Despite what its title may appear to indicate, Denys Arcand's latest opus, « La chute de l'empire américain », is not the third chapter in a trilogy that would include "Le déclin de l'empire américain" and "Les invasions barbares". It is a film that bears glimpses of the thriller and comedy genres but that, ultimately, is an unapologetic vehicle for social commentary, tackling the very under-explored subject of tax evasion.
The film tells the story of Pierre-Paul, an intellectual young man with both a PhD in philosophy and a heart of gold, who works for a delivery company and frequently volunteers at local community organizations that help the homeless. While he is on the job delivering a parcel, he witnesses a hold up where a significant amount of money gets stolen from a boutique and where everyone involved, but one man, gets shot to death in the process. Stuck in the middle of that crime scene with dead bodies and two bags filled with cash, he decides to take the money and hide it in his truck before the police arrives. He ends up leaving with the money, and teaming up with a luxury escort and an ex-convict who specializes in tax evasion to come up with a money-laundering scheme that bears more similarities with a modern-day Robin Hood tale than anything else.
I thought the film had quite an interesting premise, which was definitely reminiscent of one of my favourite films, "No Country for Old Men". That being said, that's the only thing both films have in common, as "No Country for Old Men" had this obvious classic main theme about the lure of profit and the price that people are willing to pay for it. It also tackled multiple sub-themes with great, powerful subtlety that elevated the film to a whole other level. The use that "La chute de l'empire américain" makes of this premise mostly fuels some of its sub-plots, which bring a thriller aspect to the story in which, oddly enough, the main characters never get directly involved. So, in that regard, the criminal underworld and Pierre-Paul's universe never clash, with the latter remaining in a relatively safe space where the only threat is a police investigation, leaving plenty of space (or runtime) for philosophical speeches and a somewhat preachy and pompous charge against tax evasion that is pervasively (and a bit annoyingly) disseminated in quite pontificating fashion through dialogue that seriously lacks subtlety and often times, fluidity.
The opening scene, which introduces the audience to the protagonist, really exposes this issue from the get-go: We meet Pierre-Paul as he explains to his soon to be ex-girlfriend that his intelligence, in today's society, is a handicap. As he successively spews pompous quotes from different philosophers (and makes sure to name them in the process) to get his point across, while the girlfriend in question remains speechless for the most part, you get a feeling that Pierre-Paul's character was supposed to look incredibly smart, but instead sounds socially awkward and more pretentious than anything else.
That being said, that doesn't make the film unwatchable, as there are many other aspects that make it worthwhile. First, the cast does a very good job despite the deficiencies in their characters' dialogue. Alexandre Landry, as Pierre-Paul, manages to give his character an overall awkwardness that brings credibility to his delivery of dialogue that would have otherwise sounded very unnatural. He also makes Pierre-Paul feel like a genuinely good person with the best intentions. Maripier Morin got her first acting gig in this film, and really exceeded everyone's expectations, as she more than competently impersonates a luxury escort who, against all odds, ends up falling for Pierre-Paul. Rémi Girard, Maxim Roy and Louis Morissette each offer quite entertaining performances, but the standout, in my view, was Pierre Curzi, who plays a wealthy tax attorney. They gave him the perfect look, with the slicked back grey hair, the blue suit and the Christine Lagarde tan. And his performance is absolutely on point, as he's got a glacial look in his eyes, and an imperturbable calmness that is certainly reminiscent of a few bankers that appeared at U. S. senate hearings after the financial crisis of 2008-2009.
Also, what Arcand lacks in writing prowess when it comes to dialogue, he makes up for with his ability as a director. The direction in "La chute de l'empire américain" is one of the film's stronger points, and without it, this could have been a painful film to watch. It takes a while to see where this film is going, as screen time is initially shared in equal parts between many sub-plots, some of which are quite dynamic: the injured survivor of the shootout seeking shelter, criminals looking for the stolen money, the police investigation, the ex-convict choosing whether or not he wants to help Pierre-Paul, the love story between Pierre-Paul and the escort, etc. It is unfortunate, however, that many of those settle themselves without ever being blended into the story to an extent that would have allowed them to be exploited to their full potential, prematurely leaving all the screen time to a main plot that heavily relies on clumsily written dialogue to deliver its social commentary and whose denouement will feel a bit naive to anyone who does not believe in fairy tales. That being said, the film is not without its creative, clever and funny moments, and manages to maintain a pace that keeps the audience interested.
Overall, this is a mixed bag that shows early signs of deficiencies in its delivery of social commentary, but that remains entertaining for as long as it keeps its sub-plots alive. While I sincerely appreciated that someone finally made an attempt at tackling the subject of tax evasion with the best of intentions, when the film fully enters social commentary delivery mode, it unfortunately exposes its own flaws way too visibly, despite being supported by a great cast that mostly appeases the harm, but that can only work around the lack of subtlety and the preachy aspect of the writing. Its qualities, however, make it worth watching nonetheless.
