To what extent does ‘Le Jour se Leve’ conform to the

characteristics of the art film? To what extent does it follow

the pattern of the Hollywood movie?

Made in 1939 just before France was due to go to war, ‘Le Jour se Leve’
tells the tragic story of a lonely man who finds love, only for it to be snatched
out of his hand through deception, eventually driving him to murder and
suicide. The idea of doomed fate and hopelessness epitomizes the film,
starting with ‘Valentin’ rolling down the stairs after being shot, during the
beginning of the film. This already decides the fate of the protagonist who
from then on sets the mood of the film as we follow, through the aid of flash
backs, internal psychology and the events which lead him to his inevitable
fate.
David Bordwell distinguishes the art films particular style of narration as:

‘…taking its cue from the literary modernism, questions such a definition of
the real: the world’s laws may not be knowable, personal psychology may be
indeterminate. Here new aesthetic conventions claim to seize other ‘realities’:
the aleatoric world of ‘objective’ reality and the fleeting states that
characterize ‘subjective’ reality’ (Bordwell 1985, p.206)

Anyone who has seen ‘Le Jour se Leve” will quickly realise that it does not
follow this definition of the art film, as the narrative is far too linear and
comprehensible to be likened to this classification.
What makes ‘Le Jour se Leve’ follow the classic Hollywood film is the
clear-cut motives and goals of the protagonist. At the beginning the audience
are immediately told the fate of François, thus the structure of the story is
already set in the enigma & resolution structure, and cause & effect, typical of
the classic Hollywood narrative. Here, it is used in the relationship between
François and Valentin. The conflict and tension felt between them due to
they’re common love interest, is immediately felt, sparking off the events that
lead to François’ demise. Valantin’s is a charming and gentlemanly, insisting
that the two deal with their differences in a civilized manner with conversation,
which inevitably assists the narrative information. Also, the introduction of
Valentin as an animal trainer is an obvious sigh that he ‘conducts’ the ensuing
events. The manipulation of both his mistress and François is evident as he
recognizes François’ weaknesses almost immediately and uses them to
cause much inner conflict and pain, all the way to the tragic ending. This gives
the sense of a world where the protagonist is not in control of his own fate,
which parallels the way the classic Hollywood narrative is structured.
The inevitable use of continuity editing is utilised establishing ‘…spatial
and temporal relationships between shots in such a way as to permit the
spectator to ‘read’ a film without any conscious effort, precisely because the
editing is ‘invisible’’ (Cook & Berinik 1999, p.40). The organising of the
expressions of the characters through the use of mise-en-scène and editing
techniques is common to the classic Hollywood film giving a ‘contrived’ effect,
something that the typical art film would try to eliminate. Also, the amount of
closure presented at the end is also reminiscent of the classic Hollywood
narrative, something that the art film typically allows to be open-ended.
 With this observation, it seems clear that the narrative and editing
techniques used in ‘Le Jour se Leve’ is characteristic of the classic Hollywood
film. But one crucial element that is associates ‘Le Jour se Leve’ with the art
film is that of the visual style and a particular focus on the internal psychology
of its protagonist. As Steve Neale notes:

‘Art films tend to be marked by a stress on visual style (an engagement of the
look in terms of a marked individual point of view rather than in terms of
institutionalised spectacle), by a suppression of action in the Hollywood
sense, by a consequent stress on character rather than plot and by an
interiorisation of dramatic conflict’ (Neale 1981, p.13).

The attention to François’ psychological and emotional motivations is the

source of the films narrative. We are introduced to the committing of the crime
and follow him as he reminisces about past events and feelings that have
constructed his fate: the loneliness of an average working man finding love
and happiness in a beautiful young woman; the feelings of being deceived;
and pain that he feels with regards to his hurt ego as he realizes Françoise’s
past relations with Valentin evokes an uncanny identification and consequent
pity within the audience.
The use of past and present shots that follows the particular event that
Francois is remembering is used to highlight the emotions he is feeling; a faint
smile as he remembers the happy moments he spent with Françoise, the
anger he feels as he rips and throws the teddy bear which is wearing the
brooch that was given to him by Françoise, as he realizes its worthlessness.
All of this builds an intimate picture of how François is feeling, as the stark
contrast between past and present events and feelings are merged into one.
The visual style and dark mood of despondency might even be likened to the
‘film noir’ genre, as the ‘blackness’ of the film gives the sense, from beginning
to end, of overwhelming despair.

‘One of the problems in trying to define art cinema in formal terms is…the fact
that Hollywood has consistently ‘borrowed’ from it’ (Cook & Bernink 1999,
p.110).

This fact is interesting, as it is also true that art films have consistently
‘borrowed’ from, played with, and innovated from the classic Hollywood film.
This inevitably leads onto the question, ‘is there really such thing as art
cinema?’ as it seems that there isn’t such a radical difference between those
films categorized as ‘art’ and those made by Hollywood. This is the line of
thought that Steve Neale follows when he wrote:
‘In the division of labour it sustains (with the ideology of authorship reinforcing
a distinction between intellectual and manual labour); in the practices of
production, distribution and exhibition it entails (with the relations between
distribution and exhibition on the one hand and production on the other taking
the form of commodity circulation); and in the forms and relations of
representation with which it associated, Art Cinema has rarely disturbed or
altered fundamentally the commodity-based structures, relations and
practices of what it likes nevertheless to label the’ commercial’ film industry. It
has merely modified them slightly. Certainly, radically avant-garde and
insistently political practices have been persistently relegated either to its
margins or else to a different social and cinematic space altogether.’ (Neale
1981, p.37)

This assumption leads onto the idea that ‘…one of the key characteristics of
an art film may well be it’s ‘foreign-ness’. It also strongly emphasises the point
that art cinema needs to be understood not simply in formal, textual terms but
also as a means of film consumption within its own particular institutional
context, which will vary from country to country.’ (Cook & Bernink 1999,
p.111) With this in mind, ‘Le Jour se Leve’ has utilised, with great effect,
elements of both the art film and the classic Hollywood film, thus creating a
brilliant example of cinema, regardless of the films influences.

References
Cook, Pam and Bernink, Mieke (1999) The Cinema Book. London: BFI
Publishing
Bordwell, David (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film. London
Neale, Steve (1981) ‘Art cinema as institution’, Screen 22(1)