Play Time (1967) by Jacques Tati
Playtime (1967) was one of the most expensive movies in the French history. Tati produced the Film in Tativille. The film shows funny episodes about a modern Paris than the current one. It describes a Paris that comprises of many streets similar to those of America, encircled by amazing glass and steel towers. Tourists and their guides who spread dreadful shams among the settlers populate the city. It is not an instant deadly disease but it is making everyone to act with frosty attitude affected by flight attendants and reluctance clerks[1].
The film produces in a way that it shows the theme of a family inheriting a lot of money. The family tries to use the money in imagination, loses its soul and later recognizes itself when their fortune goes away from them. However, it is not the shape of the film that describes its philosophy that is important, or its wit level. What is important in the film is the fluidity of the illustration suppresses that gets into one another in a way that only Tati recognizes. Hulot is the main character in the film mainly in the trade section. The film analyzes the critical attack that disturbs the attention from the movies huge humor such as closing sequence that shows the Parisian traffic circle showing the sacred cause of incompetence. In addition, Playtime is an irresponsible action of belief described by Tati[2].
The modern architecture describes the French culture in the film. The film focuses more on architecture of the spaces rather than the normal description. Philip who is the film historian describes how architecture shows how people behave. Tati described how the film lines develop into curves and review how the people’s movements influence the architecture of the surrounding. Philip claims that in the start of the film, people walk in straight lines and make sharp rotations. Thus, the surrounding influenced their actions[3].
Philip suggests that the film comprises of patterns and movements. It describes how the shape of a lifeless object has an importance over the route of sense and becomes the image joke. In the film, objects have been made-up and introduced in the modernized world that appears to simplify our lives. He also tries to show us the insignificance of architecture that has been so unoriginal in the current world that has made cities lose their originality. When Tati uses his camera shows that every person is a tourist, casing life and culture. Therefore, the movie describes how the modern world community is using architecture and commercial products to make them consistent. The design of Tati’s film stresses these notions. For instance, on using the light shades; blue, grey and black, we are introduced with a cold and dehumanized review of the society[4].
In describing the complexity of the apartments, we can see the similarities between these apartments. There is also similarity among the neighbors. In closer view of these apartments, there is the similarity on their furniture design. The chairs in the homes are the same chairs from the global trade fair in the earlier scene. The issue on Tati trying to leave the audience in suspense suggests that there is an obstructing wall between the communities[5].
The architectural approach of the modern city of the future city took a huge aspect, as the cities needs reconstruction. Different culture in Europe viewed the problems in the restaurants as increased by design, theme, and functions of different components. The film demonstrates the rise of the modern architecture and the related innovative lifestyle of French society. In this modern era, the audience is grasps the relationship between people and the modern situation. The film remains famous for its historical compositions and objects that features each scene. People can think that the film produced in the area of La Defense, but this is because the controls in Paris to construct high tower buildings changed after Charles was re-elected in 1962, there were not many buildings yet when Tati started his play[6].
Based on the film’s political approach, it shows the style of Democracy. From the time, Hulot moves out of a bus he manage to interrupt the modern city of glass and steel. The play starts in 1964, ends in 1967, and refers to a product responding to politics of its historical era. Based on this approach, Tati’s response against urbanization and the outpacing of daily life in France, and the loss of identity and liberty as described through a connection of the play characters and movements within the main scene[7]. As proofed in 1958 with a dialogue with Bazin, Tati said that in France, adjustments were happening rapidly for normal people to continue with their lives. The new domain stressed on the consumption of material products and opulence, at the approach of a writer and a personal expression, the quick invention of the world produced similarity with the little idea for the life experience. Tati acclaimed that he condemned the rejection of personal respect for people and said that the accusations in 1858 could show the increasing anti-authoritarian concern of the Paris youths and workers. This would burst in Paris rebellion and the protests in 1968 that was several months after the Playtime’s film release[8].
The aspect of unfriendliness that Tati told Bazin appears in the Playtime. This appears in the first part of the film and in the location of airport in Paris. The irony in the commonplace world is that the meaning of the space shifts from a significant relation to the characters that pass in and out of the space. The film does not only show us the unfriendliness effects of the post-war modern world, but also a solution through a delicate play of the humorist and democratic approach. On this basis, Tati film’s occupation grounded from his early works as a mime and performance artist[9].
The values on the film portray Hulot’s presence in the film as a spirit of impulsiveness that indicates the breakdown of the modern architecture and responsiveness. In the first instance, Hulot moves from the restaurant against the people getting in. Because of his size, Hulot staggers passing people while still trying to open the door for other people, here, he is not able to function properly in the given situation. The inelegance shows a character of innocence that seems to be lost within the severe structure of the innovative architecture. For Hulot to respond wisely to his environment, he must have a position in the modern world. This shows how modernism weakens the human wisdom and classifies them as livelihood and reactions to any kind of employment[10].
As much as Hulot offers help, the downfall increases and soars. In the modern world, each category has a specific role and function. Hulot gets irritated of the new system by approaching the function of the guard. When the guard tries to take his responsibility of being, a conflict results to the demolition of architecture. Tati shows his values for humanity can overcome harsh systems. However, this is not Tati’s final approach to talk about the connection of the modern systems and kindness. In the last scene, Hulot is trying to show compassion to the American couple where his value becomes of importance and useful. Despite the outcome of the destruction, this magically changes the suggestive of the traditional Paris. This growth releases the created tension by the modern world. After all this, Tati does not enclose the whole restaurant in the new environment, but instead he is giving a similarity of the two. The American guard demonstrates this, like Hulot who opens the door for people. He shows his help and value rather than obstructing them. Tati might be reflecting these values according to the American way of life[11].
Tati uses these approaches as a way of showing changes from the ancient values to the new values. In Playtime, Paris is a modern city with lines of similar office buildings but does not have innovation. The same office building is on the travel posters of other cities. These images show Tati’s ideas of the changing new world. The indications do not connect more to the audience, but to the characters in the film. They are frightened by the new towers and have forgotten about the attractiveness and the traditional architectural values. It is possible that Tati was trying to show the idea that though the modern society values has made us forget the past, the modern culture and architecture has drowned out of the past. As a result, although the modern life is irresistible, the attractiveness and the values of the past exist if we keep our eyes open[12].
Work cited
Cones, John W. Dictionary of Film Finance and Distribution: A Guide for Independent Filmmakers. , 2013. Internet resource.
Glasmeier, Michael. "Play Time" - Film Interdisziplinär: Ein Film Und Acht Perspektiven. Münster: Lit, 2005. Print.
Shiel, Mark, and Tony Fitzmaurice. Cinema and the City: Film and Urban Societies in a Global Context. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Internet resource.
[1] Glasmeier, 51
[2] Glasmeier, 65
[3]Glasmeier, 67
[4] Glasmeier, 82
[5] Shiel, Mark & Fitzmaurice, 24
[6] Cones, 287
[7] Cones, 292
[8] Cones, 301
[9] Shiel, Mark & Fitzmaurice, 26
[10] Shiel, Mark & Fitzmaurice, 34
[11] Shiel, Mark & Fitzmaurice, 45
[12] Shiel, Mark & Fitzmaurice 55
