#Céline x Adèle | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bourbon-ontherocks · 1 year

Note

okay, I moved stuff around in the asks so we wouldn’t end with something depressing 😂 (même si c’est déprimant en soi de devoir faire des pieds et des mains pour que discuter d’une série ne nous donne pas le cafard 🤡)

I’m sorry but I gotta address the timeline again… doesn’t timothée’s line at the beginning imply he and morgane have been dating for two months? "on n’essaie pas encore, ça fait que 2 mois" ? yet gilles tries to get out of his predicament by telling daphné ~je me suis mal exprimé "l’autre jour"… is it so hard to make the dialogue make sense?? 😟 ah, et aussi. congrats to adèle/jessica for whatever time travel gymnastics it took to be born in 1975 and die at 37 in the 2020s. (maybe she enlisted eliott’s help lol. he was wearing a back to the future sweater in the last scene, #timetravellerconfirmed)

I applaud the continuity in some regards though. lille est toujours un vivier olympique, apparemment (or are all cities like that? 😅); whatever research on hinduism they did for 304 was duly reused; morgane’s windows are still broken (tho if it really has been 2 months, we should perhaps hold the applause); she was right and did get dumped pretty fast (🥴💔💔); and, personal fave, my headcanon of a technophobic [gros canard] still holds 📱

but please tell me the product placement won’t last all season, jpp de leur café 💀 céline literally stops drinking tea because they put the coffee maker ON DISPLAY in her office, wtf 😂 a silver lining: it brings out the anticapicalist in morgane since she doesn’t drink a drop of the sponsored coffee timmy brings her at work. 🙏🙏🙏 certes, c’est capillotracté, but it’s something, alright?? let’s take that win before they snatch it away 😅 I’ll leave you with that, thanks for bearing with me! I’ll be happy to hear any and all positive takes you have on this ep. ❣️❣️❣️

"c’est déprimant en soi de devoir faire des pieds et des mains pour que discuter d’une série ne nous donne pas le cafard 🤡" -> And unfortunately, it's just the beginning... 😭😭 let's get used to it

So, before I dive into this one, Morgane's getting dumped by Timothée. This. Was. So. Gratuitously. Hurtful 😱😭 I mean, I was absolutely NOT rooting for them, but I wanted her to breakup with him, not the other way around. She objectively doesn't really care about the guy, and yet he still manages to break her heart by poking the same scar the others poked before, and I just -- 💔💔

Can we talk about how "J'ai besoin d'une relation plus...." "... simple ?" "Ouais c'est ça." "C'est toujours ça..." was such a heartbreaking exchange? Morgane being hit and ran over and over again about the SAME issue really hurt😰, and even more so when put in perspective with later stuff but 🤐🤐

Now, the timeline. 100% agreed, and I noted the same things re the inconsistencies. And the victime's date of birth made zero sense anyway since they changed her identity, right? So her zodiac sign might not be accurate, idk... Also the two months gap, which is necessary to vaguely establish Morgane and Timothée as a ~relationship, implies that Gilles kept pretending to Daphné that he was dating Timothée? And knowing Daphné she probably couldn't keep her mouth shut and made all sorts of allusions in front of Timothée who just had no clue at all? 😂 And I didn't notice Eliott's sweater but you're right, actually this show's been making fun of us and me specifically from the start 😅

(also yes, the windows weren't changed for two months while it was literally snowing during 304 🤦)

Now for me the biggest continuity issue in this episode is Morgane telling David she doesn't smoke while we saw her smoking in 301, I'll leave you with that 😅

Unfortunately, the product placement is far from over, and I must admit that it's particularly unsubtle and annoying this season 😠 but please tell me this didn't kill Céleane (Céline x tea 😆) aka my favorite ship from this show!!! 😱 And I didn't notice the trend but now that you're pointing it out, Morgane NEVER drinks out of these sponsored cups of coffee and only drinks from the anonymous cup during the breakfast scene, so... 👀

Other honorable mentions about this episode include :

Timothée attempting to lecture Serge and the latter just bursting with hilarity at him, that was extremely satisfying to watch 😊

Morgane and David bonding over getting dumped by the loves of their lives, that was sweet. At least Morgane got a modicum of sympathy and understanding this ep 🥲💕

Morgane's video at the end 🤣🤣🤣 Couac Investigations!! The fact that she answered Gilles in the video and the face he makes!!! Love this

