In "Manon des Sources", the second chapter of his novel, "L'eau des Collines" (1963), Marcel Pagnol uses the same approach as he did in the first chapter (see my review of "Jean de Florette" on IMDb), posing questions and providing answers in a more or less convoluted, drawn-out way, the better to keep the viewer's suspense high.
The first and most important question in this chapter concerns the soothing of our bad conscience following the less than satisfying conclusion of the preceding chapter. We feel perturbed for having resigned ourselves to accepting the outcome, the success of Ugolin's project, which we never totally rejected, at the expense of Jean's project, which we by now wish had succeeded. How will Pagnol liberate us from this disturbing feeling? We already know that Pagnol is not interested in introducing a "Deus ex machina" to discharge our anxiety. He will again proceed objectively, relying on the psychology of the different characters involved.
The second question concerns the two new characters who appear on the scene: a grown- up Manon and Bernard Olivier, the school teacher. We hope that they will be the ones to provide us with a more satisfying resolution to the first chapter. But what is done is done. The only liberation from the sense of guilt that we feel must be a plain, straightforward type of revenge on Ugolin and César for their crime. However, Manon appears to be so sweet and innocent that we feel that she could not possibly be the tool for revenge, no matter how well-justified. The presence of Bernard, then, offers a solution. Pagnol presented Bernard in such a way as to leave the viewer totally unconcerned about his character. So, we think that perhaps he will be the implement of vengeance against Ugolin and César and the rest of the village.
When the perfidy of César and Ugolin is fully exposed, our conscience is partially appeased by Ugolin's suicide. But César's retribution will be more terrible yet, in what is one of the most dramatic endings of any film I have ever seen. Eventually, it is not certain that we applaud this ending either, as no matter how devious Ugolin and César were, we cannot totally erase the positive feelings they and their project inspired in us at the beginning of the first film.
For the interpretation of the three leading roles, film director Caude Berry chose three exceptional actors, each with a unique personality and film presence. In the role of "le Papet," we could not have imagined anyone other than Yves Montand, native of Marseille, a fabulous actor with more than sixty films on his resume, cabaret singer, and at one time candidate for France's presidency. This aging character of César, cantankerous at times, a happy strapping fellow at other times, a sensitive and vulnerable human being, is Montand himself, and vice-versa. As for Daniel Auteuil's performance, his attainment of the well-deserved César for best actor in 1987 for these two films, says it all. Finally, Emmanuelle Béart, who also won a César for best supporting actress in 1987, fills the role of Manon with grace.
There are two additional brilliant "actors" in the films. First, there is the picturesque and harsh landscape of Provence. From the first minute of "Jean de Florette" until the end of "Manon des Sources", we are seduced by the gorgeous images of the Provence countryside, and certainly by the love the director shows for Pagnol's work and the atmosphere it evokes. The second "actor" is the village itself, as portrayed through the different village characters, shown as little vignettes scattered throughout the films. We are thus introduced to the little community, from the "cul-benit" (blessed-ass), Anglade (Jean Maurel), to the secular, socialist, anti-clerical mayor, Philoxène. All these characters bring much authenticity to the story.
Jean's musical theme is the overture from Giuseppe Verdi's "La Forza del Destino", which Jean-Claude Petit weaves occasionally together with some expressive music to underscore some of the most dramatic moments of the film.
The themes are the city versus the country, modern versus traditional, good versus bad, and memory versus oblivion.
Pagnol does not consider the country life as a perfect universe, without conflicts. He illustrates the violence that can result from the peasants' deep attachment to their lands. Pagnol exposes us to the tribal mentality of the villagers against "foreigners," such as the inhabitants of the nearby village of Crespin. The only outsiders accepted by the villagers are the "pillars" of a village society: the priest, the doctor, and the school teacher. These outsiders are accepted for the obvious reason that the village needs them to exist. Finally, Pagnol shows us the deep motivation of Ugolin and César that is also easily understood by a city-dweller: making money.
Pagnol's message is thus humanistic in so far as, without ridicule or Manichaeism, he presents the motivations and different points of view of each of his characters. On the same humanistic level, these stories demonstrate that not withstanding apparent differences, such as social, regional or physical, all people are alike and deserve to be treated humanely. However, in that respect, Pagnol's philosophy is a little naïve. The reconciliation of the villagers with their past wrongdoing toward Jean Cadoret, symbolized by the marriage of Manon, occurs only when they understand that Jean was actually "one of them." So the community of humans beyond differences that Pagnol proposes as an ideal only exists here because Jean "belonged" to the village. As such, according to Pagnol, the village life is idyllic, but for the eventual presence of harmful individuals such as Ugolin and César.
