Happiness is something in life that so many people seek and can't fully get, or maybe happiness comes in smaller doses than for others. What is happiness other than the feeling of being fulfilled and being around people that make one feel good?
In Le Bonheur, which is what the title translates to, Agnes Varda presents a story where the characters are actually content with what's happening - provided, of course, that the status quo not simply is kept, and in this case here a handsome married man Francois (Jean-Claude Drouot, later a professional but then a first-time film actor) happy with his beautiful wife Therese (Claire Drouot, I assume his real life wife, and also the kids are their kids, I'll get back to that momentarily), and then his mistress, a post office worker Emilie (also the beautiful Marie-France Boyer, gosh French people in the 60's looked good) - but things underneath the surface could combust at any moment. I don't mean to say this is a film with a lot of tension, at least not until it gets to a certain point in the last twenty minutes.
But, and maybe this is only my reading on it, the point of view here is male, and for as gentle or simple as Francois appears, it's his happiness over others (or Therese's at least) that matters. Oh, for sure, he is happy that he is with his wife and that she is happy and that the kids are happy. And wouldn't it be so nice, the idea may occur to some of us (or, really, not a lot of us), that a man could carry on being so happy with two women and that the *wife* as well as the other woman would be ok with how happy and status-quo everything is. What's so fascinating to me is that there is always underneath this sense that things could collapse all so easily, that the backdrop itself which is so sunny and covered with flowers, including that opening image of the sunflower itself, is idyllic and yet, it's....
I think a little analogy here is in order; I teach driving sometimes, and one of the things that I tell students is that there is a difference between a right and a privilege, so for example a right is something that is guaranteed (or, should be, but that's another point for another time), while a privilege is not something immediately granted to you, like you have to take a test to get your learner's permit much less on how to drive. If you have that privilege, there also (cue Uncle Ben) come great responsibilities with that power to use and drive and maintain a vehicle. Being happy in a relationship, or relationships plural, seems to be as a privilege, but some people think it's their right to be happy not only with everyone, but for them to be happy with the way things are. And I don't even mean to invoke the old White Male Privilege point here, but.... maybe I kind of do.
Would the situation, for Francois, be okay if the situation reversed? Like if his dear adorable wife Therese met someone else one day and carried on an affair and felt a certain, and as Francois points out when asked by his new "Happy Place" Emilie a different, happiness, would he be alright in that happiness, in that person, being shared with someone else? It seems like it should be too easy to say this film has a Feminist perspective because Varda is using certain documentary techniques, or rather in the casting of it being largely real people and a real couple with their real (as in non-professional actor) kids, and that there are others who Francois interacts with (like in the climactic point I won't mention here where Therese goes away from him). But there is a critique underlying this, if in a certain gentle way, of how horrific this situation becomes through Francois's self-centered actions.
I mention the documentary technique, but that's not entirely correct either. What is so striking and engaging and impressive about Le Bonheur is how much the use of color is so bright and precise, the music (much by Mozart) makes for pleasant, sunny locations and even in bedrooms it feels like the sun is shining just right so, and the editing is meant to emphasize a person's point of view. When Francois sits down with Emilie for example at an outdoor restaurant, notice how directly we are meant to be seeing other people around the characters from one of their points of perspective. This is how it is for most if not all people when in such a place, we aren't looking solely at one person, it's the entire environment that makes an impression; this also happens when Francois first comes to Emilie's apartment and how all of those little details in her place add up. This has some of the most specific and, with some hard cuts, direct/impactful editing choices I've seen in a Nouvelle vague film.
As for these performers, they are quite sensational at being natural, and emphasizing how much this happiness is deeply felt and expressed, even as it seems so tenuous; Drouot's Francois is a lot of smiles here and kind eyes, but again it's all on if he's getting this dose of happiness all the time - from both women in his life, and his kids. Drouot really pulls off a character who is remarkable to watch mostly because of how unremarkable he comes off, like he's your "Average" white male dude who can get the girl on the side because, well, what else will Emilie do with her time, and she's happy that she's happy, and the wife.... well, that's another story. But both actresses also are completely natural in this setting and under Varda's direction what is so good is how they are so at ease for much of the time, even with this very real conflict hanging over what's going on. She observes and what I assume gently guides without forcing anything.
If I had a small nit to pick (not enough to lower the rating, more of an observation), it might have been even more compelling if (minor spoiler) Francois' revelation to Therese about what's been going on happened a little earlier, like even five or ten minutes in the film, so that what happens in the aftermath could have some more time to develop as what comes next is even more shattering - mostly for what it says about how not only tenuous a woman's happiness is for a man but how easily it can be replaced. But what develops here is this very fine mixture, like a gorgeous stew that is extremely bright and chipper on the surface, like oh look how cute those kids are with that Dad (on Father's Day no less) and the mom... and it could all fall apart so very simply and swiftly. All because of the privilege of commitment, which men have taken for granted for (checks notes) since commitment began.
