The secret of Jacques Tati
26th May 2010
Dear Mr Ebert
Please let me first introduce myself. My name is Richard McDonald the middle grandson of the celebrated French filmmaker Jacques Tatischeff.
Having read with concerned interest your current blog documenting your experiences at this years Cannes Film Festival I hereby obliging write to you on behalf of my grandfathers only direct living family with information that you should be made aware of concerning the often ignored yet historically significant chapter of his life.
As you aware, having seen the trade screening at the Cinema Arcades in Cannes, this year will see the international release of an adaptation of my grandfather's original l'Illusionniste script by Sylvain Chomet and Pathe Pictures/ Sony Picture Classic. Before participating further in any active promotion of Chomet's adaptation of Tati's l'Illusionniste we would appreciate that you first consider how his interpretation greatly undermines both the artistry of my grandfather's original script whilst shamefully ignoring the deeply troubled personal story that lies at its heart.
I hope that you will be able to appreciate the significance of this information and compassionately understand the hurt that the misrepresentation of history by those involved in this production has already caused.
"Really I assure you, in all my films I did absolutely everything I wanted to do. If you don't like that, them, I am the only one to blame"
-- Jacques Tati: Cahiers du Cinema, 1980
It is well documented that my grandfather, Jacques Tati, wrote the script of l'Illusionniste as a sentimental semi-autobiographical reflection on how he was feeling about himself and in particular what he saw as his personal failings during the 1950's. It is also documented that the script was written as a personal letter to his teenage daughter. What is less well known however is the depth of his deceitful torment and how in the script he wrestles with the notion of publicly acknowledging his eldest daughter, my mother, who he had under duress from his elder sister heartlessly abandoned during the Second World War. At the time performing at the Lido de Paris with his long term lover, my grandmother Herta Schiel, Tati's deplorable conduct towards his first child was met with utter disgust by the majority of his then stage colleagues. Thrown out of the Lido by Leon Volterra, it was from this act, having been shunned by the Paris cabaret circuit for his caddish betrayal of one of their own and not as is often wrongly told to avoid Nazi recruiters, that Tati took refugee in the village of Sainte-Sévère in 1943, where he would later shoot Jour de Fete. The stage performers of Paris were a close knit community and in the same way that they had previously provided for Piaf they would also collectively help shelter Tati's abandoned infant daughter Helga Marie-Jeanne whom as Piaf was born in Paris at the Hôpital Tenon located in the 20th arrondissement.
At its heart the original script for l'Illusionniste focuses on a conjurer who upon finding that his act has became unfashionable is resorted to travel to ever further distant venues to earn a living. It is at one of these locations, originally intended to be a small town in Czechoslovakia that he befriends a young teenage girl who appears to be without family. Enthralled by the illusionist tricks which she believes to be real magic a father/daughter relationship evolves between the movies two protagonists. As the parental relationship builds the conjurer's engagement in the village comes to an end and the unlikely pair head to the big city, originally set to be Prague. For the first time in her life the young girl is exposed to the enchantment of a big city. Afraid to lose the young girl's affections to the charms of the city the illusionist unwilling to disappoint her with the truth about his life does everything he can to maintain the notion that his magic is real. However the lure of the city is powerful and the young girl attracts the attention of a handsome young man who exposes the conjurer's magic as fraudulent, nothing more than cheap tricks, illusions created to entertain an audience. Unable to hold onto her affections once his charade has been exposed the script concludes with the conjurer disappearing off into the sunset free of his deceit having as he always known he would lost the affections of the young girl to youth and the vibrancy of the city once she was able to see beyond his theatrics.
How the original script for l'Illusionniste reflects my grandfather's personal troubled dilemmas at its time of writing can be explained by taking account of the following facts.
1 It is well documented that Tati, my grandfather, wrote l'Illusionniste an emotive semi-autobiographical account of how during the 1950's he felt about himself and in particular what he saw as his professional and personal failings at the time.
2 It has been acknowledged that the script for l'Illusionniste was written as a personal letter to Tati's teenage daughter. Sophie his second child was not a teenager at the time of its writing, only his eldest daughter, Helga Marie-Jeanne whom he had adversely neglected as an infant was. In 1955 Helga was thirteen years of age, Sophie had just turned nine. Consecutive versions of l'Illusionniste script exist dated from 1955 through to 1959.
3 Tati played with idea's for l'Illusionniste throughout the mid to late 1950's the writing of which coincided with a letter written to him by his eldest daughter, Helga Marie-Jeanne. As a refugee Helga Marie-Jeanne had become trapped in Marrakech during the Moroccan 1955 uprising for independence against its French protectorate. Having been at the centre of the Christmas Eve bombing of the main Marrakech market in which she witnessed the massacre of a number of her boarding school friends, Helga Marie-Jeanne was actively encouraged by the French Consulate to flee Morocco for her own safety. Holding only a French passport she wrote to her father in hope that he would show compassion towards her plight and help her escape the hostilities that had built up in Morocco by offering her safe passage back to her home city of Paris. He was never forthcoming with help. However the request for help from his own daughter could only have weighed heavily on Tati the man, the artist, who had during the same period written the most sensitive observations of childhood innocence and parenthood with Academy Award winning Mon Oncle.