The film tells the story of Pierre-Paul, an intellectual young man with both a PhD in philosophy and a heart of gold, who works for a delivery company and frequently volunteers at local community organizations that help the homeless. While he is on the job delivering a parcel, he witnesses a hold up where a significant amount of money gets stolen from a boutique and where everyone involved, but one man, gets shot to death in the process. Stuck in the middle of that crime scene with dead bodies and two bags filled with cash, he decides to take the money and hide it in his truck before the police arrives. He ends up leaving with the money, and teaming up with a luxury escort and an ex-convict who specializes in tax evasion to come up with a money-laundering scheme that bears more similarities with a modern-day Robin Hood tale than anything else.
I thought the film had quite an interesting premise, which was definitely reminiscent of one of my favourite films, "No Country for Old Men". That being said, that's the only thing both films have in common, as "No Country for Old Men" had this obvious classic main theme about the lure of profit and the price that people are willing to pay for it. It also tackled multiple sub-themes with great, powerful subtlety that elevated the film to a whole other level. The use that "La chute de l'empire américain" makes of this premise mostly fuels some of its sub-plots, which bring a thriller aspect to the story in which, oddly enough, the main characters never get directly involved. So, in that regard, the criminal underworld and Pierre-Paul's universe never clash, with the latter remaining in a relatively safe space where the only threat is a police investigation, leaving plenty of space (or runtime) for philosophical speeches and a somewhat preachy and pompous charge against tax evasion that is pervasively (and a bit annoyingly) disseminated in quite pontificating fashion through dialogue that seriously lacks subtlety and often times, fluidity.
The opening scene, which introduces the audience to the protagonist, really exposes this issue from the get-go: We meet Pierre-Paul as he explains to his soon to be ex-girlfriend that his intelligence, in today's society, is a handicap. As he successively spews pompous quotes from different philosophers (and makes sure to name them in the process) to get his point across, while the girlfriend in question remains speechless for the most part, you get a feeling that Pierre-Paul's character was supposed to look incredibly smart, but instead sounds socially awkward and more pretentious than anything else.
That being said, that doesn't make the film unwatchable, as there are many other aspects that make it worthwhile. First, the cast does a very good job despite the deficiencies in their characters' dialogue. Alexandre Landry, as Pierre-Paul, manages to give his character an overall awkwardness that brings credibility to his delivery of dialogue that would have otherwise sounded very unnatural. He also makes Pierre-Paul feel like a genuinely good person with the best intentions. Maripier Morin got her first acting gig in this film, and really exceeded everyone's expectations, as she more than competently impersonates a luxury escort who, against all odds, ends up falling for Pierre-Paul. Rémi Girard, Maxim Roy and Louis Morissette each offer quite entertaining performances, but the standout, in my view, was Pierre Curzi, who plays a wealthy tax attorney. They gave him the perfect look, with the slicked back grey hair, the blue suit and the Christine Lagarde tan. And his performance is absolutely on point, as he's got a glacial look in his eyes, and an imperturbable calmness that is certainly reminiscent of a few bankers that appeared at U. S. senate hearings after the financial crisis of 2008-2009.
Also, what Arcand lacks in writing prowess when it comes to dialogue, he makes up for with his ability as a director. The direction in "La chute de l'empire américain" is one of the film's stronger points, and without it, this could have been a painful film to watch. It takes a while to see where this film is going, as screen time is initially shared in equal parts between many sub-plots, some of which are quite dynamic: the injured survivor of the shootout seeking shelter, criminals looking for the stolen money, the police investigation, the ex-convict choosing whether or not he wants to help Pierre-Paul, the love story between Pierre-Paul and the escort, etc. It is unfortunate, however, that many of those settle themselves without ever being blended into the story to an extent that would have allowed them to be exploited to their full potential, prematurely leaving all the screen time to a main plot that heavily relies on clumsily written dialogue to deliver its social commentary and whose denouement will feel a bit naive to anyone who does not believe in fairy tales. That being said, the film is not without its creative, clever and funny moments, and manages to maintain a pace that keeps the audience interested.
Overall, this is a mixed bag that shows early signs of deficiencies in its delivery of social commentary, but that remains entertaining for as long as it keeps its sub-plots alive. While I sincerely appreciated that someone finally made an attempt at tackling the subject of tax evasion with the best of intentions, when the film fully enters social commentary delivery mode, it unfortunately exposes its own flaws way too visibly, despite being supported by a great cast that mostly appeases the harm, but that can only work around the lack of subtlety and the preachy aspect of the writing. Its qualities, however, make it worth watching nonetheless.