AN EXTRAORDINARY DOUBLE FEATURE ABOUT AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN : "MESRINE (PARTS 1 AND 2)"

I have a bit of a confession to make. I have a bit of a thing about French films. And not in a good way. I mean don`t get me wrong, I love French cinema. But I spent my ENTIRE education with the exception of primary school in French establishment. So the prospect of reading something in French or watching a French film… Feels like homework. I mean no, once I get into it I do love it (sometimes). One doesn`t read the entire works of Emile Zola in French merely out of a sense of duty for God`s sake. But so, yeah, if I hear a film is in French, something in my brain cringes and goes ``can`t we do this later?``  And Mesrine especially, I  mean not only is it a French gangster film (and Alain Delon really didn`t make enough of those, right?) there are two of them. The whole story is almost 4 hours long. I am aware I have prejudices and do tend to make an effort to push past them, that said, I didn`t expect to feel compelled to suddenly sit down and do a `Mesrine marathon` either. Then again, maybe I shouldn`t be that surprised. Mesrine was quite a piece of work. One time France`s public enemy number one, he was as charismatic and funny as he was ruthless. And love him or hate him (you rarely did anything in between) you found it hard to take your eyes off him.

Back from special duties in Algiers in the 1960`s, the young Jacques Mesrine (Vincent Cassel) is at a bit of a loss. He tries a ``good honest job`` in a shop, but after the life in Algiers it doesn`t really suit him, neither in pace nor in economics – if you see what I mean. He starts off by making a few ``bad friends`` and petty crime. But soon his ``talents`` have him rising through the ranks, making connections in the then notorious OAS… Mesrine is well on the way of becoming a truly international name in the world of crime. These two films tell the story of his career spanning 20 years and 2 continents…

First of all let us stop for a second and just praise Vincent Cassell for his magnificent portrayal of Mesrine. Mesrine is a complex character and he is so violent, so cruel and such a ruthless gangster it must have been hard to put the effort in to make him likable. Because likable he was. As the film progresses we get the impression of Mesrine as being a lot more immature than one might initially think. I mean, definitely more immature than you would expect a bank robber and kidnapper to be. The films portrays him at virtually delighting in seeing his face in the papers and bursting with pride at becoming public enemy ``number one``. And while he can often bulldoze his way out of most situations – because it would seem if you have a specific brand of courage bordering on stupidity you can bulldoze your way out of most things in the crime world – his overconfidence in his own talents is what lets him down. And his bigheadedness is what loses him countless business partners. It is this childlike quality that makes him think he can throw a bagful of money across a river, fail and lose millions of franks. It is also this childlike quality that enables him to have the audacity and tenacity to escape from maximum security prisons multiple times. But try as he might to present himself as a charming thief who only steals from the big banks, Mesrine is not above threatening the mother of his children at gun point in front of his son who is barely a toddler. Nor is he above kidnapping and mistreating the elderly and the infirm. In short Mesrine is, maybe not in body but in mind, a rather bright teenager brandishing a gun. AWESOME combo and brilliantly depicted – one swings between thinking him hilarious and promptly feeling guilty about your laughter all through the film.

The film itself is a first class example of its genre. If you were ever even remotely afraid it may prove too ``arty`` or some such, you really do not need to worry.  Car chases, tense stake-outs and bloody gun battles are a-plenty all through the film. In fact at several points the tension mounts so much I almost found it hard to watch -  oh no, this film does not lack anything in adrenaline.

Nor indeed does it lack in testosterone. I mean I do realize this is the thing with the time depicted and the genre. I`d hazard a guess and say that there weren`t that many female main players in the ganglands of 1960`s and `70s France. Any women we see are either prostitutes (and to be fair we see quite a few of those) or Mesrine`s partners (sometimes also prostitutes) who invariable end up getting threatened, chased and knocked around by him but staying with him nevertheless. I mean I don`t blame anyone on this last bit. When he pulled a bank robbery off he used to lavish himself and his ``flavor of the month`` in extraordinarily expensive gifts. Common sense dictates you stick with it. But then again I don`t want to be overly cynical - like he said Mesrine was an incredibly complex man, maybe there was real love there, we`ll never know I guess. The point I want to make is that the only women we see are the `molls` in one sense or another.  I mean you know that has never bothered me. But for some reason I noticed it more than usual. Possibly because I ended up watching the entire 4 hour saga in one sitting.

In short, not only is this a shining example of the gangster film in general it is a fascinating true story of a rather complicated man. Like many films that stick strictly to their genre, you probably may want to give it a miss if you absolutely loath gangster movies. But if you don`t, you`re in for a treat. 

THE SUBCONSCIOUS CAN BE A SCARY THING WHEN YOU'RE IN "TRANCE"

I’m always intrigued when multiple people tell me they “need to watch the film again to be sure they “got” what was going on. It’s usually means one of two things for me. It’s either going to be one of those annoying things you actually need a user’s manual to watch. Or it’s going to be something with really a good dollop of meat on it that I can sink my teeth into. See, I’m fussy like that. I love a good challenge. I definitely don’t like simplistic endings and half – baked storylines. God knows I’ve moaned about it here often enough. But the challenge always is, with these “multiple levels of reality” type film, not ending up with a film so sophisticated you need dedicated websites explaining it in full for people to get it. Which is why I am not a fan of Donnie Darko. But I’ll moan about that some other time. I’m happy to say, having watched Trance, it doesn’t make the sh.t list. It scrapes through. Just, in places, but it scrapes through.

As the late great John Lennon said once, life is what happens to us while we are busy making plans. You can plan something down to the last detail, you can think of every single eventuality, but in the end… Life will happen. Something will “go wrong”.  This is precisely what happens during a seemingly “perfectly” planned heist at a well-known London auction house. The auction house has stringent security systems so the heist has to be planned within an inch of its life. They have everything thought of, down to an “inside man” in the shape of the auctioneer. But then… Life happens. The criminals cannot find the picture they stole, and a blow on the head means the auctioneer, the last person who had it, cannot remember it either. The criminals are utterly desperate to get their booty back so in their desperation they hire the services of a hypnotherapist. But see, that’s the thing with things like hypnosis. Once you let someone so deep into your mind… Well… Practically anything can happen.

Ok, I have to say, I really shouldn’t have mistrusted a master like Danny Boyle. He has done a spectacular job. Don’t sit down to the film with any expectations. Or do, it won’t make much of a difference, you’ll be changing your mind as to what is happening every fifteen minutes. But don’t worry. You go for a very, very exciting ride, but you get the explanation in the end. Yes, yes it’s a tad like the much caricatured “villain explaining his master plan” scene. Don’t be disheartened by that comment though and trust me, by the time Mr Boyle has quite finished with you; you will need someone to sit you down and explain what the heck just happened. The film is fast paced, a bit like the more modern editing style that people see younger directors “accused of” a bit of that, you know,  MTV style, snappy, video clip like editing, you know what I mean. But I reckon it suits the film. It really augments that sense of disorientation that is brought about in Simon, the auctioneer – played by James McAvoy.  I think the “explanation” scene is legit also because, you are as confused as Simon by that point and the editing, the storytelling, the way the film has been structured all compliments that fact.

So, if you want something that is going to present a bit more of a challenge for you, go for Trance by all means. It is different enough so that fogies like me literally have nothing to grumble about and familiar enough so that if you are not a lover of massively complicated plotlines and convoluted films you will still not be completely alienated but actually have a real good time. And also, yes,  it totally deserves a re-watch!