After My Zoeactress and director Julie Delpy, is back with a hilarious comedy about the ruckus caused by the arrival in a small Breton village of a family of Syrian refugees.
With a three-star cast (Sandrine Kiberlain, Laurent Lafitte, India Hair…), Julie Delpy humorously addresses issues at the heart of the country’s social and political news.
Julie Delpy, who has lived between Los Angeles and France for thirty years, told franceinfo Culture how the idea for this scenario worthy of an Asterix album came about, and her secrets for making people laugh with serious subjects.
franceinfo Culture: you are returning to comedy after a film in a more serious vein, My Zoereleased four years ago. Do you like changing registers?
Julie Delpy: Yes, I love that, actually. Well, I make movies because as a spectator, I like very different cinemas, very different styles of films. I like science fiction films, action films, westerns, but also comedies, like The bronzed ones Or Santa Claus is a bastard, via Cassavetes. I like Kiarostami. Bergman, I love him… So really, my taste in cinema is very broad. I have a hard time limiting myself to one genre. But as a director, it’s true that comedy comes to me quite easily. So there you go, I go for it. And then above all, when you shoot comedies, you have a lot of fun.
How did the idea for this Goscinny-style scenario come about?
The first impulse was the migrant crisis. Seeing people dying in the Mediterranean. It all started with something very painful, which really affected me. I felt very sad about this lack of humanity. Then I imagined how it would happen in a village like that, a bit torn between two extremes, with on one side people who are full of good will, who are happy to receive these refugees, and others less so. The idea was to translate this migrant crisis through a very small village, through a microcosm.
So the origin of this film is a tragedy?
Yes, it is a real tragedy, and besides, I built the film like a tragedy. There are 5 acts, like a classic tragedy, but in fact, it is a comedy, it is done in a humorous tone.
And why did you choose the humor register?
Exactly, maybe because I don’t feel capable of approaching the subject any other way. That is to say, it’s a subject that moves me so much… I think I would cry every second of the day. I’m not someone who can bring distance to the drama, I’m all in it, and I have trouble bringing distance to it. And when I’m in the drama, I don’t know if I would be able to handle it emotionally. So, in a way, through humor, writing people’s faults and barbarity, the lack of empathy of certain characters, or conversely, the excess of empathy for others, it was easier for me.
Are you actually making fun of everyone in this story?
So, yes, but I’m obviously not making fun of refugees. The film doesn’t make fun of refugees. But they are people who can have humor, like the grandfather character for example, or hope, like the young girl character.
In fact, they have their singularity, they are not anonymous, as is often the case in the treatment of the subject in the news. Do you give them a face, names?
That is to say, we have our own singularities of reaction to their arrival, and they have their own singularity in relation to us. The father, for example, does not feel the situation in the same way as the mother or the sister. And that is important because all of a sudden, they become individuals, and not just refugees. Refugees are not a mass of people who all think the same, who are all the same. It is the opposite. Each person is an individual who suffers in different ways, who experiences things in different ways, who has particular aspirations.
Is this a way of looking at refugees in a different way?
Yes, it’s a way of humanizing them, because we dehumanize them a lot. And what shocked me a lot was obviously when the war happened in Ukraine. All of a sudden these refugees were humanized while we had and continue to dehumanize the others. These are masses of people dying in the Mediterranean without a name, without anything. There is no more humanity. It’s absolutely crazy when you think about it. And in fact, that’s why I didn’t want to show the images when the family presents their story to the villager. We are so used to images that in fact there is no more connection.
Is that why you show the horror through the reactions of the villagers, through what we can read on their faces?
Yes, the faces of the villagers who see, who discover what these people have been through, but also the faces of the refugee family. They can no longer react. They have experienced too many horrors. And besides, our magnificent Syrian, Palestinian, Lebanese actors were completely upset by this scene after which we had to let them go for a good hour, so that they could digest it. So, without realizing it, we made a comedy, but with a subject that is upsetting.
Was it important for you to talk about this subject?
