Hallyday. Overall it's a pleasant if not gripping enough entry, one which I've now seen twice and will possibly see again.

This movie did not particularly convince me. Maybe my expectations went in a completely wrong direction but nevertheless I discovered some flaws that really disturbed my pleasure of this basically interesting film.The plot line grows more and more absurd and - in its absurdity - predictable as the story goes on. This would not matter to me (as I do not really mind that we are never given an explanation for the strange and questionable features that strike us right from the beginning, especially in connection with Senta and the bust) if the characters were a little more subtly portrayed. All of the characters (Magimel's at the least) are exaggerated and near-hysterical, and therefore close to various type clichés (the rebelling teen daughter stealing, colouring her hair AND piercing her nose; the bridegroom, who is revealed as an idiot the instant we see him, calling his bride embarrassing terms of endearment; the mother smiling hopefully throughout as if she was on drugs). I am sure all this is not due to bad acting but done so intentionally. But I fail to understand what kind of quality it is supposed to add to the film. Humour? I don't know; I laughed occasionally but not very often.This is the kind of film that I am sure is fun making; but then it should not be shown publicly.

Having read the book 'The Bridesmaid', I was gratified that this film was a very good representation of it. It kept close to the story and did not alter anything. Even though my image of Senta as she is portrayed in the book was different to that of the one in the film, it didn't matter as her personality was accurately portrayed - indeed, all the characters were excellent. Benoit Magimel was exactly how I imagined the main character, both in looks and behaviour.The impact of the events would have been greater to those who haven't read the book (ie I knew what was going to happen) but I found it satisfying and would highly recommend this film.Ruth Rendell's plots are so clever, with a twist in the tail, and it is important that a film captures this, and Chabrol manages it perfectly.