'In the House' has a great premise but fails to fully explore its plot

'In the House' is directed by François Ozon.

|
Courtesy of Cohen Media Group
'In the House' stars (l. to r.) Ernst Umhauer, Denis Ménochet, Emmanuelle Seigner, and Bastien Ughetto.

The premise of François Ozon’s “In the House” is so suggestive that I kept waiting for the film to become wonderful. That never happens, but at least the premise engages the mind, if not always the eye.

Claude (Ernst Umhauer), a clean-cut 16-year-old student from a working-class family, always sits in the back row of his classroom. He’s not shy exactly. He just wants to be able to scope out the foreground. His teacher, Germain (Fabrice Luchini), recognizes early on that Claude may have a literary gift. A bit fussy and rule-bound, Germain wrote an undistinguished novel years before and sees in Claude the promising writer he once fancied himself to be.

Things become interesting when Claude befriends his middle-class classmate Rapha (Bastien Ughetto). Acting as a math tutor, he wheedles his way into Rapha’s family, paying special attention to his attractive mother, Esther (Emmanuelle Seigner). Taking notes, he incorporates his increasingly intimate observations about the family into writing assignments that Germain finds himself hooked on.

The twist here is that Germain begins coaching Claude about the “story line” he’s developing, encouraging the boy to ever more outrageous and dubious acts within the family. But who is really controlling whom here? And is what we are watching actually happening or just a projection of Claude’s – or Germain’s – fantasies?

The French love their metanarrative games, but at least “In the House” is playful. It’s no “Last Year at Marienbad.” Ozon, whose uneven career includes at least one first-rate film, “Under the Sand,” directs with a balmy equipoise. The story may darken, events may lurch into territory that would not seem out of place in a surrealist jape by Luis Buñuel, and yet the stops are never pulled all the way out.

Ozon may have decided that creepiness is best conveyed with a light touch. But too often he just seems to be abdicating the material’s most resonant potential. Buñuel would have brought out its gleaming perversities. The film is child’s play compared with the Spike Jonze-Charlie Kaufman comic masterpiece “Adaptation,” still the best movie ever made about the crazymaking meta-mess of a fiction writer’s life. Ozon is a bit too much like Germain: He’s too straitened by his comfy, middle-class mind-set.

But “In the House” does at least engage us. It even enlists us implicitly as co-conspirators in Claude’s devious storytelling. We may disapprove of his machinations inside that house and his manipulations of both Germain and Germain’s equally hooked wife, Jeanne (Kristin Scott Thomas, speaking perfect French). But we also want his story – real or imagined, or a little of both – to follow every forbidden byway. In effect, what Ozon is saying is that, because we are as enthralled as Germain, we can’t condemn the boy for what he does. A good story trumps good behavior.

If “In the House” were a richer movie, it might have explored these complications instead of just laying them out for us. In a way, Ozon is as much of a tease as Claude. He leads the audience along without ever really giving us what we want. While watching this movie, I kept remaking it in my mind. Maybe that was part of Ozon’s plan. He’s coaxing us into being storytellers, too. Grade: B (Rated R for sexual content and language.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to 'In the House' has a great premise but fails to fully explore its plot
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Movies/2013/0426/In-the-House-has-a-great-premise-but-fails-to-fully-explore-its-plot
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe