THE MOTHER AND THE WHORE (LA MERE ET LA PUTAIN)

France, 1973, 219 minutes, Black and White.
Jean-Pierre? Leaud, Francoise Lebrun, Bernadette Lafont, Isabelle Weingarten, Jacques Renard.
Directed by Jean Eustache.

The Mother and the Whore is specialist cinema. Highly acclaimed by critics throughout the world, it is not a film for the average audience. Rather it is an intelligent French cinema essay, studying a modern young man and his relationships with modern young women. Though presented from the point of view of a man, the film is critical of the romanticism of the central character and the reality/ unreality of his relationship to and understanding of women. In fact the two women in the film who both embody the aspects of mother and whore, are both much more penetratingly presented and explored.

The film is in sombre black and white, has a claustrophobic atmosphere, relies very much on the dialogue and even to monologues for its impact. It runs for three and a half hours and is often shown without an intermission. Thus the audience is immersed in this small world and made to share the experiences and ask the questions about the emotional realities of life, human relationships, identity. Jean Pierre Leaud is the main star. He has achieved international fame with many of Francois Truffaut's films and those of Jean-Luc? Goddard. He also appeared in Last Tango in Paris. Bernadette Lafont is a prominent French actress, also in many of Truffaut's films.

1. The overall impact of this film, themes, characterization, the long duration of the film? For whom was it made? A French audience? European audience? International audience?

2. Why was the film made? The exploration on the part of the director, the exploration of character, themes, men women, man-woman relationships? An exploration of the psychology and impact and influence of women? The various aspects of femininity? An objective look at men-women relationships?

3. The importance of the black and white photography, the duration of the film, the musical background and its classic overtones for a modern exploration?

4. The importance of the dialogue, the amount of verbalization, the significance of conversation, communication, non-communication? Philosophising, aphorisms, cliches? The cinematic presentation of such talk? Talk within home locations, the apartments? Hospital? The outdoor sequences? The atmosphere of Paris as a city, the world of Alexandre? The claustrophobic atmosphere of focussing on the principal characters, their room? Angle photography for particular nuances in the exploration?

5. The man at the centre of the film and his masculinity? His particular male characteristics? Presented objectively, subjectively by the director? At the centre of these women's lives, of his own life? His strengths and his weaknesses? His charm, his laziness? His not working, living off others? A gigolo but thinking himself more respectable? Women's attitudes towards him? Women and his relationship to them as mothers, as whores? His use of language, quotations, objectivizing his interior feelings in quotations and philosophy? Cliche? The personal investment in discussion, with Gilberte, Veronika, Marie? His artificiality and naturalness? As the father of Gilberte's child and yet his jilting her? His irresponsibility in her regard? His studying her case rather than being involved with her? His summarizing everything in his head and yet his spasmodic reactions and emotional eruptions? A man of impulse and emotion? The quality of his relationship with Marle, the age difference, Marie as mothering him, the sexual relationship? His theorizing about his infatuation and its brevity? His jealousy of Marie's relationships? The growing infatuation with Veronika? His studying her, his fascination in listening to her descriptions of herself, her work, sexuality? The gradual emotional involvement? The build-up of detail of his way of life and our getting to know him? How thoroughly? what kind of man was he? was his life melodramatic, ordinary, farcical, tragic? Through him, did the film explore modern man?

6. The focus of the title and the extremes of the role of a woman? The particular traits and characteristics of a woman as a mother, psychologically, physically? Mothering at different stages - gestation, giving birth, nurturing, educating, succouring and fostering, comforting? Woman as whore and being treated as an object by nun? The subjugation and commercialization of her own sexuality to man? How were each of these traits present in the main women in the film? Could any of them be identified with one of the aspects? How did they exercise these aspects of their femininity in Alexandre's regard?

7. The film's portrayal of Marie? A heroine? A portrait of the woman in both aspects? Her background of divorce, work, mistress of Alexandre? The nature of her relationship with him, the gap of age? Her being presented in work? The importance of her attitudes, her lover? The recipient of Alexandre's jealousy? The question of marriage? Her trips? Her reaction to Veronika? The significance of the night with the three of them in the bed? The contrast with Veronika? Questions of suicide and the theatrical attempt? The impact on the others?

8. The contrast with the character of Veronika? As a woman, mother and whore? The stranger entering into other people's lives? As an attractive personality, her background? Her work? Her roughness? Her going out with Alexandre, her succumbing to his charm? The verbal communication, the verbalizing about their relationship? Her being seen at work? The importance of her arrival, sleeping with Alexandre?. The night of the three in the bed? Her phoning? Her talking? The dramatic impact of her long speech, indications of themes, revelation of a person? The possibility of pregnancy?

9. The theme of motherhood and pregnancy? The emphasis on the pregnancies of the various women real or imagined? The questions of abortion? The relationship of love and giving birth? Sexuality and giving birth?

10. The importance of language in the film? So much speaking, so many speeches? It has been suggested that language has power to seduce, distort, assault, evade, classify? How true is this of the film?

11. How much empathy could the audience have for these three characters? How much sympathy and understanding?

12. The value of this kind of didactic explorative cinema?