In Mon Oncle Tati would take the opportunity to swipe fun at the notion of arranged marriages which his elder sister Nataile had manipulated him into after the rejection of his own daughter in real life. Natalie had an overbearing influence over Tati and his abandonment of his eldest daughter was greatly influenced by her depraved intervention. Tati's script for l'Illusionniste parallels many of the dilemmas he was facing in his real life at the time, acceptance that he wasn't getting any younger, the failing popularity of live cabaret, befriending and taking on his parental duties towards a teenage girl he knew little about, bringing that teenager to a big city and the dilemma of ultimately losing the child's affection once the veil of his stage persona was exposed.
4 Tati, in keeping with his preference of not working with professional actors, had singled out Sylvette David who had modelled for Picasso for the role as the teenage girl due to her resemblance to Bridget Bardot. In her letter from Morocco Helga Marie-Jeanne had innocently joked that the locals of Marrakech had nicknamed her the brunette Bardot of the Sahara. David did not sit for Picasso until 1954 so it can only be concluded that Tati did not know of her until after this date.
5 Tati had set l'Illusionniste in the Czech capital city of Prague. The mother of his eldest child Herta Schiel was of duel nationality and escaped the German annexation of Vienna using Czech papers. She remained a Czech citizen throughout the war. Tati always referred to Herta as being Czech.
6 The original l'Illusionniste script focuses on how from a distance the teenage girl believes with utter wonderment the enchanting life the conjurer inhabits. After making a sentimental bond through his stage persona with the girl he does not have the heart to reveal to the teenager that his magic and what she sees as his very life are little more than a fabricated illusion. Throughout his career Tati was often quoted as saying that his Hulot was just a character he had created and he himself was a very different person to what was seen on screen. His eldest daughter's perception of him as a child was mainly formed from what she had seen of him in character on screen. l'Illusionniste script deals directly with the dilemma he was facing on how would his daughter respond once she realised the gentile man on the silver screen was not the same man he was after the dim theatre lights had been switched back on.
7 The original script for l'Illusionniste concludes with the magician walking off into the sunset wiser for the experience and free of his deceit. Tati had hoped that by openly apologising to his eldest daughter he would in some way be free of his real life deception that increasingly contradicted his growing public persona. The very title, l'Illusionniste illustrates how Tati was aware at how his public persona was a veil that contradicted the real man. Conjurers by their very craft are deceitful.
8 Tati had never intended to play the role of the illusionist himself instead he had intended to cast Pierre Etaix in the leading role but Etaix fell out with Tati over moral issues concerning the script. A bitter feud surfaced and the two men never again spoke. Tati copyrighted l'Illusionniste script at the beginning of the 1960's as he was concerned that both Etaix and Jean-Claude Carrière would try and steal it. All of Tati's old music hall colleagues knew of his eldest daughter he had fathered in Paris during the Second World War and the majority felt his actions to one of their own betrayed them all. It is highly likely Etaix or Carrière would have known about Tati's eldest child.
9 My Grandmother Herta Schiel never lost contact with her Parisian music hall colleagues and throughout her life would travel nearly every year back to Paris. It was through these connections that she learnt that Tati had written a script for the daughter he had shamefully betrayed. No name was ever given to the script but knowing of only two other un-produced scripts by Tati, The Occupation of Berlin (which has currently conveniently gone missing) and Confusion it can be concluded that l'Illusionniste with the parallels it draws is indeed that script. The l'Illusionniste was written around the same period as The Occupation of Berlin when Tati must have been reflecting upon his war years. Performers of the Lido de Paris, Bal Tabarin and A.B.C. who had known Tati both as a friend and colleague since he himself was a teenager still remarkably live in Paris and to this day are in regular contact with his eldest daughter Helga Marie-Jeanne. Nothing that Tati did in his movies was by accident but exist as a result of meticulous planning to precisely convey his very personal vision.
On hearing that Sylvain Chomet had started production on l'Illusionniste in what for centuries has been my father's family home county of Northumberland on the Scottish border I confidentially approached him with the difficult true story that lay at the heart of my grandfather's script. Gratefully acknowledging l'Illusionniste true meaning that he had apparently always known was written by Tati as a "personal letter to his daughter" Chomet invited me to his Edinburgh studio to read the script he had adapted and to see the progress he was making.
