Posts Tagged ‘Claude Chabrol’

Le Boucher (1970)

Dir: Claude Chabrol | France, Thrilller 1970

Claude Chabrol was the most cheerfully poisonous of the French New Wave directors. While Godard was busy dismantling cinema and Truffaut was making tenderness look like an existential condition, Chabrol settled down to investigate the bourgeoisie, that great French institution devoted to keeping up appearances while something ghastly festers beneath the wallpaper. He was the movement’s great anatomist of respectable people behaving badly, preferably over a good meal and with the curtains drawn.

An early critic of bourgeois hypocrisy, Chabrol became its most entertaining undertaker. His films are full of provincial notables, respectable marriages, respectable businesses and respectable people who, one suspects, would cheerfully murder the neighbours if it could be done without upsetting Sunday lunch. In films such as Les Biches, La Femme infidèle and Le Boucher, he made the apparently ordinary positively sinister. His great gift was to understand that evil rarely announces itself with a fanfare. More often, it asks you to pass the salt.

Then there is the matter of knives. Chabrol had, by all accounts, a particular fascination with them, a predilection recalled by his wife and frequent leading lady, as here, Stéphane Audran. Whether you consider Le Boucher as a domestic eccentricity or a detail best kept in mind when accepting an invitation to dinner, it seems entirely appropriate that one of his finest films should revolve around a butcher. Chabrol, who understood the symbolic possibilities of a dinner table better than most directors understood the possibilities of a camera, knew that a knife could be both a perfectly ordinary kitchen implement and a rather alarming extension of the human personality.

In Le Boucher, the knife is never merely a knife. It is a tool of the trade, a fact of rural life, a quiet threat and, ultimately, a way of expressing feelings for which the characters have no adequate vocabulary. It is also a splendidly economical cinematic device. No expensive special effects are required when a man has a sharp blade, a troubled mind and an entire village prepared to mind its own business.

Set in the Dordogne, this chilling two-hander brings together Hélène, played by the mannered, often coquettish, Stéphane Audran, a schoolteacher whose composure suggests that she has long ago made peace with disappointment, and Popaul, played by Jean Yanne, the local butcher. The two meet at a wedding, where the French countryside exudes carnal pleasure: food, wine, easy conversation, dancing and the general impression that civilisation consists of knowing everybody else’s business while pretending not to.

Hélène and Popaul strike up a friendship. She is intelligent, reserved and emotionally inaccessible; he is warm, decent, lonely and carrying the psychological baggage of a life that has been less than kind to him. He has served in wars and seen things no one should see, and his attempts at ordinary happiness have been frustrated by the usual human complications. He can slaughter an animal with professional efficiency but is rather less equipped to handle the delicate business of the heart.

Hélène, meanwhile, has her own history of romantic disappointment. She is not a woman who has stopped feeling so much as one who has learnt to keep feeling under strict supervision. Her classroom is orderly, her manner composed, her private life a closed book. One suspects that if happiness were to knock on her door, she would first ask it to make an appointment.

Chabrol places these two people together with the patience of a man arranging pieces on a chessboard, although his interest is less in checkmate than in the strange, hesitant movements people make towards one another when they are frightened of being known. Then the murders begin.

Young women are found brutally killed, and the bucolic idyll acquires an unpleasant new dimension. The countryside, which had seemed so reassuringly timeless, becomes a landscape of suspicion. The local community carries on, naturally. Villages have a remarkable capacity for accommodating horror, provided it does not interfere too much with the market, the school timetable or the arrangements for the next wedding.

The genius of Le Boucher is that it refuses to become a conventional whodunit. Chabrol is not especially interested in making us play detective, ticking off suspects and congratulating ourselves on having spotted the murderer before the final reel. Instead, he gives us something far more disquieting: the knowledge that we may understand a person without being able to save them, and that sympathy is not the same thing as innocence.

The film’s tension comes from the terrible discrepancy between what we know, what we suspect and what Hélène is prepared to acknowledge. Audran’s performance is a masterclass in restraint. Her face can convey a whole emotional history without appearing to have done anything at all. She listens, observes and occasionally smiles, and one feels that an entire novel has just passed behind her eyes while the other person was still struggling to finish a sentence.

Jean Yanne is equally extraordinary. Popaul is not presented as a monster imported from some lurid Gothic imagination. He is a recognisable man, capable of kindness, humour and genuine tenderness. His loneliness is not theatrical; it is the sort that has settled into the bones. He wants companionship, and he wants to be understood. Unfortunately, the universe has supplied him with a butcher’s knife and a set of emotional circumstances that make the search for intimacy rather more complicated than it ought to be. This is where the film becomes unexpectedly modern.

