Populaire (France-Belgium 2012)

Luis (Romain Duris) and Rose (Déborah François).

Louis (Romain Duris) and Rose (Déborah François)

This is the film that I have enjoyed most in the cinema this year. I found it compelling entertainment for two reasons. One was the casting of Romain Duris and Déborah François and the other was the use of costume, colour, lighting, graphics and music. Duris and François are my favourite francophone actors of the current crop and that might explain why I am so taken with a film which too many critics seem to have dismissed as simply ‘conventional’. Philip French has announced his retirement from the Observer but in one of his last published reviews he gave the film the full works and found many interesting connections – whereas his colleague on the Guardian, Peter Bradshaw, dismissed it with hardly a second glance. That’s a big mistake because there is plenty to see.

Budgeted at a whopping €14.7 million, Populaire has been inevitably linked with The Artist and Mad Men because of its meticulously presented period detail. It shares The Artist‘s female star Bérénice Bejo (in a small but important role) and its cinematographer Guillaume Schiffman and it’s set in 1958-9 with the same attention to period offered by Mad Men. But that’s where the connection to the TV series ends – and the lazy hype perpetrated by distributors has arguably damaged the film’s box office. Think instead an hommage to the American sex comedies of the 1950s with Duris as Cary Grant or Jack Lemmon and François as an amalgam of all those greats such as Doris Day and before her Judy Holliday – but also decidedly Déborah François. This feeling of borrowing from Hollywood is underlined by the clever use of colours and lighting – like the bright colours of early Technicolor. The music is also well chosen with a mix of French and Anglo-American popular styles. There is a real sense of that keen French interest in American modernity associated with the need for speed – the typing competition is an excellent vehicle for this. Populaire is the first feature by director Régis Roinsard who had the original idea and co-wrote the script. It has its flaws and weaknesses but overall it works extremely well. Of course, a romcom/social comedy set in the 1950s raises questions about gender and we’ll come to those later. First though a brief outline.

Rose is the hopeless secretary.

Rose is the hopeless secretary.

The local finals in Normandy.

The local finals in Normandy.

Rose takes piano lessons from Marie (Bérénice Bejo)

Rose takes piano lessons from Marie (Bérénice Bejo) in order to improve her dexterity.

Rose is a young woman bored by live in her Normandy village where her father owns the village store. When insurance agent Louis advertises for a secretary in a nearby town she applies for the post and gets it – because she is pretty and Louis is a letch, we assume. In fact she is hopeless as a secretary but she can type like a whirlwind. Louis keeps her on and begins to train her for the typing speed contests which were apparently all the rage in the late 1950s. From then on the narrative structure is highly conventional with Rose going on to contest the ‘World Championship’ in New York. Along the way there are a couple of innovations and some tricky decisions over what to show/hint at in terms of offering what might be seen as nostalgia to a contemporary audience. (The ‘Populaire’ is a model of typewriter manufactured by the Japy company of Paris who become Rose’s sponsors when she wins the national title.)

Rose as the new star of promotions for Japy typewriters

Rose as the new star of promotions for Japy typewriters in one of the witty musical montages

The romcom demands that Louis at first doesn’t recognise his own desire for Rose, allowing him to be quite determined and distanced in his ‘use’ of her typing skills to achieve the success as a trainer that eluded him as an athlete himself. He is that familiar figure, the man in his late thirties running the family business but feeling that he has not succeeded. Rose loves him from the start but is too proud to show it, going along with his madcap training schemes to please him. The narrative material that Roinsard attempts to work with here includes a backstory that involves Louis as member of the Résistance in the latter stages of the war – which in turn led to his separation from his childhood sweetheart (Bejo), now married to an American who parachuted onto her parents’ farm in June 1944. For me, none of this worked, partly I think because despite his many talents I just couldn’t see Duris  in the Résistance – but perhaps the fault is mine, there is no reason why a man looking good in a sharp suit in 1958 shouldn’t have a wartime past. But the back story does lead into some potentially darker sides to the drama. Allied to this the sudden appearance of Louis’ family at Christmas provides one of the highlights of the film.