In spite of Pagnol's naïve idealism, the films still succeed, because we are ultimately able to tie up all the loose ends, and to reconcile the warring factions through family and blood ties that transcend any geography.
The first and most important question in this chapter concerns the soothing of our bad conscience following the less than satisfying conclusion of the preceding chapter. We feel perturbed for having resigned ourselves to accepting the outcome, the success of Ugolin's project, which we never totally rejected, at the expense of Jean's project, which we by now wish had succeeded. How will Pagnol liberate us from this disturbing feeling? We already know that Pagnol is not interested in introducing a "Deus ex machina" to discharge our anxiety. He will again proceed objectively, relying on the psychology of the different characters involved.
The second question concerns the two new characters who appear on the scene: a grown- up Manon and Bernard Olivier, the school teacher. We hope that they will be the ones to provide us with a more satisfying resolution to the first chapter. But what is done is done. The only liberation from the sense of guilt that we feel must be a plain, straightforward type of revenge on Ugolin and César for their crime. However, Manon appears to be so sweet and innocent that we feel that she could not possibly be the tool for revenge, no matter how well-justified. The presence of Bernard, then, offers a solution. Pagnol presented Bernard in such a way as to leave the viewer totally unconcerned about his character. So, we think that perhaps he will be the implement of vengeance against Ugolin and César and the rest of the village.
When the perfidy of César and Ugolin is fully exposed, our conscience is partially appeased by Ugolin's suicide. But César's retribution will be more terrible yet, in what is one of the most dramatic endings of any film I have ever seen. Eventually, it is not certain that we applaud this ending either, as no matter how devious Ugolin and César were, we cannot totally erase the positive feelings they and their project inspired in us at the beginning of the first film.
For the interpretation of the three leading roles, film director Caude Berry chose three exceptional actors, each with a unique personality and film presence. In the role of "le Papet," we could not have imagined anyone other than Yves Montand, native of Marseille, a fabulous actor with more than sixty films on his resume, cabaret singer, and at one time candidate for France's presidency. This aging character of César, cantankerous at times, a happy strapping fellow at other times, a sensitive and vulnerable human being, is Montand himself, and vice-versa. As for Daniel Auteuil's performance, his attainment of the well-deserved César for best actor in 1987 for these two films, says it all. Finally, Emmanuelle Béart, who also won a César for best supporting actress in 1987, fills the role of Manon with grace.
There are two additional brilliant "actors" in the films. First, there is the picturesque and harsh landscape of Provence. From the first minute of "Jean de Florette" until the end of "Manon des Sources", we are seduced by the gorgeous images of the Provence countryside, and certainly by the love the director shows for Pagnol's work and the atmosphere it evokes. The second "actor" is the village itself, as portrayed through the different village characters, shown as little vignettes scattered throughout the films. We are thus introduced to the little community, from the "cul-benit" (blessed-ass), Anglade (Jean Maurel), to the secular, socialist, anti-clerical mayor, Philoxène. All these characters bring much authenticity to the story.
Jean's musical theme is the overture from Giuseppe Verdi's "La Forza del Destino", which Jean-Claude Petit weaves occasionally together with some expressive music to underscore some of the most dramatic moments of the film.
The themes are the city versus the country, modern versus traditional, good versus bad, and memory versus oblivion.
Pagnol does not consider the country life as a perfect universe, without conflicts. He illustrates the violence that can result from the peasants' deep attachment to their lands. Pagnol exposes us to the tribal mentality of the villagers against "foreigners," such as the inhabitants of the nearby village of Crespin. The only outsiders accepted by the villagers are the "pillars" of a village society: the priest, the doctor, and the school teacher. These outsiders are accepted for the obvious reason that the village needs them to exist. Finally, Pagnol shows us the deep motivation of Ugolin and César that is also easily understood by a city-dweller: making money.
Pagnol's message is thus humanistic in so far as, without ridicule or Manichaeism, he presents the motivations and different points of view of each of his characters. On the same humanistic level, these stories demonstrate that not withstanding apparent differences, such as social, regional or physical, all people are alike and deserve to be treated humanely. However, in that respect, Pagnol's philosophy is a little naïve. The reconciliation of the villagers with their past wrongdoing toward Jean Cadoret, symbolized by the marriage of Manon, occurs only when they understand that Jean was actually "one of them." So the community of humans beyond differences that Pagnol proposes as an ideal only exists here because Jean "belonged" to the village. As such, according to Pagnol, the village life is idyllic, but for the eventual presence of harmful individuals such as Ugolin and César.
In spite of Pagnol's naïve idealism, the films still succeed, because we are ultimately able to tie up all the loose ends, and to reconcile the warring factions through family and blood ties that transcend any geography.