The Children of Paradise

The Children of Paradise is considered to be one of the finest French films ever made. I think that it’s just a French film, certainly appealing enough, but not really all that grand and wonderful. It’s hard to really get all that worked up over a movie in which a bunch of mopey “romantics” think they fall in love, when really they’re just thinking with their sex organs. Sounds more like a farce, than a romantic tragedy. But, then again, maybe it is a farce. One of the supporting characters talks about a play he has written, and how, in general, the romantic tragedies of ordinary folk like you and me are not tragedies at all, but farces. Sure, he’s also a thief and a murderer, but I think he’s on to something!

The movie takes place in a very interesting world, in the circuses and the carnivals of Paris. The three major characters are Baptiste, a mime at the Funambles, one of the circuses, Fredrick, a struggling would-be actor who finds himself working at the Funambles, and Garrance, a somewhat mysterious woman who, as the film begins, is an attraction at one of the competing carnivals (she is naked in a barrel full of water, looking in a mirror; of course, you, and the ticket buyers, can only see her shoulders and a bit of cleavage, just enough to inflame the minds of Frenchmen). The way that these three meet each other is interesting. Fredrick, sort of a would-be playboy, as well, makes a play for Garrance upon arriving in town; Garrance brushes him off politely by saying something to the effect that if it was meant to be, Fate would allow their paths to cross again someday. Later, Garrance is about to be arrested when a man accuses her of stealing his watch (actually stolen by the thief I mentioned before, whom Garrance has an occasional acquaintance with). Baptiste, who at this time is “amusing” his audience by playing the mope (actually, it’s not really acting apparently, but I’ll get to that later), sees what really happened, and tells the cop what really happened -- in pantomime.

Garrance had already told the thief that she is enchanted by Baptiste’s eyes, and, upon being saved, she gives him a flower. Baptiste falls hopelessly in love, or something to that effect, and spends a lot of time moping about. Later on, he happens to meet Garrance again, and gets her a place to stay (apparently she has none). They are in her apartment; she, in her boldness, proceeds to undress in front of him. A few minutes later, she subtly implies that he ought to spend the night. He gets scared off -- and slips out of the room. In any case, he still gets her a job at the Funambles, and still admires her and pines for her love -- not realizing till later that Fredrick has returned to the picture, and has begun his own affair with Garrance.

Years pass. Garrance has entered into an arrangement of sorts with a rich count, who wants to “protect” her. Fredrick has become a huge, and somewhat arrogant, actor, while Baptiste has become the most famous pantomime performer in the country. All three have gone their separate ways, but soon find themselves back together, and all the old issues have returned with a vengeance. Will this story end happily, or will it be a romantic tragedy, or what?
Children of Paradise is meant to be a large romantic epic; it was called the Gone with the Wind of French cinema, and in any case, this film is also a big undertaking, at least in respect to the fact that it’s three-plus hours. I, however, did not succumb to a lot of romantic feelings as a result of this picture. That may have to do with the fact that Baptiste is a huge romantic fool, as far as I was concerned. Unfortunately, I have a poor memory, and had to return the DVD to the video store, so I am unable to rehash most of his quotes for you, but I do recall that he said a lot of melodramatic, idealized, romantic twaddle, and really believed it. It’s obvious from the start, when he wanders into the Funambles with Garrance’s little flower, that this guy has his head in the clouds. He talks about her, as if she were the love of his life, even though they just met -- even worse, he says all this to the woman who has the misfortune to really love the guy, even after knowing him for a long time (she even manages to have married him by the second half of the film; what a glutton for punishment!).

The whole romantic climax has to do with what Baptiste should have done earlier, when Garrance subtly offered him to stay the night with her. So basically what you have here is a one-night stand elevated to grand romance. One night stands can be illuminating in one form or another, and in a realistic, gritty, dark, etc., sort of movie, we could have gotten something interesting out of it. But this movie makes it seem like, just because they fooled around for a night, then it’s the proof of their undying love, but circumstances surrounding them forbid such a love. Hmmmm. That almost is as unconvincing as Better Than Chocolate, in which the young lesbian couple also go through the cliched screenplay motions of a crisis which could destroy their love. Funny, considering that about ten minutes after these two women meet, they try to have sex in a van, and much of the movie consisted of passionate sex scenes rather than two personalities clicking.

But, then again, maybe the villain is correct. Maybe this is really just a farce, but we don’t realize it. The big laugh is that this poor guy’s been hanging around the theater too much, and is living his life in grand theatrical gestures, that he doesn’t know the difference between loving a person ‘s heart and soul, and thinking with his... well, you know. And the other characters are pretty amusing too, although that’s not always a bad thing. Fredrick is an outgoing person, goofy, ridiculous, but charming, certainly responsible for some of the most amusing lines and scenes. Garrance always has that little smirk on her face, as if she’s too detached to really feel strongly for a person (I don’t think she is nearly as hopelessly in love as Baptiste is). The count who “protects” Garrance is insanely jealous, and has a thing for duels (actually, most of the males have things for duels, which is funny in general; can’t these people just settle down?). And the criminal thinks he’s morally superior to everybody else, which is highly doubtful, although sometimes you wonder if perhaps he’s more in on the joke than everybody else.

I’m not trying to say that the story line is stupid, because it isn’t really all that bad. There are many great scenes, many of them having to do with the theater itself -- Baptiste’s pantomime in order to save Garrance, a few of Baptiste’s pantomime plays, and Fredrick’s plays, one of which is a hilarious insult toward the writers of what he feels is a stupid play, and, also, his performance of Othello. Many of the plays that are performed for us reflect in some way the drama of the real story, and are very nicely done. This stuff, and the world of performance in general, is worth the rental.

I just don’t buy the mushy love stuff, because I’ve been burned too many times to ever believe in such foolishness. I am rather detached about these sorts of things; unless the characters really convince me that they are in love, or in some sort of attachment, I really don’t care about their sentiments. It’s not the same thing as it was in Lost and Delirious, a somewhat insane romantic melodrama; at least there, the couple was genuinely in love, and you felt for them whenever things spiraled downward. With Children of Paradise, I was not seduced, I guess you could say. This is a good movie. My ambivalence toward some of the material prevents me from giving it the full 100%, however.

Rating: ***

Back to movies

Back home