In some of Chabrol's lesser films, like "À double tour," his effort to preserve the ambiguity of characters' inner lives slips into incoherence about their moral status. Fed mixed signals, the viewer can't decide what attitude to take toward the characters and loses interest in the film.
"À double tour" provides evidence for two contrary readings. In one view, the mother is an intelligent, modest, likable person, a faithful wife and caring mother. She is afflicted by two destructive forces in the household: a weak husband, who is having an affair with a vapid younger woman, and a boorish prospective son-in-law who is good for nothing. But the film also encourages the opposite view: the husband and prospective son-in-law are free spirits, combating bourgeois repression embodied by the mother.
This contradiction is crystallized by a central puzzle: the husband and prospective son-in-law constantly display their contempt for the mother, but we never see her behaving contemptibly.
The film's lack of moral position toward the characters is not a sign of an artistic sophistication that forces viewers to "make up their own minds" as in real life. It is, rather, a failure to establish an essential element in a work of art: a point of view. Given equal evidence on both sides of the film's moral conflicts, viewers draw no conclusion and thus lack a deep involvement in the work.
The same problem affects Chabrol's "Le boucher" (1970), in which the protagonist is given no motivation for protecting a homicidal maniac, who goes on to kill again. Both films end up repelling viewers instead of engaging them. By contrast, his "La femme infidèle" (1969) is a masterpiece because even though the heroine's two actions are contradictory (cheating on her husband, yet returning to love him), the film develops a single emotional truth that embraces them.
"À double tour" provides evidence for two contrary readings. In one view, the mother is an intelligent, modest, likable person, a faithful wife and caring mother. She is afflicted by two destructive forces in the household: a weak husband, who is having an affair with a vapid younger woman, and a boorish prospective son-in-law who is good for nothing. But the film also encourages the opposite view: the husband and prospective son-in-law are free spirits, combating bourgeois repression embodied by the mother.
This contradiction is crystallized by a central puzzle: the husband and prospective son-in-law constantly display their contempt for the mother, but we never see her behaving contemptibly.
The film's lack of moral position toward the characters is not a sign of an artistic sophistication that forces viewers to "make up their own minds" as in real life. It is, rather, a failure to establish an essential element in a work of art: a point of view. Given equal evidence on both sides of the film's moral conflicts, viewers draw no conclusion and thus lack a deep involvement in the work.
The same problem affects Chabrol's "Le boucher" (1970), in which the protagonist is given no motivation for protecting a homicidal maniac, who goes on to kill again. Both films end up repelling viewers instead of engaging them. By contrast, his "La femme infidèle" (1969) is a masterpiece because even though the heroine's two actions are contradictory (cheating on her husband, yet returning to love him), the film develops a single emotional truth that embraces them.