After a long conversation Chomet revealed he had obtained the script for l'Illusionniste from my Aunt Sophie Tatischeff following nothing more than a single telephone conversation he had with her whilst seeking permission to use a segment of Jour de Fete in his Belleville Rendez-Vous animated movie. Sophie died regrettably young in October 2001 a full two years before Belleville was released in late 2003 and it is questionable that she would have released what she had protected for so long to an unknown director she would never in person meet and who at the time had nothing to his name but a well received short animation. It was impossible for Sophie to give Chomet the script for l'Illusionniste after she had seen Belleville Rendez-Vous as he has often been quoted as saying.
Chomet justifies using an animated caricature of Tati by saying that Sophie never wanted anyone to play her father however she would have been well aware that her father never intended playing the part of the Illusionist himself, he had no conjuring skills and wanted solely to concentrate his efforts on writing and directing this most personal movie. As stated above the role was originally written for Pierre Etaix.
After Chomet became aware of the troubled story that lay beneath l'Illusionniste he informed the current caretakers of my grandfather's estate, Jerome Deschamps and Mikall Micheff at Les Films de Mon Oncle, who without consent published the most deplorable inaccurate account of my family in the biography Jacques Tati by Jean-Philippe Guerand. This intolerable disfiguring of our lives provoked us as a family and all that remains of the Tatischeff line with no choice but to finally put on record our true heritage to which everybody who is currently promoting themselves through my grandfathers celebrity have no legitimate claim whatsoever.
The partners at Les Films de Mon Oncle certainly never had a hand in the creation of my grandfathers oeuvre nor are they in anyway related to him. When Tati became bankrupt the Deschamps family chose to do nothing but glee at his downfall. It is quite deplorable that today they should be allowed to parasitically exploit both his abilities and failings whilst disturbingly distorting history. Deschamps came into ownership of four of Tati's movies after he purchased them from a terminally ill Sophie Tatischeff in the last year of her life to pay her debts (she'd lost a fortune with her recording studio, Son our Son) as she did not want to die with the shame of bankruptcy like her father. Deschamps absolutely did not inherit the Tatischeff estate as a rightful heir as he would like the world to think. Working closely with highly respected Princeton academic David Bellos who is credited with writing the most discerning biographical account of my grandfather's life we have been able to publicly document for the first time the true events that were Tati's War years..
What we ask is that you please try and understand the most unjust personal anguish that my family has faced for so long with nothing but the utmost reserved dignity and why the promoting of my grandfathers most personal script on the issue without acknowledging his troubled intentions for its creation, never mind how it has been spitefully reinterpreted, will only add further insult to everyone personally involved. Not recognising the source for l'Illusionniste shows not only disrespect for Tati the artist but also subverts the man's only redeeming response towards his daughter he inconsiderately abandoned.
To the outside world my grandfather, Jacques Tati was the great mime, the celebrated cinematic artist who held the most special gift of being able to entertain and make people laugh through his unique humane way of portraying the often crazy world in which we all live. However as he always maintained his celluloid characters were not him but creations born from his real life observations. Like many artists he was also troubled for this was also the same man who in complete contradiction to his professional screen persona had heartlessly abandoned both his eldest child, Helga Marie-Jeanne and her mother, Herta Schiel in the most shameful of circumstances. Tati courted and performed on stage at the Lido de Paris with Herta for the two years previous to the birth of their child. Inseparable Tati would enthusiastically discuss with Herta his ambitious plans to create his own movies and as early as 1941 he already had L'Ecole des Facteurs/Jour de Fete envisaged.
In Herta existed a vibrant brave young woman who at just seventeen years of age had the foresight alongside her sister Molly to flee the impending annexation of Vienna whilst courageously providing shielding and eventual safe passage to Morocco for their most admired childhood Jewish friend, Heinz Lustig. A young woman barely out of childhood herself who having arrived in Pairs with little more than a visa allowing her only to perform on the stage went on to courageously at great personal risk learn Morse Code and translate intercepted German messages from the front line into French for the Resistance movement before they were sent to De Gaulle in London. A woman whose only mistake was to fall in love then be betrayed by the gangling clown who would go on to charm the world with laughter in the way he ridiculed and questioned it.
In a single year, 1943 Herta's gallantry would be severely challenged as she found herself isolated in a foreign occupied city holding a needy new born child having lost both the man she loved and heartbreakingly her sister to tuberculosis. The mother of Tati's first child was a valiant woman who was not afraid to stand up for the freedom of Europe and today rightfully deserves not to be forgotten.
Tati's eldest daughter, Helga Marie-Jeanne always maintaining a Parisian soul would spend most of her life to adulthood in between Paris, Marrakech and Vienna. Having grown without knowing the love of a father in adulthood she could not bare the thought of bringing the shame she had suffered as a child for his betrayal to her half-brother, Pierre and sister, Sophie. It is for this reason alone that at the height of her father's celebrity she remained dignifiedly silently even under pressure to create scandal. Helga Marie-Jeanne had suffered enough as a child for her father's betrayal, in adulthood she determinedly decided to make her own way in the world. In honour of Helga Marie-Jeanne's dignified humility and her mother's wartime intelligence work Croix de Guerre awarded Parisian Resistance leader Dr Jacques Weil would stand in the place of her father when she married in England in the summer of 1965. Today as a much loved retired grandmother living in the northeast of England the least she deserves is respectful acknowledgement. Had she not remained resolutely silent it is highly unlikely that her father, Jacques Tatischeff would have been able to complete his cinematic oeuvre that still enthralls today.