Well, this is all I got for today, I hope I made you feel a tiny bit better about this episode (do you still have those boating shoes on or did they break already?)... And I just wanted to say, I will always bear with you 💕 ngl we're facing hard times, but we'll get through this, anon, and we'll get through this together 😘

Til next time! 🥃❤️

#julia's adventures with the hpi anon #hpi #anon #ask #hpi analysis #hpi season 3

3 notes · View notes

thexfridax · 4 years

Photo

Translated interview

Adèle Haenel: 'Sex in cinema is usually quite pathetic’

Wenke Husmann, in: Die Zeit, 31st of October 2019

Additions or clarifications for translating purposes are denoted as [T: …]

Our understanding of art? Patriarchal! Eroticism in cinema? Stunted! The actress Adèle Haenel about her new film ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’.

In the film ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’, the young aristocrat Héloïse literally catches fire. Around 1770 she falls in love with a young painter, who is supposed to portray her. The role of the shy former convent student seems unusual for Haenel at first glance, who otherwise plays very assertive female characters: an AIDS activist in ‘120 BPM’, a martial artist in ‘Love at First Fight’, a doctor who solves a murder in ‘The Unknown Girl’. But Haenel also interprets the role of the muse as a very active one. The actress had her breakthrough in 2007 at the age of 18 with ‘Water Lilies’, the debut film by film-maker Céline Sciamma. The two were a couple for years. ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’ is their second collaboration, which was awarded the Best Screenplay (for Sciamma) at the Cannes Film Festival.

Haenel speaks German very well. She learned the language almost perfectly for Chris Kraus' feature film ‘The Bloom of Yesterday’. However, whenever she speaks German, she will always be so categorical, Haenel warns, and after a very German expletive slips into the conversation, she switches to French.

ZEIT ONLINE: In ‘Portrait of a Lady on Fire’ you play a restrained woman at first. Your Héloïse is supposed to be portrayed by a painter. She is the more experienced, a self-assured artist you fall in love with. But then you reinterpret the role of the muse.

[T: Short bio of Adèle and description of the film is inserted here, but I didn’t translate these, as y’all know everything already 😏]

Adèle Haenel: It's about equality. I believe that the role of the muse is in fact active - and as important as the official role of the artist.

ZE: What is the active part or equality in the relationship between you being the portrayed and the painter? And what's new about it?

AH: I think in art history, being a muse was the role that women were allowed to play. That's why men said, ‘Oh, it's a passive role, the muses are just in the room, and we're dreaming and fabricating great ideas in our heads.’ It was their way of saying that as men, they are the only ones who create art. That's Scheiße [T: 💩 💩 💩] in my opinion. I’m sorry. Whenever I speak German, I am always a bit more categorical. But that’s the way it is.

(Continues the conversation in French)

I believe, however, that muses have always been active. They were just not presented like that. This also has a lot to do with a certain notion of art. Art is not just an ideal sphere that comes down to earth through an artist who is both absolute and ingenious. Art is created by questioning your own choices over and over again, as well as the reasons that led to them. Thus, there is something sacred and something entirely unholy in art. Questioning postulates, constantly questioning your own work, makes art powerful. And that is much more the result of collaboration than of anything else.

ZE: In this case, collaboration is based on love. Muse and artist are on equal terms. Your connection acts like an engine and unleashes the creativity of the artist. Is that the reason why the first portrait that the painter Marianne made of you as Héloïse is technically good but rather conventional? [T: the interviewer uses ‘not befitting’ here]

AH: It's not even about the progression, where only love makes art better, but it’s actually about the process. That's why you constantly ask yourself questions. Of course, at some point a portrait will come out, but in the film it’s not about whether that’s a good thing or not in the end. The problem of the first ‘failed’ portrait is that it avoids any questions. It does not ask exactly: Who is this person? What attitude did the painter take towards her? Does the model have an essence that we try to capture and bring to the canvas? Or is it just about capturing a specific moment? At this point, the collaboration begins. My character Héloïse begins to question Marianne, the artist, ‘What's that supposed to be?’ And when Marianne answers, ‘That's the way to do it,’ Héloïse retorts, ‘What do you mean, that's the way it is done, how do you find yourself in it, what's your attitude towards it?’ And you cannot just take that stance, you have to feel it.

ZE: Is this relationship comparable to what you have as an actress with the director Céline Sciamma?

[T: The above was taken from a translation on the Teller Report website and revised where necessary, my own translation continues below.]