In Le Bonheur, which is what the title translates to, Agnes Varda presents a story where the characters are actually content with what's happening - provided, of course, that the status quo not simply is kept, and in this case here a handsome married man Francois (Jean-Claude Drouot, later a professional but then a first-time film actor) happy with his beautiful wife Therese (Claire Drouot, I assume his real life wife, and also the kids are their kids, I'll get back to that momentarily), and then his mistress, a post office worker Emilie (also the beautiful Marie-France Boyer, gosh French people in the 60's looked good) - but things underneath the surface could combust at any moment. I don't mean to say this is a film with a lot of tension, at least not until it gets to a certain point in the last twenty minutes.
But, and maybe this is only my reading on it, the point of view here is male, and for as gentle or simple as Francois appears, it's his happiness over others (or Therese's at least) that matters. Oh, for sure, he is happy that he is with his wife and that she is happy and that the kids are happy. And wouldn't it be so nice, the idea may occur to some of us (or, really, not a lot of us), that a man could carry on being so happy with two women and that the *wife* as well as the other woman would be ok with how happy and status-quo everything is. What's so fascinating to me is that there is always underneath this sense that things could collapse all so easily, that the backdrop itself which is so sunny and covered with flowers, including that opening image of the sunflower itself, is idyllic and yet, it's....
I think a little analogy here is in order; I teach driving sometimes, and one of the things that I tell students is that there is a difference between a right and a privilege, so for example a right is something that is guaranteed (or, should be, but that's another point for another time), while a privilege is not something immediately granted to you, like you have to take a test to get your learner's permit much less on how to drive. If you have that privilege, there also (cue Uncle Ben) come great responsibilities with that power to use and drive and maintain a vehicle. Being happy in a relationship, or relationships plural, seems to be as a privilege, but some people think it's their right to be happy not only with everyone, but for them to be happy with the way things are. And I don't even mean to invoke the old White Male Privilege point here, but.... maybe I kind of do.
Would the situation, for Francois, be okay if the situation reversed? Like if his dear adorable wife Therese met someone else one day and carried on an affair and felt a certain, and as Francois points out when asked by his new "Happy Place" Emilie a different, happiness, would he be alright in that happiness, in that person, being shared with someone else? It seems like it should be too easy to say this film has a Feminist perspective because Varda is using certain documentary techniques, or rather in the casting of it being largely real people and a real couple with their real (as in non-professional actor) kids, and that there are others who Francois interacts with (like in the climactic point I won't mention here where Therese goes away from him). But there is a critique underlying this, if in a certain gentle way, of how horrific this situation becomes through Francois's self-centered actions.
I mention the documentary technique, but that's not entirely correct either. What is so striking and engaging and impressive about Le Bonheur is how much the use of color is so bright and precise, the music (much by Mozart) makes for pleasant, sunny locations and even in bedrooms it feels like the sun is shining just right so, and the editing is meant to emphasize a person's point of view. When Francois sits down with Emilie for example at an outdoor restaurant, notice how directly we are meant to be seeing other people around the characters from one of their points of perspective. This is how it is for most if not all people when in such a place, we aren't looking solely at one person, it's the entire environment that makes an impression; this also happens when Francois first comes to Emilie's apartment and how all of those little details in her place add up. This has some of the most specific and, with some hard cuts, direct/impactful editing choices I've seen in a Nouvelle vague film.
As for these performers, they are quite sensational at being natural, and emphasizing how much this happiness is deeply felt and expressed, even as it seems so tenuous; Drouot's Francois is a lot of smiles here and kind eyes, but again it's all on if he's getting this dose of happiness all the time - from both women in his life, and his kids. Drouot really pulls off a character who is remarkable to watch mostly because of how unremarkable he comes off, like he's your "Average" white male dude who can get the girl on the side because, well, what else will Emilie do with her time, and she's happy that she's happy, and the wife.... well, that's another story. But both actresses also are completely natural in this setting and under Varda's direction what is so good is how they are so at ease for much of the time, even with this very real conflict hanging over what's going on. She observes and what I assume gently guides without forcing anything.
If I had a small nit to pick (not enough to lower the rating, more of an observation), it might have been even more compelling if (minor spoiler) Francois' revelation to Therese about what's been going on happened a little earlier, like even five or ten minutes in the film, so that what happens in the aftermath could have some more time to develop as what comes next is even more shattering - mostly for what it says about how not only tenuous a woman's happiness is for a man but how easily it can be replaced. But what develops here is this very fine mixture, like a gorgeous stew that is extremely bright and chipper on the surface, like oh look how cute those kids are with that Dad (on Father's Day no less) and the mom... and it could all fall apart so very simply and swiftly. All because of the privilege of commitment, which men have taken for granted for (checks notes) since commitment began.