Film Review: This Man Must Die!

 "This Man Must Die!"

**** (out of ****)

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"

Romans 5:12-21

The title of Claude Chabrol's French thriller does not derive from this biblical quote but instead from a piece of music by Brahms. I prefer to interpret Chabrol's "This Man Must Die!" (1970) however through the biblical quote.

As I watched "This Man Must Die" a thought came over me - for some reason this movie didn't feel like Chabrol's other movies. I couldn't understand why I felt this way. A lot of the ingredients that make a Claude Chabrol film are here. And yet something about the movie distinguishes itself from the rest of Chabrol's cannon. I mulled over this, trying to conjure up an explanation. Something about this Chabrol film seemed to be both more philosophical and spiritual than his others- that was my conclusion.

Watching Chabrol's countless masterpieces - "Les Biches" (1968), "Wedding in Blood" (1974), "The Unfaithful Wife" (1969), "The Flower of Evil" (2003) and "Merci Pour Le Chocolat" (2001), I never came away from those films pondering the morality of murder. Yet watching "This Man Must Die!" it was all I could think about.

Chabrol, once credited as "the French Hitchcock", was a member of the famed La Nouvelle Vague (French New Wave) film movement that captured the attention of international audiences throughout the 1960s. Other filmmakers that were part of the movement included Francois Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, and Eric Rohmer. Some credit Chabrol with having made the first film of the movement, "Le Beau Serge" (1958).

I've always interpreted Chabrol's work as critiques of the upper class and exposing the facade of their respectable upbringing and lifestyle. Everything looks nice on the outside but in these people's hearts lies the desire for murder. They will do whatever they have to, to protect their secrets and maintain their status. Perhaps driven by a moral imperative, these characters are never concerned about the final judgement they will face, standing in front of their maker. I can't say the same thing about the lead character in "This Man Must Die!".

This time around we follow Charles Thenier (Michel Duchaussoy) who has vowed revenge against the individual that murdered his child in a hit and run accident. Charles nor the police have any clues to go on but blind hatred is a strong motivating factor and Charles will pursue his cause until his brand of justice is served. With police reaching a dead end in their search for any reported damaged vehicles around the time of the murder, Charles deduces the culprit must either be a mechanic or own his own shop. Thus he would have been able to make any necessary repairs to his car.  

With only this hunch to go on - and the aid of a clever screenplay - a miraculous series of events unfold which lead Charles to discover the existence of a would be actress, Helene Lanson (Caroline Cellier). She may have been in the passenger seat of the vehicle that killed Charles' son. Or could she have been behind the wheel? All Charles knows is a vehicle with Helene and a mysterious man had some damage done to it on the exact same day as the hit and run.  

Charles befriends the woman by pretending to be a young screenwriter who may have a role for her in a script he is working on. She doesn't seem to buy it but does find Charles attractive and accepts his numerous dinner invitations. Is Charles starting to fall for Helene or is it all part of his act? What will he do if it turns out Helene was the one behind the wheel of the car? Would he still be able to kill her and get the revenge he claims to seek?

The situation creates an interesting conflict and theme of the movie. It begins to comment on the good and bad within man. If Charles were able to find the killer, what kind of man would that make him if he did in fact kill the person? Would Charles be any better than the man that killed his son? Could he live with himself knowing he too had committed murder? With the passage of enough time, could the anger and hatred subside? Would he even be able to kill the culprit if /when confronted by him?

And soon yet another layer of morality is added when Charles finally does meet the man that was in the vehicle with Helene on that fateful day, her brother-in-law, Paul (Jean Yanne). The movie goes out of its way to present Paul as the most insufferable character ever to grace a movie screen. This is the kind of guy that walks into a room angry before he has even spoken to anyone. He is incapable of saying the slightest nice thing to his wife and son. He only seems seems happy when he is mocking others. A sick trait that he shares with his mother. A woman who we never see smile throughout the movie but cracks up in a scene when Paul is reading a poem his wife has written, which he finds to be lousy.

Now "This Man Must Die!" makes it seem like Charles almost has an obligation to kill Paul, if not to avenge the death of his son but to protect Paul's family from his cruelty. One way or another this man must die! Can there be morality in murder?

