Director: Denys Arcand
Writer: Denys Arcand
Stars: Rémy Girard, Marie-Mai, Guylaine Tremblay
Synopsis: In an era of political correctness, identity evolution, protests, cultural scandals, activism, media storms, and other disputes, an elderly man no longer having faith in humanity, discovers new landmarks and thus his happiness
Denys Arcand isn’t shy in provoking and eliciting strong reactions from the public. Whether it was through his satires The Decline of the American Empire or the Academy Award-winning The Barbarian Invasions (Arcand is still the only French Canadian filmmaker to have won an Oscar), there isn’t a single person who comes out of his films feeling indifferent, regardless if you liked it or not. But it’s been a while since he’s made something as memorable, or at least as interesting, as his Oscar-winning film. Days of Darkness pushed far too many buttons of provocation just because he thought he could, despite Marc Labrèche and Diane Kruger attempting to salvage the film, while The Fall of the American Empire is just plain bad.
Has Arcand lost his filmmaking and screenwriting touch? Or has he always been a “bitter, old, reactionary crank,” as some have recently qualified him? With his latest movie, Testament, he seems to approach the latter as he attempts to criticize our society’s alleged obsession with political correctness and fails miserably at discussing any of the themes and messages he tries to convey.
It doesn’t help that the story is too scattered for its good. The film starts with Jean-Michel Bouchard (Rémy Girard, a frequent Arcand collaborator), who has lost all will to live. He walks every day in the cemetery, longing for his hopefully peaceful demise, though he keeps himself busy by working a day or two at the archives and tending with his friends at the Parizeau-Duplessis retirement home. Herein lies the first part of his “satire,” the home is, of course, named after two of Québec’s most controversial Premiers: Jacques Parizeau and Maurice Duplessis.
In that problematically-named retirement home lies a mural that glorifies a scene of genocide against Indigenous people, with which many activists who suddenly show up at the front door take issue. This causes a massive political scandal, with the Health and Social Services Minister (Caroline Néron) urging the home’s director, Suzanne Francoeur (Sophie Lorain), to find a solution. She hires two painters (Gaston Lepage & Louis-José Houde) to remove the mural, which appeases the activists.
However, when the Deputy Minister of Culture (played here by controversial playwright Robert Lepage, whose shows SLĀV and Kanata were both canceled after being accused of cultural appropriation) finds out that the mural has high artistic value and was painted by one of the most renowned artists in history, more scandal is created, as nationalist protestors want the mural to be shown again. Oh, and did I forget to mention there’s a subplot involving the retirement home’s library being turned into a video game center for no reason other than an excuse for Arcand to make tired jokes about old people not being able to adapt to new technologies? Yeah…
By describing the plot, we’ve already lost our central protagonist and his arc, which is about Jean-Michel slowly realizing that there is more to his life than he believes. Had the film solely focused on that introspective character’s journey, it would’ve been one of Arcand’s best because Girard gives one of his most compassionate performances. Sure, he is a consistently good actor and always gives his all with whatever character he portrays, but he always gives just a bit extra when working with Arcand. The core of The Barbarian Invasions was about Rémy’s battle with cancer, and some of the later scenes in the film are simply heartbreaking to watch. In Testament, Girard takes a far more meditative approach than he did in the Oscar winner, and the results are simply staggering.
One scene in particular, in which he quasi-confesses his love to Suzanne after she believes he’s been having an affair with Flavie (Marie-Mai, in her first non-dubbed film role), who visits him every week, is the film at its best. It’s a poignant meditation on the meaning of life and what we, as individuals, must do to reawaken our spirit and want to continue living, even if it seems pointless to go on when we’ve seemingly lost everything. Arcand tries to visually represent this through Guylaine Tremblay’s character, who begins to drink, smoke, and binge-eat fast food after her ultra-fit boyfriend dies of a stroke seconds after finishing a long bike run. There’s a bit of exaggeration in her mannerisms, but Jean-Michel’s actions, as he learns more about Suzanne and her family, convince him there is more to his life than he had thought. In my opinion, that’s the heart of Arcand’s film, and it more than succeeds.
However, he seems too busy attempting to criticize Québec’s alleged penchant for “woke” ideologies, joking about cultural appropriation, activism, the use of pronouns, gender identity, intersectional feminism, climate change, and even openly mocking several minorities under the guise of “satire.” Arcand may not be a right-wing figure, but he – and conservatives in general – fail to realize that the word “woke” means “being alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.” So, if you believe something slightly left-leaning is “woke,” it means the above definition and not what you think woke is. But that doesn’t stop Arcand from making “jokes” that are profoundly transphobic, misogynist, racist, and, above all else, unfunny.
The only times I chuckled were during its National Assembly session parodies, where the satire of parties like the Coalition Avenir Québec and Québec Solidaire are so close to reality it becomes naturally funny. René Richard Cyr’s Culture Minister dozing off in the background seems an apt descriptor of our current legislature because we all know, deep down, that they do absolutely nothing, which Arcand cheekily points out through the provincial government’s response to COVID-19.
How is it inadmissible that a society that has grown to be more progressive over time wants to fix the errors of our past? Anything dated and or/offensive should absolutely be recontextualized or, if needed, removed, but Arcand posits this perfectly acceptable response as anti-art or anti-culture through the commentaries of his painters who are openly saddened to be erasing what they believe to be “important art,” but also through his own words. Last week, Arcand appeared on Tout le monde en parle and said “fuck off” to anyone who told him that he should’ve consulted the Indigenous community before making the film:
Arcand: I do not believe in consultations. It’s now the latest trend when we have to talk about Indigenous people or whatever. We’re always supposed to consult. I’m completely opposed to this. I think the creative process is an absolutely personal act that comes from deep within ourselves. It’s like if you asked Shakespeare if he went to Italy to ask the Capulets and Montagues if they agreed with his interpretation of Romeo & Juliet – fuck off! He’s writing a play called Romeo & Juliet. If you disagree with it, just don’t see it. Consultations are made for governments, unions, and municipalities wanting to know if closing Camilien-Houde is a good idea, for example, but not for writing fiction.
Marc Labrèche: Did you ever say, “I should’ve not written this scene like that,” or “I should’ve opened my eyes more about something that escaped me?”
Arcand: Of course! All the time. Every day. I’d love to have more talent and skills. But I never said to myself, “Oh, I should’ve consulted!”
This declaration shows immense contempt for individuals who deserve to be properly represented on screen instead of perpetuating the same dangerous – and racist – stereotypes that have plagued moviegoers’ screens for many years. We have recently started to see Indigenous creatives being at the forefront of mainstream titles like Reservation Dogs or the upcoming Echo, but Arcand seemingly wants to continue portraying them in an offensive light instead of asking pertinent questions about how a more open and welcoming society can repair past wounds and aid in reconciliation, or involving them in the creative process. It may be a personal act, but asking them what they think of your script before it gets shot doesn’t hurt.
Testament asks all the wrong questions and perpetuates even more dangerous stereotypes passed off as “jokes” and “satire,” positioning Arcand as a bitter, old, reactionary crank instead of a serious auteur who revolutionized Québec cinema with his American Empire series. Even his exploitation film Gina has a hidden political subtext that goes far deeper in its messaging than it has any right to, especially compared to his hackneyed Testament. Who knows if the title itself means this will be Arcand’s last film, but if it does, he’s leaving us with quite the whimper that could make some viewers rethink his past films as products of their time instead of some of Québec cinema’s greatest treasures.