My grandfather's artistry did not come without a price and the one who suffered the most for his compulsive behaviour was inexcusably his eldest daughter. Had it not been for the love of her brave astute mother, the goodwill of others and Helga Marie-Jeanne's own self discipline her fate would have been far bleaker.
My family's story is unfortunately not the romantic fiction of Truffaut's Last Metro or Curtiz's Casablanca. It is however a true account of how during that most horrendous period in modern history people's moral character was challenged when faced with adversity. Had Tati not survived his military service defending the French borders on the Western Front he might well have died a war hero. Instead the subsequent war years would see him conjure up the most indefensible family tragedy, a betrayal that runs in complete opposition to the legendary tale of how his own grandmother had rescued her son from Russia. The suffering of a child is inexcusable in any society. The sabotaging of Tati's original l'Illusionniste script without recognizing his troubled intentions so that it resembles little more than a grotesque eclectic nostalgic homage to its author is the most disrespectful act that shows nothing but a total lack of compassion towards both the artist and the child it was meant to address.
Before his death Tati called for his body to be thrown out with the garbage as through his own eyes his life had been a failure. He bemoaned to friends his misgivings and how through his own errors of judgment he would never experience the joy of being a grandparent. We have opened this painful chapter of our lives not out of any vengeance but so that we can now be allowed to lay to rest a previous generation's mistakes, there is no spite only sorrow for what is ultimately a family tragedy. To fully appreciate an artist's work you first must acknowledge the person and the life they had lived.
If the integrity of my grandfather's work means anything to you then please take into account the wishes of his only three grandchildren who united stand loyally by their adored mother, the daughter he had heartlessly abandoned as a child and later addressed l'Illusionniste to. Together we ask that you please show moral compassion and chose in the future not to participate in the misrepresentation of our family history to suit the parasitic benefit of others. That Sylvain Chomet, Pathe Pictures, Sony Picture Classics and Les Films de Mon Oncle dare to rub my grandfather's remorse on our doorstep without respectfully acknowledging the facts is intolerable. The truth deserves a voice so that at the very least we do not forget the sacrifices made by others for our liberty.
"On le pleure mort,il aurait fallu l'aider vivant"
--Paris Match 19th November 1982 Obituary of Jacques Tati.
Yours sincerely
Richard Tatischeff Schiel McDonald
29 Comments
Leave a comment
The Webby Awards
Person of the Year
Best Blog: Natl. Soc. of Newspaper Columnists
One of the year's best blogs -- Time
Twelve months, 102 million views at RogerEbert.com.
Year's best blog: Am. Assn. of Sunday and Feature Editors
Buy from Amazon.comBuy from Barnes & Noble
Buy from Borders
___________________
Fascinating. While I can certainly respect the sentiments expressed in this letter, it has unfortunately produced in me a desire to now see the film for myself. And a desire to hear Chomet's side of the story as well.
I feel for your family's anguish and fortitude under challenging circumstances. Your tale, your grandmother's tale is well worth circulating. However, there seems to be a disconnect between the reality of the family history and the purpose of cinema, to tell a story. Rarely can one be loyal to both.
I personally would love to see your grandmother's story on the big screen, in a separate tale.
I never watched any of Tati's film. Reading this letter, I can see how heartbreaking it is for Richard and his family to see a stranger using l'Illusionniste script as a way to make his work get more attention. He should be ashamed.
Incredible story. Genuinely eye-opening. I always liked Tati's playful contempt as a hint towards better things. But now I know that it was born out self-loathing for a terrible and irrevocable moral failing. I don't think I can watch the films the same way. But it's the truth and it deserves precedence because of it.
I, of course, have not seen "l'Illusionniste" yet, but intend to when it arrives in the US. As an animator and cinéaste, I admire the works Sylvain Chomet and Jaques Tati. Tati's films have become a constant source of inspiration, and to see Chomet's interpretation of a Tati film is an irresistible premise.
With that said, having read Mr. McDonald's letter, I can see how Chomet's interpretation of "l'Illusionniste" may seem like a slap to the face for his family after all they have been through. Yet there is an aspect which I feel is missing because of his own emotional to "l'Illusionniste".
What Mr.McDonald fails to mention is that to millions of fans, myself included, Tati exists primarily as Monsieur Hulot. Rather than the troubled filmmaker, we see him as the character he played. Chomet never had any connections to Tati the man. He, like all of us, only knew what we saw on the big screen.
