THE FRENCH MINISTER/ QUAI D’ORSAY

France, 2013, 113 minutes, Colour.
Thierry Lhermite, Raphael Personnaz, Niels Arestrup, Jane Birkin.
Directed by Bertrand Tavernier.

This is a story about French government, focusing on a particular minister, the minister for foreign affairs. There is a glimpse of a photo of George W.Bush, which seems to indicate that the setting is around 2003, discussions of an imminent invasion of a Middle East country, here given a fictitious name. Many audiences will appreciate the politics of the period.

The film is directed by veteran, Bertrand Tavernier, best known for his quite serious films for many decades. An interesting question to ponder is why he chose this particular film and comedy at this stage of his career.

Some commentators have referred to the British television series, the hilariously comic Yes, Minister. The key to that series was that the minister was very much of a fool, relying on his advisers, especially Sir Humphrey Appleby, Nigel Hawthorne’s perfect re-creation of a civil service adviser, shrewd, adept with language and insinuation, seeing himself as the power behind the minister. That is not exactly the case here. Rather, while the minister is often a fool, he is shrewd and smart enough to perform well in public and to take the advice that he wants to hear. These advisers to the minister are not Humphrey Applebys. They are professionals, caught up in the political pressures, research, advice, speechmaking, rescuing the minister from difficult situations.

But, the film is still a comedy, an amusing comedy, with a blend of spoof, satire as well as critique.

Thiery Lhermite is the minister, a professional politician, rather sure of himself when he has no basis for this, but quick on picking up trends, need for action, and reliant on advisers whom he trusts. He is not in favour of the invasion of the Middle East. He is under pressure to move for Germany to have a place on the UN Security Council. He travels to the United States to give speeches. He travels to Africa when a civil war crisis erupts. He makes jokes about NATO and tries to avoid NATO meetings. And, on the personal level, his charm to have a dinner with a prize-winning novelist, played with forcefulness by Jane Burkin.

The audience is taken into this world by initially focusing on a young would-be civil servant, Arthur, preparing to wear the right clothes and have the right manner for his interview. He is caught up in the minister’s whirlwind and has a job before he knows it, but actually doesn’t have a physical desk and the table that he has to work at is part of a narrow thoroughfare with everybody passing through. But, he makes his way and is successful at his work, even when a journalist on a bus in New York steals one of the pages of the minister’s speech and there is a media-political kerfuffle.

The main character supporting the minister, patiently, biding his time, even nodding off, is played by Niels Arestrup. That the minister succeeds is often due to the old man’s advice – even passing a note up the table while the minister is indulging in conversation with the novelist, to tell him to keep quiet and let her get a word in.

It is interesting to see the minister whirl in an out of his rooms, papers flying as he opens and slams the door. In his visit to Africa, he defies advice and get out of his car in the middle of an angry crowd, contacts the Prime Minister and resolves the case. He has his mantra which he repeats often, for policy: lucidity, unity, efficiency!

The film does get a bit serious at the end, with the minister going again to the United Nations and, after all the many drafts that his speeches always go through, he delivers a speech which receives and applauding response.

The film is particularly French in its characters, rather different from an English version of this kind of story – but quite entertaining in its way.

1. An amusing comedy? Spoof, satire and critique? How contrived? How real?

2. The work of the director, his serious themes over many decades, his decision to make political satire?

3. The title, the French government offices? Visuals, buildings, the Palais, the interiors? Offices?

4. The focus on the Minister, his assistants, the writers, those responsible for language, the experts in various areas, the speech writers, advisers? Rivalries and clashes within the department? With other departments? The role of the president, the phone calls? How real, amusing?

5. Arthur as the initial focus, his perspective and experience, preparing for the interview, his partner and the shirt, the tie? Going to the meeting, waiting, the criticism? The Minister and his being ebullient, knowing Arthur’s reputation, the expectations? The visit with Maupas, the women working in the department, advisory, secretarial? His not having a room, his desk as a thoroughfare, his being relegated to minor positions like that of having to travel by bus instead of car in the US?

6. Situation, fact and fiction about the invasion of Iraq, the picture of George W. Bush? The discussions about the situation, invasion, the dossier about weapons? France and its policies, compared with other countries of Europe, Britain, Germany, Germany wanting a place on the Security Council? France and Africa?

7. The minister as pompous, his abilities, reliant on advice, changing arguments, his emphasis on ‘lucidity, unity and efficiency’, the repetition of this mantra? His past? Success? His entry into room and the wind blowing the papers? His interest in words, his manner? The phone calls to the President, decisions? Social life? the meetings, the agenda, the jokes about NATO, the escaped bear? The planned visit of Molly Hutchinson, his notes, talking too much at the dinner, his adviser warning him to be quiet, her perceptive questions and his bypassing them?

8. His basic stances, NATO, Geneva, Germany, the invasion in the Middle East? Managing his staff and work? Maupas and his wisdom, age and experience, nodding off, presenting ideas, personal relationship with the Minister, able to talk to him? The discussions with other?

9. The expert on the Middle East, voicing his opinions? The other experts, the touch of the serious and the comic? Their banter? The secretaries and their help? The trip to the United States, hospitality in the plane, the changes in the speech, the reactions, Arthur forced onto the bus, the journalist stealing his page, the article, its effect?

10. Ubanga, the difficult situation, civil war, negotiations, phone calls? The minister going to Ubanga, the girl and her fear in the car, the road barriers, the Minister getting out, the crowds, his coping? Meeting with the President, deals and negotiation and success?

11. Arthur, his partner, her being a teacher, her concern about the couple and their not getting visas, after putting the note in the minister’s pocket – and suddenly the good decision made?

12. Arthur, his partner, her character, they getting on well together, whether she should travel with him, go to socials and dinners, his proposal of marriage?

13. The preparation for the speech to the United Nations, the visit, the various drafts, the minister giving his speech? Success?

14. The perennial dilemma about outward and public appearances, life behind the scenes? The farcical aspects, playing things by ear – and yet the final success at the United Nations?