For all its reputation as a classic French psychological thriller, Le Boucher is also a devastating study of loneliness and lost love. Its central tragedy is not simply that violence exists, but that two people can stand so close to one another and remain separated by an almost unbridgeable distance. They share meals, conversations and stretches of the same countryside, yet there is a fundamental loneliness in each that the other cannot quite penetrate.

Popaul reaches towards Hélène with the awkward sincerity of someone who has not entirely given up on human connection. Hélène, who has already experienced the disappointment of love, is caught between compassion and fear. She recognises his vulnerability, perhaps even something of her own in it, but recognition does not magically produce the courage to love. Nor does it provide a reliable instruction manual for dealing with a man who may be responsible for a series of murders. One can hardly blame her for wanting to take things slowly.

Chabrol’s brilliance lies in refusing to turn this emotional predicament into a neat moral lesson. He is too intelligent to suggest that loneliness automatically makes people dangerous, or that love can cure every wound. His characters inhabit the untidy territory between pity and desire, fear and tenderness, where most human relationships actually take place. The horror comes from the possibility that the need to be loved can coexist with something monstrous, and that the person we feel sorry for may also be the person we should fear.

Visually, the film is deceptively simple. Chabrol makes extraordinary use of the Dordogne’s pale stone buildings, quiet roads, green countryside and ordinary domestic interiors. The landscape is beautiful without being sentimental. There is no need for a haunted castle when a village school, a butcher’s shop and a roadside picnic will do perfectly well. The camera watches rather than announces, allowing unease to accumulate almost imperceptibly. A conversation that begins with cake and polite remarks can leave one feeling as though the furniture has shifted a few inches while nobody was looking. And then there is the cake.

Food in Chabrol is rarely innocent, although it is usually appetising. Eating is a social ritual, a display of good manners, an expression of affection and occasionally a reminder that the civilised world rests on rather fragile foundations. In Le Boucher, meals become occasions for connection, but also for the uneasy recognition that we are never entirely sure what lies beneath another person’s good manners. The cake is perfectly ordinary. It is the company that makes it troubling.

The film’s cult reputation is therefore not difficult to understand. It offers the pleasures of a murder thriller without the mechanical satisfactions of a puzzle; the beauty of French provincial life without the comforting delusion that beauty makes people good; and two extraordinary central performances that make its moral complications feel painfully intimate. It is suspenseful, yes, but it is also funny in that dry, slightly cruel Chabrolian fashion, where the absurdity of everyday behaviour becomes more disturbing than any amount of thunder and lightning.

Above all, it understands that the past is never quite past. War, disappointment, rejection and unspoken grief travel with people into the present, where they are expected to behave normally, attend weddings, eat cake and make polite conversation. Most manage it. Some do not. Chabrol is interested in the thin, uncertain line between the two.

More than half a century after its release, Le Boucher feels less like a period piece than a film that has quietly caught up with us. Its concerns are entirely contemporary: emotional isolation, the failure of intimacy, the difficulty of recognising another person’s suffering and the terrible consequences of leaving certain feelings unspoken for too long. We live in an age of constant communication and unprecedented opportunities to make contact, yet the essential predicament remains unchanged. People are lonely. They want to be seen. They want to be loved. And sometimes, when they cannot find the words, they do something appalling instead.

Chabrol, being Chabrol, offers no comforting resolution to this problem. He leaves us with the uneasy sense that human beings are capable of tenderness and cruelty in the same breath, and that the most frightening things may occur not in the darkness beyond the village, but among people we have known for years.

Le Boucher is a film about murder, certainly, but its real subject is the terrible distance between wanting to love someone and knowing how to do it. The knife is memorable; the blood is shocking; the suspense is immaculate. Yet what lingers is something quieter and sadder: the spectacle of two lonely people who briefly find one another, only to discover that sympathy cannot always bridge the gulf between them.

A superb thriller, then, and a rather bleak advertisement for the perils of emotional repression. If you happen to be invited to a wedding in the Dordogne, by all means go. Enjoy the wine, admire the countryside, have some cake. Just be careful whom you confide in, and perhaps leave the knives to the professionals. Chabrol, one suspects, would have approved of that last precaution. He might even have asked you to stay for dinner.

NOW ON BFI PLAYER and the Chiswick Cinemas London W6

 

 

Claude Chabrol: Elements of Crime – Season at the BfI London

Claude Chabrol (1930-2010) was one of those filmmakers who seemed to regard cinema less as a profession than as a permanent state of curiosity.

The French director made films for more than half a century, moving with surprising ease between murder stories, comedies, literary adaptations and psychological dramas, but beneath the variety there was a remarkably consistent preoccupation: what happens when the polished surface of respectable life begins to crack.