I don't think Chomet's intention was to create "l'Illusionniste" as Tati would. Instead I think he created it to serve more as an homage to Tati's unique brand of cinema. Although "l'Illusionniste" may originally have been a message to his estranged daughter, the time for such a message to serve it's original purpose has passed. Now, like it can only serve to convey someone else's message. Tati himself cannot make amends for his actions, therefore no one can. What Chomet can do with "l'Illusionniste" is continue, in spirit, the cinema of Jaques Tati.
Although Chomet's changes to "l'Illusionniste" may skew the original intent, the true story of the script should be told. But the film is Chomet's now. It is the spirit of Tati's films and not his life, serving as the inspiration. By carrying Tati's cinematic spirit, Chomet has the opportunity to spread joy, every comedian's goal. If given the same opportunity, I'd do the same.
Well, that certainly seems heartfelt, if a little misguided. I'd like to know what you think, Rog'....
I'm not sure why this was published in full rather than as part of an article with some attempt at fact-checking (or declaring that such checking is impossible). In a sense I'm glad to have read it, because I love Tati and Hulot and have always wondered what his dark side was. This shows he was an artist like many, many others. Yet in the end, the writer - perhaps understandably - sees the Illusionist script as a sort of family artifact and not a work of art. I don't see the crime that the writer sees. But I regret if Tati the man did the things alleged. I think Mr. Hulot would shake his finger at Mr. Tati, and maybe even give him a kick in the pants.
Some might say, having read the excellent exposé by Richard Tatischeff Schiel McDonald, Grandson of the esteemed French filmaker Jacques Tati, peeling back the layers of this truly fascinating and turbulent episode in his Grandfather's life and what it meant in a wider context with both respect to his eldest daughter Helga and her future family, would suggest there is an even greater, and intinsically darker tale to be told.
So could it just be that Tati's finest story; 'The Truth', has not yet been revealed and demands a wider audience? Only time it seems, along with the gradual break-down of disingenuity, mistruths and outright lies perpetuated by the Deschamps family, will really begin to tell.
“Slap in the face”, I’m guessing it is far more than that considering Chomet has chosen to dedicate his take on the Illusionist to Tati’s other daughter and his own children under the perverse heading, “A fathers love to his daughter”. Is it not rather sick to take a man’s apology to a orphaned daughter and use it as a gift to your own child especially when it seems clear that Chomet knew exactly why Tati had wrote the script and the fact that the person it was intended for was living just a few short miles from where he was making it?
The truth behind the real life of Tati might well trouble some die hard fans who would wish both he and Hulot were the same however it is fact that they were separate but this does not take away his wonderful contribution to cinema. All art is influenced by reality and Tati’s movies almost perfectly convey this. That they might hide a darker depth than most of us knew about for me at least makes them even more interesting.
Pathe Pictures own promotional synopsis of The Illusionist
http://www.pathefilms.ch/libraries.files/20100073_en_1_The_Illusionist_Englisch.pdf
that bizarrely acknowledges how personal the script was to Jacques Tati but does not mention his eldest daughter, Helga Marie-Jeanne Schiel but instead dedicates it to Tati’s other daughter Sophie Tatischeff who Chomet it would appear had never personally spoke to or met as it is claimed Chomet’s producer Didier Brunner was the one who spoke to her. Without issue it appears Chomet did not obtain The Illusionist script from Sophie Tatischeff as it clearly states that he first read it in 2003. Having now read Tati’s grandsons astonishing heartfelt letter the whole of Pathe’s synopsis seems littered with contradictions and half truths. Chomet, if he knew of the existence of Helga, can certainly be accused of adding maliciously another level of deceit to the life of Jacques Tati’s; a dishonour that the great director tried to amend in his writing of The Illusionist. Crazy how Chomet’s take on The Illusionnist is being presented as a homage to Tati yet pays nothing but disregard to why we now know it was wrote apart from the telling that it is a, “letter from a father to his daughter” that tackled issues that were, “far to close” to the author, Tati who is on record as saying, “The Illusionist was far too serious a subject for his persona and he chose to make Play Time instead”.
THE ILLUSIONIST is a love letter from a father to his daughter. For Sophie Tatischeff, the daughter of Jacques Tati, comedy genius and French cinema legend, this touching correspondence could not be left undelivered. Catalogued in the CNC (Centre National de la Cinématographie) archives under the impersonal moniker ‘Film Tati Nº 4’, this un-produced script has waited half a century for hands to flick through its pages and realize its potential.
She doesn’t know yet that she loves him like she would a father – he knows already that he loves her as he would a daughter.
But as Alice comes of age, she finds love and moves on. The Illusionist no longer has to pretend and, untangled from his own web of deceit, resumes his life as a much wiser man.