I don’t know how to be useful in these crises because I don’t know how to do it, how to help, except to send money. I’m not good at humanitarian stuff, I’m useless at all these things. So this film is a bit to answer this question: what can we do as people? Our governments give money and support Bashar El-Assad, what do we do, we give money to our governments that support Bashar El-Assad? It’s complicated anyway.
So this film is a bit of your contribution in a way?
Yes, well, it’s really minimal. And it’s in humor, because I didn’t want people to feel judged. I don’t want to lecture anyone. Who am I to lecture? I don’t have that pretension.
Besides, in the film, everyone gets a bit of flak, not just the racists, but also those who are very committed in the other direction, like your character for example?
Yes, yes, absolutely. My character who is also a bit beside herself in a certain way. She wants to save the world, she doesn’t know how to do it, she is a bit lost, she does anything, she makes false papers…
Too much good will?
Too much goodwill, that’s it.
And so in terms of comedy, you don’t mince your words, aren’t you afraid of shocking people?
Wooden language is not my thing at all. I might offend some people, but it’s really in a humorous tone, so it doesn’t matter, you can’t please everyone. But again, I really wanted to make a film without judging people too much. I have friends with whom I don’t agree politically. I’m not someone who judges people on those things.
Well, I don’t really get along with hyper racist, hyper violent people who want to kill everyone, but a priori if people are reasonable, there is no reason to stigmatize them. I also wanted to make a film that does good in fact. With what we are experiencing in the world at the moment, I have the impression that we need it a little. It is a pretension perhaps, to want to do good, but in any case I did good to myself, with the actors I worked with, and with the team…
What is your method for creating comedy?
So it’s meticulous, actually. It’s really about dosage. You can’t go too far, and you can’t go too far, because otherwise it’s funnier. You can’t be afraid and go straight for certain characters. You also have to surprise. For example, the cop, we think he’s pretty nice, then he says horrible things, and then he changes his mind because he understands who he’s dealing with. So in fact we see people who aren’t “one thing”, because people aren’t “one thing”, we can change our minds. We can behave in a certain way, and then realize that we’re not supposed to be like that. So it’s really meticulous work.
And besides, it’s a film with a lot of characters, so it was complicated, right?
Yes, it was a real in-depth writing job to make all these characters exist, with very few scenes. I wanted them all to exist. This idea of a report in the village, with the interviews, is a bit of a “trick” to introduce all the characters. Right away we understand who the mayor is, who the plumber is, we understand who Anne is (who is already drunk from the morning), we understand who Joëlle is (who says I saw “Nuit et Brouillard” and it changed my life) … These are simple things, but which immediately define the characters.
It is a film that is in keeping with current events, with the RN’s scores in the European and legislative elections.
I would say more of a social film. But it’s true that there’s also politics. I had fun with Macron. The first shot of the film is him. Macron with a little music… The film was thought about for quite a while, so the release falls at a time like that. I don’t know if it’s luck, but in any case that’s the situation as it is.
“I live abroad and return to France regularly, and I have seen things taking shape for a long time.”
Julie Delpyto franceinfo Culture
With these back-and-forths, I see things changing in fits and starts. I see society changing, people’s anxieties changing, the media changing. I co-wrote with French people who live in France, but maybe I’m becoming aware of things in a different way. I lived through Trump’s rise to power. I lived through what no one in the United States thought was possible. No one thought he was going to win. But he won.
Your film is really in the tradition of French comedy, French humor. We think of Goscinny, Jean Yann, the Splendid. What are your inspirations?
Yes I like those films from the 70s, like the films of Jean Yann. For me, Santa Claus is a bastardit’s a pinnacle of comedy. But I also like films with lots of characters like Renoir’s films, I love The rule of the game, films in which there is a social or political subtext, with very flowery, very daring dialogues. At the moment it can shock some people, and no doubt the film will not please everyone, but I think it can also be very amusing.
But there is a happy ending, almost like in a modern fairy tale?
Yes, the film is still in that tone. That is to say, there is a resolution. The characters evolve. They get used to each other, and they end up managing to live together. It’s quite optimistic, that’s it. If it could create a wave of optimism in France, that would be great (laughs). I’m not sure it will work, but we’ll try!