Born in Paris in 1930, Chabrol grew up in a bourgeois family and spent part of the Second World War in the small village of Sardent in central France. Cinema became an early obsession. He organised screenings and immersed himself in films with the enthusiasm of someone discovering an alternative education. After the war he returned to Paris, where he studied literature and law but was increasingly drawn towards the city’s film culture. The Cinémathèque Française was his real university.

There he became part of the remarkable circle of young cinephiles who would soon transform French cinema. François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, Éric Rohmer and Jacques Rivette were among his contemporaries, and the journal Cahiers du cinéma became their battleground. Chabrol joined the magazine in the early 1950s, writing about the American directors whom established French critics often dismissed as commercial entertainers. Alfred Hitchcock was particularly important to him. Chabrol recognised that suspense could be much more than a mechanism for frightening an audience: it could expose character, morality, sexual jealousy and social hypocrisy.

A close friendship with Éric Rohmer led to their influential study of Hitchcock, published in 1957. But Chabrol was not content to remain a critic. His circumstances gave him an opportunity that many of his colleagues lacked. An inheritance from his first wife’s family provided money with which he could make films, and Chabrol used some of it to help finance work by other young filmmakers. He was therefore not simply one of the New Wave directors; he was among the people who helped create the conditions in which the movement could happen.

His own first feature, Le Beau Serge (1958), was made on a modest budget in Sardent. It was an audacious beginning: rather than constructing an elaborate cinematic world, Chabrol went back to a place he knew and turned its landscape and inhabitants into the setting for a story about friendship, disappointment and moral failure. The film immediately demonstrated an instinct that would remain central to his work—the ability to find menace in ordinary surroundings.

Les Cousins followed in 1959 and won the Golden Bear in Berlin. If Le Beau Serge had looked towards provincial France, Les Cousins shifted its attention to Paris and the seductive, competitive world of bourgeois youth. Chabrol’s cinema was already different from the more romantic image of the New Wave. His characters could be attractive, witty and modern, but he had little faith in the idea that modernity automatically made people freer or better.

During the early 1960s his career became less predictable. Chabrol made films that were not always successful and experimented with commercial genres, including thrillers and spy films. This period is sometimes treated as a detour, but it was actually important to his development. He learned how to work within the machinery of commercial filmmaking without abandoning his own interests. Unlike some of his fellow New Wave directors, he was never particularly interested in making difficulty or experimentation an end in itself. He liked audiences, genres and stories. By the end of the decade, he had found his territory.

Les Biches (1968), La Femme infidèle above (1969), Que la bête meure (1969) and Le Boucher (1970) (main pic) established the Chabrol style in its mature form. The settings became increasingly bourgeois: comfortable houses, country properties, restaurants, schools and immaculate dinner tables. Yet these reassuring environments were rarely reassuring for long. Chabrol understood that wealth and good manners could provide excellent camouflage for obsession, cruelty and violence.

Stéphane Audran became the great female presence of this period. Elegant without being conventionally glamorous, intelligent and capable of suggesting enormous emotional depths without displaying them, she was perfectly suited to Chabrol’s cinema. Their professional partnership produced some of his finest work, including La Femme infidèle and Le Boucher. His fascination was not simply with adultery or murder but with the elaborate social rituals surrounding them—the lies people tell themselves, the things they choose not to see, and the extraordinary lengths to which respectable people will go to preserve appearances.

Stephan Audrane at Venice in 2017 | copyright image 

 

This is why calling Chabrol the “French Hitchcock” is useful only up to a point. Hitchcock gave him a language of suspense, but Chabrol used it for his own purposes. His real subject was France: its provincial life, its bourgeoisie, its class divisions, its institutions and its hypocrisies. A murder in a Chabrol film is often less important than the society surrounding the murderer and the victim.

He also had a wicked sense of humour. Chabrol could be ruthless without being solemn. He enjoyed the absurdity of bourgeois rituals—the elaborate meals, the polite conversations, the apparently impeccable marriages—and often allowed comedy to sit beside horror. His villains were not necessarily monsters. Sometimes they were simply people who had reached the point where the rules they lived by could no longer contain their desires.

His productivity was extraordinary. He continued making films through the 1970s and 1980s, often producing work quickly and sometimes moving between serious and commercial projects. There were weaker films, inevitably, but he rarely seemed to lose interest in the possibilities of cinema. He could take a familiar genre and find another way of looking at it.

In the late 1980s and 1990s came another remarkable period. Une affaire de femmes, Madame Bovary, Betty and L’Enfer showed a filmmaker who had become increasingly interested in the psychology of women, marriage and social constraint. Then came La Cérémonie in 1995, one of his most powerful films. With Isabelle Huppert and Sandrine Bonnaire, Chabrol turned a story of domestic service and class resentment into something far more disturbing: a portrait of two social worlds that coexist but scarcely understand one another.