Chomet: THE ILLUSIONIST was written by Tati between 1956 and 1959. “The story was all about the irrevocable passing of time and I understood completely why he had never made it. It was far too close to himself, it dealt in things he knew all too well, and he preferred to hide behind the Monsieur Hulot mask. You could tell from the start it was not just another Hulot misadventure, all the heart-on-sleeve observations made that crystal clear. Had he made the movie - and I’m certain he had every camera angle already worked out - it would have taken his career in a totally different direction. He is actually on record saying THE ILLUSIONIST was far too serious a subject for his persona and he chose to make Play Time instead”.
“There was a moment in that movie where the triplets are watching television in bed”, explains Chomet. “I thought it would be funny to have the cartoon characters view a live-action clip close in feeling to its Tour de France cycling story. Jacques Tati’s wonderful Jour de fête/Holiday sprang to mind because it featured him as a postman on a bicycle. So Didier Brunner (the producer) contacted the Tati estate, run by his sole surviving daughter Sophie Tatischeff, for permission to use an extract. Her authorisation was based on pictures and a set of design developments for The Triplets of Belleville. She clearly liked what she saw because she mentioned an un-filmed script by her father and hinted that my animation style might suit it.”
Chomet read THE ILLUSIONIST script for the first time on his train journey to the Cannes Film Festival in 2003 for the world premiere of The Triplets of Belleville.
Well bugger-me biege:
"If the success or failure of all cinema were to be held to account against a historical, social or psychological analysis of the underlying state of mind of the script writer then it would cease to exist as a functioning art form."
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100608/LETTERS/100609982/-1/letters
And yet if underlying state of mind of the script writer is in fact central to the storyline, is it not more than a shade disingenuous and hypocritical to suggest anything other?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/jun/10/sylvain-chomet-belleville-rendezvous-illusionist
It would seem there are certain descrepencies as to how Chomet obtained this script:
"It had been slipped to him by Tati's daughter, Sophie Tatischeff, touched by his little nods to her father's Jour de Fête and Monsieur Hulot in Belleville. "I think Tati wrote the script for her. I think he felt guilty that he spent too long away from his daughter when he was working. Little girls turn into a woman in such a short period," Chomet says. "Tati had this feeling that he had missed something essential. It's an extremely emotional story, so personal that I think he was afraid to make it himself. Really, she gave me a precious gift and sadly Sophie Tatischeff died from lung cancer – like her father – before I could thank her for letting me have the script." "
Is not more likely that it is infact as Mr Mcdonald states, a heart-rending apology to his eldest daughter, given the circumstances he portrays above.
So it begs the question - just how did Sylain Chomet really come by it? What is he hiding? Why does his story not quite add up? Why is he now so reluctant to publicly acknowlege the real identity of the girl in the story, instead choosing to hide behind some glib, wooly 'love letter to a city'? And finally, just how was it that something of this importance, so important and compelling as to actually be turned into a film, this script that was apparently so casually just 'slipped' to him, and yet by the time he could be bothered to acknowledge it, the person in question (Tati's youngest daughter) had died?
Difficult to believe that anyone could take what was clearly a deeply personal acknowledgement of Tati's own failings as a father towards his eldest daughter Helga Marie-Jeanne, and not only re-interpret it as and when it suited but to then dedicate it to his youngest daughter Sophie! Surely this is just rubbing salt into what must already be a very raw wound for Tati's eldest daughter and the surviving family members. I believe that Sylvain Chomet has done a great disservice not only to the family of Tati but to the man himself, strange if he truly admires and respects Tati's genius as has been claimed.
So the precise reason Chomet has wilfully chosen to misinterpret and pervert the true nature of Tati's original, thus diluting and undermining its validity is unclear. But in doing so, preposterously in this observers opinion, by attempting to re-write the personal details of a private life, weaving in similes that flimsily echo the personal journey that he (Chomet) has shared with his own daughter throughout the creative process merely serves to provide a smokescreen, a cheap conjurer's trick, neatly drawing attention away from what lies at the central core of the l'Illusionniste; a far deeper, intrinsically more compelling story that Chomet has stubbornly, and for whatever reason, completely failed to grasp.
And now, all these years on, it seems somehow perverse and downright degradeing that a young woman, abandoned in youth and now again in her dotage is cast further aside, but not just by her father (as if this is not bad enough), but by the slanted agenda's of induviduals and estates who seek to embroider the separate strands of their own lives into the Jaques Tati myth at the expense of those biologically tied.
Wow, that family has got a lot of pent-up conflict!
To the Tati relations I'd say... don't worry about it! A 2D animated feature by a French director that's an homage to Jaques Tati is going to be such a niche film that it will go unnoticed here in America except by hard-core animation fans. Most of America has no clue about Tati or Chomet and no matter how good or bad this film is it's not going to push the needle of the public's estimation of either by any significant amount.
Does any of this change the fact that "The Illusionist" is a wonderful movie? And how many of the people criticising Chomet have actually seen it?
"To fully appreciate an artist's work you first must acknowledge the person and the life they had lived."
Is it really necessary? I doubt it. The life of a public personality is a private matter.