Chabrol's morality fable is told within the guise of a thriller and Chabrol was an expert craftsman. He didn't earn the "French Hitchcock" moniker for nothing! Pay attention in the opening sequence to the ways Chabrol creates suspense by obstructing our view and how he plays with our expectations. Chabrol keeps cross-cutting between the young boy walking and the speeding vehicle. Chabrol will switch from the medium shot of the driver's POV to long shots of the boy with an empty road in the background, making the audience suspect the vehicle will be approaching at any moment. When we are "inside" the vehicle, the male driver, pulls the female passenger closer to him, so he can wrap his arms around her. By doing this Chabrol has obstructed our view as a backseat passenger and now we can't see the road. Is the young boy anywhere near?! 

There is another sequence when Chabrol also plays with our expectations making us believe Charles will go through with his murderous plot. Charles, Paul and some family members go on a fishing trip. On their way back they climb up a cliff when Paul accidentally slips and reaches out to Charles for help. This could be Charles' moment to act? He and Paul are away from everyone else. People would just assume it was an accident. It is as if God is testing Charles. What will he do?

By the time Chabrol had released "This Man Must Die!" it was during one of his hottest creative periods. He had already directed "Les Biches" and "The Unfaithful Wife". His next release after this movie would be "Le Boucher" (1972), a film many recognize as one of his greatest achievements. Oddly enough, or perhaps because of this creative peak in Chabrol's career, "This Man Must Die!" I feel has taken a back seat in popularity. I don't believe it is as widely known as some of Chabrol's other films from the period. One reason for this may be because Chabrol's wife (at the time) Stephane Audran was not in this movie but appeared in the others.

Scorsese had De Niro, Bergman had Max von Sydow, Sternberg had Dietrich and so Chabrol had Audran - the greatest actress to collaborate with him until Isabelle Huppert. Audran, with her pitch perfect poker face, understood the enigma of Chabrol's characters. As wonderful as Cellier may be in the role, she always plays the character as innocent. How much more exciting would it have been if the character suspected who Charles was?

The movie was based on the novel, "The Beast Must Die" written by Cecil Day-Lewis and published in 1938. It was filmed prior to Chabrol's version in the 1950s in Argentina. For Chabrol's adaptation, Paul Gegauff was brought on as a co-screenwriter. He was one of Chabrol's most frequent writing collaborators having written "A Double Tour" (1959), "The Cousins" (1959) and "Les Bonnes Femmes" (1960). Outside of Chabrol's films he may be best known for adapting "Purple Noon" (1960).

Back in the early years of this blog, Chabrol was among the filmmakers whose work I reviewed most often. I would rank him in my top ten of favorite directors. His death in 2010 was a tremendous blow for me. It's been years since I reviewed a Chabrol film but that doesn't mean I stopped thinking about his work. His films within my VHS and DVD collection stare back at me on a daily basis. During this "year of me" - my year long tribute to my favorite artists and celebration of my own milestone birthday - I knew I would eventually get back to writing about the cinematic world of Claude Chabrol.

I first became aware of Chabrol thanks to former Chicago Tribune movie critic Michael Wilmington. Wilmington was a great admirer of Chabrol's and through those movie reviews I became intrigued. The crosstown paper's critic, Roger Ebert, never championed Chabrol's work as enthusiastically. It made me think perhaps Chabrol was not a major figure in international cinema. And then, because of Wilmington, I started to see the man's work. I sat in amazement to watch the then current output of his work. My first ventures into his cinema were "Merci Pour Le Chocolat" and "The Flower of Evil". "Flower" cemented the deal for me, Chabrol was a genius! I declared it one of the year's best films and over the years my assessment of its brilliance has only been confirmed. It was the last masterpiece he directed. 

If you are not familiar with Chabrol's work, "This Man Must Die!" is worth seeing. I would recommend seeing it after "The Unfaithful Wife", "Les Biches" and "Wedding in Blood". It will help you see what a shift "This Man Must Die!" is in its tone. This is a much more reflective work but still filled with flashy moments of brilliance.