The Changing of the Guard in the New French Cinema

Note: Nathalie Baye has been one of France’s greatest actresses for more than 25 years, starring in the films of some of that country’s leading New Wave directors (Francois Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard) as well as leading contemporary French directors. Her new film, “Venus Beauty Institute,” opens today. The Times asked her to reflect on her New Wave films and how they compare to her more recent experiences, including working with director Tonie Marshall on “Venus Beauty Institute.”

*

Do any American moviegoers today remember the French New Wave? Were they ever aware? Have most American filmgoers even heard of Francois Truffaut? The most important of Truffaut’s films was, in my opinion, “The 400 Blows,” then maybe “Jules and Jim.” These were made during the so-called French New Wave.

Yes, I worked for Truffaut, and for Jean-Luc Godard, but “Day for Night” came many years after the New Wave, and “Every Man for Himself” well after that. [Baye had roles in both films.] “Day for Night” turned out to be one of the most important French productions ever made, a huge international success. But it was probably the fact that a Hollywood studio, Warner Bros., financed the film that led to its global standing, not Truffaut’s association with a cinema movement that lasted perhaps five years.

Mythology is a strange thing. Most people think “Day for Night” was my first film. Not true. My first film was an American movie starring Peter Fonda that was directed by Robert Wise [“Two People”] I worked early in my career for Godard, Truffaut, Bertrand Blier and Bertrand Tavernier. Why? Because they were the directors who were working.

Godard was a very normal person--but unconventional as a director. Then, as now, he had a small crew and sometimes he would allow only four or five of them on the set at the same time. The crew consisted of Godard, the man behind the camera, one assistant and the actor. He would say, “Oh, the light isn’t exactly how I want it in here, let’s go outside and find someplace else to film,” or, with the crew and actor on set waiting he would say, “No, not today. I don’t feel like shooting today.’

Godard was freedom. The difference between the New Wave and today’s directors is that the new directors are much more self-conscious. In France the New Wave created a social and cultural revolution in cinema--a whole new style. Then, for a long period of time, French directors tried to emulate that style, often unsuccessfully.

Today’s generation of French directors rejects that path altogether. They see French New Wave films as something very generic. They reject the idea of making these intimate movies, shot in natural settings, filmed with great artistry, all New Wave conceits. In fact, I see myself as more New Guard than New Wave.

I’d like to direct a short film, but even a short requires a certain courage I may be lacking. I’ve come across stories that interest me, but I’m more fascinated by form than narrative. I am fascinated by technique. I would love to do a small thing--for five minutes with a small camera--something in the style of Thomas Vinterberg’s “Festen” (The Celebration). The catch is, I love being an actress, and if I go behind the camera I would be afraid that to go back to acting for other directors would be dreadfully boring--I’d want to tell them where to place the camera.

Once Upon a Time, Actors Had Input

New directors in France seem to be less open to involving actors in the process of directing. I wonder if that’s the same in the States. It was definitely not the case in France 20 years ago. Young French directors today think, “OK, she’s trying to tell me something. She thinks she’s smarter than me.” Very insecure. They refuse to be influenced, certainly not by an actor.

It was much simpler working with Truffaut. He loved actors. He was not the most incredible director of actors in the world; no, he was just very good with his cast as human beings. He loved his actors and when he cast an actor, for one thing, he would listen to the actor and, consequently, he would enjoy the shoot. He made it easy for the actor, and for himself.

With my new film “Venus Beauty Institute” it was a bit different. The director, Tonie Marshall, told me she was writing the part of Angele for me. I became very excited and nervous. Nervous because I was hoping to love it, you know? She was writing it for me. That doesn’t happen for many actors--it’s a big responsibility. But it’s also a wonderful gift. It makes you want to give a great deal back.

And I know the real reason why she wrote this character for me. When you’re a well-known actor people have a preconceived notion about you. Strangers think Nathalie Baye is somebody very proper, very square, very clear, perhaps not too deep. In reality, I’m a far more complicated person, and I think that’s what Tonie sought to create, not another simple role, which is how most directors see me. Tonie sees the conflict, the contradictions.

Angele is many things--she is sweet, tough, proud, funny. It’s the first character I’ve played that is so complex, so real. I’ve played real people for other directors too. But they are real people from the real lives of those directors. In “Every Man for Himself” I was Jean-Luc Godard’s wife. In “Day for Night” my character was based on Truffaut’s real-life girlfriend at the time. That’s another kind of bizarre.

The French Make Americans Look Prudish

Yesterday an interviewer asked me why Americans are obsessed with sex in films. But that’s not true! Americans are very shy and prudish compared to the French, especially when it comes to films. I don’t care about sex in films. American journalists pick up on the sexuality in “Venus Beauty Institute” more than I would have thought because it is not really a sexual film; it is more a sensual film, there is a great difference.

In France, I think there is a movement for many directors to be outspoken about sex. Most of the time it is women directors. They want to be the gender representing sexuality in movies. My character in “Venus Beauty Institute” is very sexually confident, but she’s not about sex. I never called Tonie and said, “OK, I want you to make the character more sexually strong.” Again, I don’t think people see me normally playing an overtly sexual creature. I don’t even see myself as a very sexy person.

I’m very happy with the characters I’m being offered now, with the kinds of people I’ve been playing lately, more so than those I played early in my career. Perhaps it’s because my characters these days represent more flawed people, real people, damaged people, like those in “Venus Beauty Institute” and “A Pornographic Affair” [a 1999 film directed by Frederic Fonteyne, called “An Affair of Love” in the U.S.] I have more freedom now to take these riskier roles, more so than many other French actors and directors. I feel confident and mature enough in my life and in my career now to inspire freedom in other actors and directors.

You don’t think about confidence when you are 20, you just do it. Today I love the comfort of confidence. The challenge in making a good film, and a successful film, can still overwhelm me with great apprehension from time to time. Twenty years ago I didn’t think about such things. But with the sense of apprehension comes a sense of how privileged one can feel just being offered those challenges.