In Sylain Chomet's excellent movie, we never really know if the main character is Tatischeff himself, or Monsieur Hulot. This is because he is part of our collective memory.
In other words, Tati's figure is public and belongs to the public who is perfectly entitled to interpret its life as it wishes, and even to reinvent it.
Your account of Jacques Tatischeff's private life is most interesting. However your version of the facts does not discredit Chomet's take on this emblematic figure.
Clem you contradicted yourself,
"The life of a public personality is a private matter."
"Tati's figure is public and belongs to the public who is perfectly entitled to interpret its life as it wishes, and even to reinvent it."
It tends to be accepted that an artist of esteem cannot be removed from his creations. Is it Greene's or Reed's Third Man, Tolkien's or Jacksons Ring? Tati never belonged to anyone but Tati himself. A great part of Tati's appeal is that he was the most singular film maker working like a painter fighting throughout his life for the independence of his art.
How good or bad Chomet's take on Tati's script is a matter of personal choice but having seen it in Belgium earlier this month I was thoroughly disappointed by the execution of what is a very melancholy story. Yes it is delightful in places but as the audience I was left never quite understanding the bond between the magician and the girl. Having now been enlightened as to why Tati had written the script it seems very foolhardy of Chomet to try and omit the most touching private story that a father had written for his daughter he was never to rightfully love.
I am not here to defend Tati the man, but it does not seem to me at all obvious that he wrote The Illusionist for his estranged daughter, Helga.
This long, rambling letter, filled with circumstantial detail, does not exclude the possibility that the script might refer to his younger daughter, Sophie, or to his feelings of inadequacy as a father in general.
Indeed, it does seem strange that Tati would refuse to lift a finger to help Helga out of Morocco, but at the same time dedicate a script to her.
Moreover, the script portrays a man who lavishes too much attention on a young girl, not too little, thereby leaving her cocooned from the realities of the world. Without knowing Tati's family history in detail, it is difficult to see how this so obviously relates to a daughter to whom he apparently offered no material support.
Finally, Chomet's excellent film wisely chooses to focus on the legacy of Tati's on-screen persona, and his attempts to continue the music hall tradition in an era that had moved on.
The Illusionist stands a respectful testament to Tati the artist, and it is to be commended for not getting embroiled in the details of a 60 year old family dispute, which I doubt will ever be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
SideshowM, What a load of twaddle!
Surely knowledge of Tati's family history is in the hands of his actual family? The long, rambling letter you refer to, having being written by Tati's grandson is not lacking in detail and the facts as stated are hardly circumstantial. It is in fact a moving and honest account of this family's personal story as passed down from parent/grandparent to child. Personally I think it makes perfect sense that after abandoning Helga to her fate in Morocco, Tati expressed his remorse and shame in the only medium available to him at the time. As for this movie referring to his younger daughter Sophie, she was not a teenager at the time the script was written, Helga was. Tati was by all accounts, according to his contemporaries at the Lido very much in love with Helga's mother Herta and the estrangement from both mother and child was orchestrated by his overpowering and domineering sister. The original script was an expression of the guilt and frustration that Tati presumably lived with for the rest of his life. Surely the reason for lavishing attention and cocooning a young girl from the harsh realities of life in his script can be seen as an alternative to the reality of abandonment and neglect that the man must have been living with on a daily basis.
Returning to this topic, the more I read about the controversy surrounding The Illusionist, the majority of articles refer back to this website, and to Richard McDonald's letter, unquestioningly asserting its claims as fact.
In other words, this letter appears to have become the SINGLE source of information for the criticism of Chomet and his film.
Again, I am not here to defend Tati the man (though I would happily defend The Illusionist as a superb piece of filmmaking), and it is quite possible that all of McDonald's claims are entirely true.
However, this 3,500 word letter, in my opinion, fails to substantiate them here.
My questions - and these are genuine pleas for information - are as follows:
1) McDonald states that: "It has been acknowledged that the script for l'Illusionniste was written as a personal letter to Tati's teenage daughter".
What is the source for this claim, and is it specific to a *teenage* daughter?
2) McDonald states that: "Tati had hoped that by openly apologising to his eldest daughter he would in some way be free of his real life deception that increasingly contradicted his growing public persona".
What is the source for this claim, or is it merely opinion asserted as fact?
3) Finally - and this is a general query - has Tati otherwise written, spoken, or otherwise referred to his daughter Helga in any way?
Chomet’s adaptation is a testimony to his abilities to grave rob and granny mug.