His later films retained the same fascination with hidden motives and carefully maintained appearances. By then Chabrol had become an institution, but he never entirely behaved like one. He continued to make films at a remarkable rate, and his appetite for actors, locations and stories remained intact. He could be sardonic, playful, occasionally mischievous, but he was always watching. His last two films were The Girl Cut in Two (2007) starring Ludivine Sagnier and Benoit Magimel, and Bellamy (2009) with Gerard Depardieu in the leading role.

Chabrol died in Paris in 2010, aged eighty. By then he had made more than fifty features, an astonishing body of work that is both uneven and remarkably coherent. His career also offers a different model of what a New Wave director could become. Where Godard continually challenged the language of cinema and Truffaut turned filmmaking into a form of personal expression, Chabrol gradually became a master of classical storytelling. He took the lessons of the New Wave and used them to make films that could look almost conventional while quietly subverting everything they appeared to believe in.

That may be his greatest achievement. Chabrol made the bourgeois thriller into a form of social observation. His camera enters the dining room, sits down at the table and waits. The wine is poured, the conversation begins, everyone behaves correctly—and somewhere underneath the civility is anger, desire, jealousy or fear. Chabrol knew that the most revealing moment is not necessarily when the crime takes place. It is the moment just before, when everyone is still pretending that everything is perfectly normal.

CLAUDE CHABROL: ELEMENTS OF CRIME from 1 September – 6 October 2026 at the BFI Southbank London.

Les Cousins (1959) **** Out on DVD

Director: Claude Chabrol

Script: Paul Gégauff, Claude Chabrol

Cast: Jean-Claude Brialy, Gérard Blain, Juliette Mayniel, Stéphane Audran

112min     French drama with subtitles

Claude Chabrol was one of the main protagonists of the French New Wave and this was his second and claimed the Golden Bear at the Berlinale 1959.

The Cousins are chalk and cheese: Charles (Gérard Blain) embodies bourgeois values of fidelity and straightforwardness while Paul (Jean-Claude Brialy) is suave, urbane and an inveterate womaniser with feet of clay. The film also marked Stéphane Audran’s stage debut and she went on to marry Chabrol five years later (after a brief marriage to Jean-Louis Trintignant) and to star in most of his films.

Chabrol passes no moral judgement on his characters allowing their subtly-nuanced performances to lead us to our own conclusions in this parable which is as entertaining as it’s delightful to look at thanks to Henri Decaë’s sublime visuals and Paul Gégauff’s stylish script which he co-wrote with Chabrol.

[youtube id=”zeX0VqupgPc” width=”600″ height=”350″]

LES COUSINS IS NOW OUT ON BLU-RAY AND DVD COURTESY OF EUREKA’S MASTERS OF CINEMA SERIES AND FULLY RESTORED  BY GAUMONT PICTURES.

 

Le Beau Serge (1958)*** Out on DVD

Director:Claude Chabrol

Cast: Gerard Blain, Jean-Claude Brialy, Bernadette Lafont.

99min    French with subtitles

[youtube id=”QQAYs31Bp48″ width=”600″ height=”350″]

Generally considered to be one of the first films in the French New Wave movement, Le Beau Serge was Claude Chabrol’s self-financed debut and he launches himself, full throttle, into this bleak piece of social realism that focuses on the homecoming of François (Jean-Claude Brialy) who is back from a few years in Paris. Full of sophisticated confidence, he finds that his old friends aren’t necessarily as happy to see him as he would have hoped, and particularly Serge, a leather-jacketed, rebellious roué who has turned to drink and settled for a loveless marriage

France was still getting back on its feet after the War years and there was considerable poverty in provincial life.  With its nods to the ‘Nouvelle Vague’ and improvised and grainy indie feel, it’s an interesting starting point for those keen on Chabrol or Nouvelle Vague but not gripping or well made enough to warrant much excitement compared to what was to come in the Chabrol canon. Some of the editing is poor with some shaky camera-work, although the performances are surprisingly accomplished particularly for Jean-Claude Brialy and Bernadette Lafont. MT

LE BEAU SERGE IS NOW OUT ON BLU-RAY AND DVD COURTESY OF EUREKA ENTERTAINMENT’S THE MASTERS OF CINEMA SERIES.

* GAUMONT RESTORATION.

* EXCERPTS AND INTERVIEWS WITH CLAUDE CHABROL.

* NEW AND IMPROVED ENGLISH SUBTITLES.

* ORIGINAL THEATRICAL TRAILER. 56 MIN DOCUMENTARY ABOUT THE MAKING OF THE FILM.

 

Copyright © 2026 Filmuforia