The Mother and the Whore (1973)

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

In the late sixties a new wave of directors emerged from France. Instead of images dialogs were more important to them. Although there were more (art house) directors who put a lot of talking into their movies people like Jacques Rivette and Jean Eustache took it to the extreme.There are several reasons to dislike La Maman et la Putain: First reason is of course its length as mentioned by almost every reviewer I watched this movie in several parts which is really the best way to enjoy and analyze it. Second reason is the fact that it is shot in black and white. Good use of color could have added a lot of emotion and atmosphere. And the third reason is the cinematography. In almost every scene there is a static camera as if nothing has changed since the invention of cinema by the brothers Lumiere. A lot of reviewers add the fact that they cannot identify with protagonist Alexandre, a dandy with great disdain of people with a job who lives on the money of his girlfriend/patron Marie. For me that is no specific reason to dislike a movie. Just like I cannot identify myself with Alexandre I cannot with Hannibal Lector for example. There's no necessity to feel sympathy for the characters to make a good movie. For me it feels that Eustache cancelled all the practices that could distract the viewer from the dialogs, so no color, no movement and no editing. So let's concentrate on the characters and what they say. As I mentioned Alexandre is a layabout who spends his days hanging around in café's, flirting with women and listening to old recording by Marlene Dietrich or Edith Piaf. He is full of self-pity and believes that every recent historical event has happened to add misery to his live. He dislikes the people with regular jobs and a homely life. But in fact all he really wants is to live that kind of life with his former lover Gilberte. There's some talking that he abused her before she ran away from him, although I found that hard to believe regarding his passive character. While still mourning about his loss of Gilberte he met Veronica, a woman who reminds him of his the girl he lost. In endless monologues their relationship evolves sometimes loving each other tenderly and alternately act very crude. Veronica is nymphomane looking for the love of her life. She loves Alexandre but she also now that he is not the lover she's looking for. At first Alexandre's other lover Marie is amused by his advances to Veronica but soon she become jealous. At the end Veronica penetrates in the live of Alexandre and Marie and a love triangle develops.At the end you feel some sympathy for Alexandre. Although he is very rude to the women in his life and he is a lazy bastard he is also a great narrator of stories and quite funny. Although he talks about 75% of the whole movie there are not a lot of things you know from his past before his relationship with Gilberte. Jean-Pierre Léaud did great acting in his role of Alexandre. It is said that he improvises a great part of his role. I also sympathize with Veronica. She's longing for the great love of her life but all she finds are men who wanna sleep with her. She can be very crude (especially when drunk) but also very tender. The last scene hints at a pregnancy of her, probably with Alexandre as the father. For me it is impossible to say how the relationship between Alexandre and his two lovers should continue. It is clear that he needs Marie (and her money) to patron him. He loves her as a mother but what he really longs for is a pure woman like Gilberte. Sometimes Veronica reminds him of her but sometimes he is disgusted with her. I don't think that there is a very bright future for Alexandre. His relationship with Veronica creates a wedge in his relationship with Marie so in the end he will lose both his patron and his whore.Like I said I watched the movie in parts. It's certainly not easy entertainment but if you push through the beginning (Oh no! Not that kind of movie!) you are rewarded with a fine psychological drama. But if I have to compare it to other French movies of the Nouvelle Vague and the New Wave and if I look at all the reasons to dislike it I think that Eustache missed a masterpiece by ignoring the art of cinema and focusing on the art of dialogue.

... is because of films like this.Don't get me wrong. I like independent cinema, and particularly like good foreign films, but this film could have been cut by at least an hour.I'll explain.The film revolves around a self centered young man who professes he loves certain women, but is really looking for someone to love him. Enter a woman who doesn't love herself, but finds this same young man, taps his energy, and both wind up "flowering" for it.This movie revolves around the sexual morays and politics of a small group of Parisians. The film starts out very strong. Actors present characters in an extended first act that we would like to get to know, but, unfortunately this pic becomes the poster boy for the proverbial "long boring French film" replete with characters who light up cigarettes and talk in either cafés or materially spartan rented rooms about how life should be different, and what it all means. Toss in an Oedipal complex/undercurrent, and you have the quintessential French avante-garde flick.Huh.Inspite of this there's some good material in this film, but director Jean Eustache (probably to make up for lack of scheduling and some technical aspects) throws a lot of dialog at the audience that would've have been better served with some visual cues.All in all it shows how messed up an certain sect of French culture really is, and, perhaps ironically, drives home a realist message regarding the act of coupling.Technically it's bare bones. Lots of natural lighting is fused with high contrast B&W cinematography, and to add to the rugged feel of the film the scratch track is used. Little to no looping of dialog. You can hear what pros call "room tone" as it was actually recorded during filming.I could go off the deep end and call this film self-indulgent, pretentious et al, but will say instead that the exposition given to the story was "over-exposed" (for lack of a better term). The symbolism is fine, but a lack of visuals and a borderline in-you-face delivery of certain dialog, hampers what could have been a much better film. By that I don't mean commercially successful nor accessible, but a film that could have delivered the same gists, character and message without the flaunting its strive for artistic excellence.

this movie is so complex that it can be given any description and still roll with it. you have a insecure, troubled and fascinating main character (played by Jean-Pierre Léaud) who is trapped between two (no, three) women. we listen to his social, philosophical and moral idiosyncrasies in interminable monologues, we see him working his magic around the three women that he loves. this could be the premise for a fowl movie, full of rigid, cold, uninteresting commentaries. yet director Jean Eustache manages to keep it fresh, ironic and witty. being such a long movie, one cannot but burst into laughing when, after 2 hours of speaking politely, Jean-Pierre Léaud all of a sudden screams on the phone while he remembers a cheesy line from a movie. this kind of situations are purely cinematographic and cannot be fully restored in a commentary. nor can someone restore the tragic and painfully beautiful monologue of Françoise Lebrun towards the end of the movie. 3 and 1/2 hours and worthing every minute.

Well, of course not, women are overly sensitive and needy on average, which is interestingly portrayed from mother to whore, though not pseudo-artistically, extravagantly, or blatantly dwelt on. Unlike many of you I have only seen La Maman et La Putain twice. As many good films, I noticed my opinion of it improved after a second viewing. All that I know is what I have seen and have yet to delve into further exploits until I myself have acquired the dvd. I have yet to figure out precisely why I enjoy this movie so much, but really, what do I care why? Though I'm sure I could and will form some wonderful explanation. All right, so you may disagree, perhaps it is a bit boring at times, I'm not an expert. The blonde reminds me of a lovely Grushenka.