AH: Yes, absolutely. Our collaboration is based on that idea. There are also parallels in terms of content, because painting in this film also has a lot to do with cinema. As it’s also about sequence, scene and so on. The screenplay was very detailed. Improvisation as a method wasn’t intended. But I had a certain amount of freedom to shape my character. The point wasn’t to do this behind closed doors, but the idea was developed in exchange to centre my character around the gaze and into three phases: At the beginning of my journey, I saw myself more as an object, then there was the phase of questioning, and at the end I’m more of a subject. This means that I used my face like a mask at the beginning of the film, very solemn, almost sacral, with little emotion, reserved. The warmer Marianne’s gaze becomes at Héloïse, the more I change the way I’m acting. I become more active and animated. I gave myself a very clear structure. Céline went with this kind of idea. And then we start to discuss about specific and precise things.

ZE: That seems quite practical and unpretentious.

AH: Oh, I’m a very impatient person and get annoyed very quickly. That’s why I can’t stand some of the questions that I get (mimics a stupid tone): ‘How do you endure just being looked at the whole time?’ I do retort then: ‘Have you even seen the film? It’s about the exchange of gazes!’

ZE: There is a narrative framework in the film, where Marianne remembers this love several years later. It’s about the impact of that encounter. How important is such an echo for the arts?

AH: You could say that every human being contains something like an eternal truth inside of them, but that this cannot manifest in a person in its pure form. The potential is there. So, you can develop, change, grow. It’s almost our responsibility to become a better [T: bigger is stated here] person, who exhausts all possibilities to become what makes us human. A romantic relationship [T: love affair…] also makes us feel the possibility to become someone else, more than what we were before. I’m thinking in particular of Spinoza in this context.

ZE: In short, he talks about the necessity of individuals to evolve so that they become more perfect. [T: ‘Vollkommenheit’ is difficult to translate, but I understand that Spinoza meant that this is the ideal state of being, see: The Ethics, Part 4. Of Human Bondage, Or The Strength Of The Emotions, Preface]. Looking at your career, it seems that you and film-maker Céline Sciamma, who was your partner for a long time, also helped each other very much in that sense to evolve.

AH: Céline and I have an extremely close connection and always had an intense intellectual exchange with each other. And an intense emotional exchange, but of course that changes over time. When it comes to what I said before about the search for and questioning of what’s underneath, and how we make choices in terms of our work, then Céline and I understand each other well. We agree about the questions and how we can communicate about them.

ZE: The film takes place around 1770. Back then, the first female artists’ associations were found such as the school of Adélaïde Labille-Guiard. Marianne also worked in such an art school. It was only a few years that women could work as painters. Before and after, female artists could only do that in a limited capacity. Why was that?

AH: You get the impression that the female gaze is somehow threatening for male colleagues, that’s why they always tried to ban it. And besides, that is still the case.

ZE: How?

AH: Because some kind of natural order is being postulated. We have very much internalised this patriarchal order, in our intimacy, our desires, in everything. Indeed, challenging this perceived natural order is dangerous, because the entire patriarchy virtually depends on this everywhere. The trick to avoid answering questions that women are asking is in pretending that women really don’t have any reason to ask these kind of questions: They are doing well after all. If it wasn’t that pathetic, it would be really funny.

[T: Two of the below bits were extracted (for ease of reading) from @hedawolf‘s fantastic gifset on Adèle smashing the patriarchy, please head over and show some love.]

ZE: It seems that many big film festivals are now more open to show films that are about interesting and diverse female characters. Aren’t there more of these stories these days?

AH: Indeed, the problem has now come to the surface of society – two years after the Weinstein affair and #MeToo. You can see the facts. These are hilariously pathetic: 100 per cent of women, who use public transport in Paris, have experienced violence or abuse. 100 per cent! You always hear: ‘No, not all men are like that.’ Yes, of course. But all women have experienced this. And men also feel it. They’ve started to question the structures, in which this was possible, and in which they also lived for a long time. They also question their own behaviour. It’s not about locking up all men in a cage, but that we all evolve. It will make us all freer. But you have to let go of your little privilege of always being in charge. I understand that this is tough. [T: 😏]

ZE: You’ve really shown us one of the most wonderful scenes on this topic in your film, without men.

AH: This scene is sexy, inventive, created in collaboration – we were also quite satisfied with it. That’s why I was so happy at the premiere in Cannes: There are 2,000 people in the audience, who will see something completely different.