English Title: The Nun

Original Title: La religieuse

Year: 1966

Country: France

Language: French, Latin

Genre: Drama

Director: Jacques Rivette

Screenwriters: Jacques Rivette, Jean Gruault

based on the novel by Denis Diderot

Music: Jean-Claude Eloy

Cinematography: Alain Levent

Editing: Denise de Casabianca

Cast:

Anna Karina

Liselotte Pulver

Francine Bergé

Micheline Presle

Jean Martin

Francisco Rabal

Christian Lénier

Yori Bertin

Pierre Meyrand

Charles Millot

Marc Eyraud

Gilette Barbier

Wolfgang Reichmann

Michel Delahaye

Rating: 8.1/10

Catching Jacques Rivette’s THE NUN on the big screen pays great dividends, restored in its pristine luster, the film is among three films screened here in Shanghai to commemorate the diva of Nouvelle Vague, Anna Karina (1940-2018), another two are Godard’s VIVRE SA VIE (1962) and A WOMAN IS A WOMAN (1961).

Initially banned for its scathing anticlerical ridicule and opprobrium, THE NUN is an adaptation of Denis Diderot’s novel, and Rivette’s second full-length feature. During 135 minutes, it relates the story of Susanne Simonin (Karina), an 18-year-old girl of the mid-18 century, who is railroaded into nunhood by her bourgeois parents, because she is a bastard (a secret her mother tries to keep from her unwitting husband) and the family has no money left for her dowry, sending her to the Almighty’s calling seems to be the only option, although it is plain specious.

The crux is, for Susanne, devout as she is, she feels that she has never received the calling from God. Her eventual vow-taking ceremony is conspicuously omitted on the screen, and reckoning by the reactions of her mother (Lénier) and Mother Superior Mme de Moni (Presle, ever so graceful and compassionate), something is certainly amiss there. Later Susanne claims that she has no recollection of the ceremony, perhaps she was in a fugue, witnessed by many, that fact could have been graciously taken as a testimony of revoking her vows had the church assumed a more liberal attitude towards its devotees. So one can see that it is religious orthodoxy, not Catholic church itself is the fair game here.

Susanne possesses an innocuous, inexperienced soul, her idée fixe is that she cannot be cloistered in a convent because she is not qualified for that kind of devotion. She is not “enlightened”, neither secularly nor spiritually. When she is taken as the new favorite of the sapphic Mme de Chelles (Pulver), she is none the wiser to understand it is the carnal urge in the play (not until she is illuminated by the priest who listens to her confession, the “mansplaining” avant la lettre), nor could she survive in the secular world, as it is equally, if not more sinisterly, cloistered.

It is overt that the part after Susanne finally escapes from the convent is fast-tracked (encapsulated in less than 10 minutes), as if Rivette suddenly registers that time is running out. But previous to that, audience have undergone a Manichaean rollercoaster of a ride that segues from the high-handed oppression under a cold, stern, authoritative Sister Sainte Christine (Bergé), who succeeds Mme de Moni as the new abbess and cruelly persecutes Susanne for her recalcitrance, to the utter vivacity, chipper sorority stemmed from Mme de Chelles’s governance, like Susanne, we viewers also cannot believe our eyes, how mischievously cunning is Rivette to stage-manage such an about-face (including the modulation of its palettes) to taunt the church’s disparate improprieties!

Karina is at the top of her game here, grittily buckles down for Susanne’s ordeal and is most pathos-invoking in her heartfelt cri de coeur, bedraggled, miserable, baring her heart out and kneeling down to a ruthless superior. Bar Sister Sainte Christine, can any human being stay unaffected by such a soul-shattering emotional plea? That said, Karina’s brilliance is somehow dimmed when Pulver makes her appearance, her handsy Mme de Chelles is a delightful outlier of all the prior characters, an archetype of lesbian nun which would be vilified, mocked and exploited in lesser hands. Yet Pulver plays her with such a facility of earnestness that is in tandem with Mme de Chelles’ superficial frivolity and benevolence, and when her infatuation brings her downfall, our giggling slowly freezes and what gels is something less definitive, she is between the butt of a joke and a tragic figure tormented by her inner demons, Pulver is fantastic from A to Z. Concurrently, Karina’s Susanne takes a back seat as a perturbed virgin, like a scare-easy bird, her integrity is the sole lifeline she can hold on to, which foreshadows her denouement. Viewed today, Rivette’s exceedingly watchable cause célèbre is neither scandalous nor sacrilegious, if anything, it might aid to rectify the church’s abiding Procrustean canker.

referential entries: Rivette’s WOMEN DUELLING (1976, 7.3/10), CELINE AND JULIE GO BOATING (1974, 9.2/10); Luis Bu?uel’s VIRIDIANA (1961, 8.2/10).

