Together with Henri Langlois, Georges Franju was one of the founders of the legendary Cinematheque Francaise but his own, compact, production is still quite unknown. He is best known for his later feature, often categorized as a horror film, Eyes Without a Face (1960). His features were outstanding, masterful and brilliant but his earlier short documentaries might be even greater. The hard world was the subject in all of his documentaries; he depicted a world, without illusions, which was not better at all after the war it had just went through - WWII. In these documentaries he dealt with the truths behind human monuments (Hotel des invalides), the misuse of good intentions and accomplishments. Two of these documentaries stand out, and are his most well known ones: Hotel des invalides which was a pacifistic reportage of a war museum and Le sang des betes; a documentary about a slaughterhouse in Paris.
It would be juvenile to see Le sang des betes as a film about animal cruelty, or even as a moral study. Of course, one might say that watching it is the first step taken towards vegetarianism but to my mind there is much more in it, and I am a vegan. Le sang des betes depicts man deforming nature into something obnoxious. It's a poetically realistic film, filled with fantastic and grotesque details, where actual sights characterized by tragicalness.
The film is ultra-realism but also dream-like. It's in the same area with Luis Bunuel's "documentary" Las Hurdes - A Land without Bread; a film so honest that its realism turns into surrealism. In Le sang des betes Franju gave reality an artificial expression; he created a natural environment which turned into a setting - the contrast of the slaughterhouse and the outside world. The material world of the film reinforces this idea: old furniture thrown away, flee market, drying sheets and surrealistic details such as a mannequin, painting (Renoir?), umbrella and children playing outside.
Before we are taken to the harsh reality of the slaughterhouse Franju depicts the world outside; people falling in love, children having fun, city sights and life passing by. Then we are taken away from this, through a brilliant poetic shift; a woman gets kissed and a fan goes through the picture as we are taken to the slaughterhouse. This surreal, poetic detail is very important; from the touch of kiss to the slaughterhouse through a dream-like shift - there is also a slaughterhouse.
The irony in the commentary tracks is not juvenile agitation and doesn't rank in the simple level of anarchism. Georges Franju had the same intensity of tenderness that many great filmmakers have; for instance the earlier mentioned Luis Bunuel. He had the courage to show violence without beautifying it one bit. The introduction of the used equipment; killing machinery, is honest and realistic.
There is no quarrel about the film's obvious allegory. The victims of the following day are already known; a strong metaphor to the holocaust of which four years had just passed. In the end we see the gates of the slaughterhouse closing, or are they just the same gates of Auschwitz we've seen in so many pictures? The film is both poetic and realistic, dream-like and genuine, timeless and strongly historical.
It would be juvenile to see Le sang des betes as a film about animal cruelty, or even as a moral study. Of course, one might say that watching it is the first step taken towards vegetarianism but to my mind there is much more in it, and I am a vegan. Le sang des betes depicts man deforming nature into something obnoxious. It's a poetically realistic film, filled with fantastic and grotesque details, where actual sights characterized by tragicalness.
The film is ultra-realism but also dream-like. It's in the same area with Luis Bunuel's "documentary" Las Hurdes - A Land without Bread; a film so honest that its realism turns into surrealism. In Le sang des betes Franju gave reality an artificial expression; he created a natural environment which turned into a setting - the contrast of the slaughterhouse and the outside world. The material world of the film reinforces this idea: old furniture thrown away, flee market, drying sheets and surrealistic details such as a mannequin, painting (Renoir?), umbrella and children playing outside.
Before we are taken to the harsh reality of the slaughterhouse Franju depicts the world outside; people falling in love, children having fun, city sights and life passing by. Then we are taken away from this, through a brilliant poetic shift; a woman gets kissed and a fan goes through the picture as we are taken to the slaughterhouse. This surreal, poetic detail is very important; from the touch of kiss to the slaughterhouse through a dream-like shift - there is also a slaughterhouse.
The irony in the commentary tracks is not juvenile agitation and doesn't rank in the simple level of anarchism. Georges Franju had the same intensity of tenderness that many great filmmakers have; for instance the earlier mentioned Luis Bunuel. He had the courage to show violence without beautifying it one bit. The introduction of the used equipment; killing machinery, is honest and realistic.
There is no quarrel about the film's obvious allegory. The victims of the following day are already known; a strong metaphor to the holocaust of which four years had just passed. In the end we see the gates of the slaughterhouse closing, or are they just the same gates of Auschwitz we've seen in so many pictures? The film is both poetic and realistic, dream-like and genuine, timeless and strongly historical.