In the end, the film stands or falls for me on the performance of Ms François and she is formidable. She has the ability to move convincingly from village shop assistant to flirtatious romcom heroine, from childlike student to steely contestant and from clumsy office worker to assertive and confident young woman. In all of these roles she is convincing and she dominates the screen. The criticisms of the film’s ‘sexist’ and ‘gendered’ view claims that the film is conservative and backward looking and this is linked by some commentators to the inclusion of one sex scene and one ‘gratuitous’ ‘wet blouse’ moment – see the image at the head of the post. In the UK the film was given a 12A certificate which seems about right – but in the US it seems to be heading for ‘Restricted’.  The sex certainly is an issue for a film which I’ve suggested is attempting to work like those 1950s Hollywood comedies with their Hays Code approved scripts. A similar problem comes up when characters appear to be speaking ‘out of time’ – e.g. with references to smoking and when Rose cries “but this is 1959” (and therefore she can be a ‘liberated’ young woman). I think, on balance Populaire gets these decisions right. I also think that, like Doris Day and Judy Holliday before her, Déborah François is capable of taking the script away from its ideological implications of a submissive and restricted female underclass. Rose is a strong woman who works hard to get what she wants, standing up to whoever gets in her way. The narrative does validate the skills of the typist and it underlines the fact that secretarial work was one of the ways by which women were able to become independent and to establish themselves in the office before moving into a wider range of white collar jobs.  The film has suffered because of some of the negative reviews. I hope more audiences are able to see it and enjoy it for what it is – a conventional romcom with great performances that recalls some of the under-rated popular films of the 1950s. It has already created a buzz among the collectors of antique typewriters!

Rose on the big stage

Rose on the big stage

And if you do enjoy this, can I recommend Déborah François in the generically very different La tourneuse de pages (The Pageturner) which nonetheless has some narrative similarities?


  1. des1967

    I agree with most of what Roy says. The colour and the mise en scene generally were excellent. Those responsible for production design must have had a ball making this film. I’ve seen criticism of the way the film ignored important things that were happening in France at the time (the Algerian crisis, an army mutiny, the overthrowing of the Fourth Republic and the coming to power by De Gaulle in dubious circumstances). I’m not sure a genre like the romcom can contain elements such as these but in certain respects it does reflect the social reality of the period. This was the high point in the so-called “trente glorieuses”, the 30-year period after the War when France went, politically, from crisis to crisis but economically and socially it was a time of rapid change. (The Moulinex kitchen gadgets said it all).

    Where I depart from Roy is in the performance of Romain Duris. He’s a fine actor in many ways. He was excellent in, for example, De battre mon cœur s’est arêté/The Beat that My Heart Skipped, L’Homme qui voulait vivre sa vie/ The Big Picture and especially Paris . But I really don’t like him as a comic actor – particularly in L’arnacoeur/Heartbreaker. He seems to have one basic trope for comedy: an idiotic grin.

    Anyway, I’m not sure of the extent to which bad reviews affect box office but I’m just back from France where the film has been doing great business.

    Incidentally, Duris’s next film is an adaptation from a very popular French novel, “L’écume des jours” by Boris Vian (who is perhaps best known here as author of that great anti-war, anti-colonialist song, “Le Déserteur” – which was, of course, banned in France). The novel is a surrealist, satirical romance which has been translated into English as “Froth on the Daydream”. The film’s English title will be Mood Indigo, perhaps to do with Vian’s being a fan of Duke Ellington. It’s a novel which I thought untranslateable and unadaptable (although there was an attempt in 1968 by Charles Belmont with Jacques Perrin, Marie-France Pisier and Sami Frey) but maybe the combination of Duris and his co-star Audrey Tautou (there’s a certain quaint wackiness in the novel) will work and Michel Gondry (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) is perhaps the director who to pull it off.


    • Roy Stafford

      Yes, I had my doubts about Romain Duris but the more I think about him as Jack Lemmon, the more I think his idiot grin could work.

      I’m intrigued by your comment about the film’s recent ‘great business’ in France. I thought that Populaire was released in France last November when it did good but not spectacular business, especially given a very wide release. Box Office Mojo currently shows $US9 million with the UK as third biggest territory with $476,000.


      • des1967

        Jack Lemmon was restrained in comparison. Jerry Lewis?

        Re business, I admit my methods were more impressionistic than scientific – reactions in French press, what people I met were saying, etc. But, although no Intouchables nor even one of those machine-like franchises such as Asterix or La vérité si je mens, it has done pretty good business at 1.2 million spectators.


      • Roy Stafford

        In French terms, I think that a cinema audience of 2-3 million might be expected for a film with a budget of 14 million euros to be a hit.

        I need to find you some gurning Jack Lemmon photos!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.