Tati & Mon and ? Oncle testing fiasco for modern architectural extravagances.
Tati, Mon Oncle, and … testing fiasco for modern architectural extravagances. My uncle Mon Oncle, France 1958 col.120 ‘. Author: Jacques Tati. By: Jacques Tati, Jean-Pierre Zola, Adrienne Servantie, Alain Bécourt, Lucien Fregis. The small Gérard (Bécourt) is divided between the monotony of the tank’s high-tech home of the parents, and the warmth of the popular neighborhood of Uncle Hulot (Tati). Sister and brother in law seek to incorporate into their world the bewildered relative with catastrophic results. A surreal satire on the relationship between old and new bourgeois sull’affanno to appear modern. Tati (for the third time in Hulot cloths) confronts the machine civilization and goes beyond the immediate comedy of burlesque: the whole film is a continuous gags, one of his best works, Special Jury Prize at Cannes and Oscar for the best foreign film. So it reported, with 3.5 stars, in the DICTIONARY OF FILM by Paolo Mereghetti.Baldini and Castoldi, 1993.
Compared to Mon Oncle, The Party, it seems the American point of view on the stupidity of modern conformism fed dall’agiatezza of the new rich.
Released ten years earlier, the masterpiece by Jacques Tati, anticipates the themes of comic catastrophe caused by the architectural absurdity of a villa (in fact, here, a house) luxuriously modern. Yet another masterpiece -of ten years giovane-, the party in Hollywood Sellers-Blake, is not a remake, even from only one point of view of architectural themes, traveling on substantially different tracks of comedy and satire. Mon Oncle, however, already has something more. It comes in the style, the language of architecture. The film critic of the time will observe keenly, “the new home of Hulot’s brother is a suburban monstrosity of abstract art Cubist where every frightening aspect is defined to be fashionable at the expense of living.” So the first show of modernity is not technology but stylistic (and fashionable). This villa is not only full of command buttons to the delight of the hosts for unnecessary, dangerous gadgets -as its Hollywood counterpart in Beverly Hills- but ostentation “consistent” with his own form, with its own architecture, its substantial outward modernity, as a moment of adherence to an aesthetic style considered in line with a way of life.
It is not a novelty of little consequence. After passing phenomenon as avant-garde, modern architecture also falls in the social hierarchy as well as cultural. Divendando object of interest “petty bourgeois,” adapts symbolically, linguistically and therefore aesthetically. At a superficial awareness can only match a superficial representation. If, in “The Party” architecture remained confined in the interior design and furnishings, using a gradient stylistic characterization -almost an appearance than automatic control- off, the newly “luxury” Paris suburbs, the residence of industrialist plastic tubes, Monsieur Harpel, and mainly his wife -Madame Harpel, sister Houlot- proudly shows off the architecture -in all external, in the interior and in arredi- their unmistakable aesthetic connotations. Attention to detail, however. As Toto, in Capri, “Totò in color”, does not spit in the eye of Picasso, but the snobbish painter “Picasso”, so Tati does not intend to demolish the purist aesthetic of Savoje villa, but, on the contrary, exhibited the vulgarity of “lecobusierismo “(… and other isms) the manner in direct or collateral line, which became fashionable in a social context already drained of self-identity. no wonder the house is not white, but gray. not by chance the bare simplicity private anti-decorative the “masters” of the modern changes into obsession-ostentation iperdecorativa modern -see the entrance gate, or the paths of the garden, for example-. Tati, no shooting in the crowd, aims fine. It is also the center (or especially) in more than forty years later. This film that, for the avoidance of teaching misunderstandings, it should be projected at the beginning and end of each academic year in all the schools of architecture, and some universities has nearly done it before and after certain teachers to students, it is not only an admirable set of pretexts for memorable gags, is an annotated catalog of architectural nonsense, “rappel à Monsieur de les architectes” as he might have said, in fact, Le Corbusier, before screwing himself in formalism (and lecorbusierismi) no return. A list too long to be out here. Jacques Tati’s Mon Oncle HoulotLe “elegant”, uncomfortable, sidereal, “American high tech style chairs”. The porthole windows that appear in the night like ghostly and menacing giant eyes of the villa. … Dictatorial obliged garden paths … you are only tasting menu that the chef of Mon Oncle offers.
Perfect and extreme care of all the details of that, their, particular aesthetic vision, more than a ‘house is proposed as a sculpture to live, ideologically complicit and contiguous to the “machine a habiter”, so that the hostess looks after her and it cleans with painstaking care as a true masterpiece from the museum. Tank, is centuries away from the hot-and trasandata- humanity of the neighborhood where he lives M. Hulot: he is not, but it could be from the parts of rue Rambuteau; in that ancient village of Les Halles, where shooting of fate or premonition artistic, twenty years later will land from hyperspace of architectural fantasy Beaubourg Renzo Piano.