So Pesso you would prefer that Tati, the lovable uncle Hulot, was without emotion for his eldest daughter? What’s your agenda for trying to quash an incredible story of survival and regret? If you actually read the letter in full it says that the information comes direct from the mouth of Tati via his former colleagues he had worked with in the music halls of Paris who personally knew both Tati and the mother of his first child since childhood. Former colleagues of Tati from the music hall era that The Illusionist is set. The detailed above letter states no name was given to the script which fits in with the information that it was archived under the title of "TATI Film no4". Chomet for his part has been nothing but inconsistent with his speculative account of the script origins going so far as to out rightly lie about the Tatischeff family history falsely stating the dates of birth for Tati daughters to fit his timeframe of event and most spitefully that Helga his eldest daughter was a result of some sordid affair which is very far from being the case . Why would he do such a thing without reason if something wasn't a miss? Why has Chomet lied about how he had obtained the script. Originally claiming that it was, having wowed her with his talents, personally handed to him by Sophie Tatischeff yet he now confesses that he had never even spoke to her let alone met her before first reading it in 2003 two years after she had died. Pesso perhaps you have some solid contradictor evidence rather than pushing pure speculation from people out to make a profit from other peoples misfortune. If you have solid fact produce it.
Excuse Pesso my post was intended to question SideshowM.
So SideshowM you would prefer that Tati, the lovable uncle Hulot, was without emotion for his eldest daughter? What’s your agenda for trying to quash an incredible story of survival and regret? If you actually read the letter in full it says that the information comes direct from the mouth of Tati via his former colleagues he had worked with in the music halls of Paris who personally knew both Tati and the mother of his first child since childhood. Former colleagues of Tati from the music hall era that The Illusionist is set. The detailed above letter states no name was given to the script which fits in with the information that it was archived under the title of "TATI Film no4". Chomet for his part has been nothing but inconsistent with his speculative account of the script origins going so far as to out rightly lie about the Tatischeff family history falsely stating the dates of birth for Tati daughters to fit his timeframe of event and most spitefully that Helga his eldest daughter was a result of some sordid affair which is very far from being the case . Why would he do such a thing without reason if something wasn't a miss? Why has Chomet lied about how he had obtained the script. Originally claiming that it was, having wowed her with his talents, personally handed to him by Sophie Tatischeff yet he now confesses that he had never even spoke to her let alone met her before first reading it in 2003 two years after she had died. SideshowM perhaps you have some solid contradictor evidence rather than pushing pure speculation from people out to make a profit from other peoples misfortune. If you have solid fact produce it.
Dublin's Independent newspaper thinks Chomet is being disingenuous with his "delusions of grandeur".
http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/film-cinema/illusions-of-grandeur-2306371.html
Mr McDonald also failed to mention that Herta Schiel,not only had a czech passport, but was actually born in Prague. This might have had something to do with the loaction of the original script?
This is a fascinating story, though I don't agree that the making of the film covers up or hides the story of Tati's personal life. It isn't a Jacques Tati film, and therefore doesn't speak on his behalf (unless we want to read the figure of the shattered ventriloquist as an underhand symbol of what Chomet is doing for Tati) or provide a definitive account of what happened. Rather, it alludes to emotions, regrets and events without retelling them as history. Maybe a live action film would have conveyed an authoritative version of events, but animation gives it the air of partial remembrance or dreamlike wistfulness. Whatever Tati wanted the the script of The Illusionist to say about himself, he clearly didn't want to say directly. It uses allegory and suggestion in place of outright confession, and that's what Chomet's film preserves.
Now that the film is released, it's in the hands and minds of audiences. They can interpret it as they wish, and supplement that interpretation with Richard McDonald's moving appeal if they choose, or intrepret the film as the deceitful cover-up of a guilty secret. If one wants to read it as a confessional, we can still do that. The film does not close down that interpretation. That's how cultural texts work. It's frustrating, but none of us are getting this information directly, and the truth of Tati's intentions will never be completely settled.
Yes, but Dan - does it not lead you to wonder if it would not have been a far greater publicity coup, and all the better for the film's takings (which have been poor), had the Tati Estate sought to gain the weight of a ready-made, creditable, and emotionally frought backstory in the form of a reconiliation with Tati's estranged family. And not, as they have done, to shamefully sweep them still futher under the carpet. And lets face it - this is a backstory that bares all the hallmarks of all the things that all successful film's are made of. None of which are in evidence in Chomet's cheap* hand-me-down apology to his own daughter.
*Quite an expensive vanity project as it turns out.
If any eminent critic feels inclined to interview the director ask him this question: " how were you able to animate a more accurate image of Helga's husband as he was in the 50's than that of Tati himself? You could also ask him about the state of exitentialism in Newcastle! This is truely fasinating to myself and although flattering is reasonably distasteful.
Coming late to this debate after seeing the film last night. Richard McDonald has every right to express his opinion about the film and Sylvain Chomet personally. He doesn't have any right however to exercise artistic veto over Chomet's interpretation on the grounds that it doesn't accord with his version of the truth. Chomet's interpretation isn't dishonest - purely because he didn't make the kind of pretensions for it that McDonald implies.
Having seen the film, I think the animation is wonderful. The problem is actually the script. It lacks the central compelling storyline that all animated films need.