第12屆#法羅島電影節(jié)#無人知曉單元第8個放映日為大家?guī)怼杜掏健罚旅鏋榇蠹規(guī)砬熬€痛苦修女們壓迫無比的評價了！

墨夜軒：

如果后半段沒有那么趕會更好。

RIVER：

結(jié)局是必然的結(jié)果，但通往這個終點的路走的太快了。

果樹：

雖然拍法高級，但實在不是一個觀賞起來很親民的電影。

法羅島帝國皇后：

宗教的權(quán)威性和強制性斷絕了信仰的合理性，生意里金錢最重要，把主義做成生意，哪還有底線。

我們敏熙：

竟然是一部“快速電影”，剪輯干脆，細枝末節(jié)砍得一干二凈，留白頗多。古典故事中注定毀滅的命運。

格系藝人：

壓抑，絕望，鏡頭壓迫著角色的同時也壓迫著觀眾。導演的節(jié)奏越后面越趕，但與此同時絕望感愈加猛烈。

子夜無人：

從一個牢籠轉(zhuǎn)移到另一個牢籠，人物始終掙扎在久遠的禁閉中從而失去了時空性，在屏幕上反復出現(xiàn)了不斷撲空摔倒在地的動作，像一種千錘百煉的拷問。清規(guī)戒律是酷刑，溫柔呵護是覬覦，施以援手是占有欲，擺上臺面是小玩意，唯有縱身一躍，才能了結(jié)循環(huán)往復的悲劇宿命，此生終于分明。

Bboard19920313：

雅克·里維特這個該死的導演一個猛子撞在我槍口上，上屆《不羈的美女》我就已經(jīng)對他沒什么好印象了，哪知道這次竟然讓我更加抓狂。他真的能把一個本來的無聊的故事講的更叫無聊，沒有了優(yōu)美畫作的本片讓人更加難以忍受，外搭上演員一言難盡做作無比的“神級”表演，以及我今天真的很累很累，我宣布再也不看他的電影了。

#FIFF12#DAY8的無人知曉場刊評分將在稍后為大家釋出，請大家拭目以待了。

18世紀的很多貴族會把女兒送進修道院成為修女以保持女兒的貞操，這樣在以后的聯(lián)姻中可以保持或抬高身價。蘇珊娜就在這樣的背景下被母親強制性的送到了修道院。但蘇珊娜是悲慘的，雖然父母也是貴族但蘇珊娜并不是他們親生的，父母的親生女兒是蘇珊娜的姐姐，所以蘇珊娜得不到任何遺產(chǎn)，而且家庭經(jīng)濟上的困難也是她被拋棄的原因之一。她懇求母親不要遺棄她，但無論多么卑微的示弱和祈求都無法動搖母親的意志。蘇珊娜是善良的，她放棄了哀求。至此，她只剩下兩條路：要么成為修女，要么無家可歸。蘇珊娜無可奈何的成為了修女，噩夢就此開始。

蘇珊娜忍受不了宗教對自己身體和思想的禁錮，以及修道院壓抑人性的氛圍。她渴望自由，她奔騰的意志驅(qū)使她成為了修道院里的“壞孩子”。她遲到，晚歸，缺席禱告，托朋友幫忙尋找生父生母，找律師試圖用法律的手段讓自己活得自由。這在教母眼中是不可原諒的，所以她被體罰，被其他修女排擠，唾棄，誣陷，毆打，被停止食物供給。在精神和肉體雙重折磨下，奔騰的意志逐漸干枯。同時生母的來信告訴她生父已死，生母也生活窘迫，蘇珊娜徹底失去了希望。在律師的幫助下，蘇珊娜轉(zhuǎn)移到了另一個修道院。新的教母對她非常友善，這種友善讓蘇珊娜感受到了久違的安全感，她開始變得平靜順從?？蓾u漸的這種友善和親密開始越界。教母在與蘇珊娜相處時有了很多親昵的行為甚至要和蘇珊娜一起睡覺，并且每時每刻都在纏著她。顯然，教母是個同性戀。蘇珊娜很害怕便把事情告訴了神父，神父在夜色下翻墻把蘇珊娜偷偷救出了修道院?？商K珊娜都還沒來得及感謝，神父突然變了個人似的企圖強奸蘇珊娜，在陌生人的幫助下，蘇珊娜偷走了。她無家可歸，無路可走，寄人籬下做著女傭的工作。又因為不好的名聲被辭退。走投無路的她成為了街邊的乞討者，無意中被富婆看中，帶著她參加了一個上流社會人士舉辦的淫亂酒會。蘇珊娜面對眼前的一切和自己無望的生活，跳樓結(jié)束了自己凄慘的人生。

這是一部對宗教和人性進行猛烈批判的電影。整個故事都在壓抑黑暗的氛圍下行進。善良，單純的蘇珊娜在“上帝無處不在”的修道院里見識到了人性的黑暗，她忍受著上帝子民的傲慢和迫害。她如同尼采的化身用奔騰的意志證明上帝已死。