the black bored

Reflections on Yannick (2023)

One hot Sunday afternoon I happened to stream a movie called Yannick on a popular streaming site Mubi. I feel Yannick is one of the best films that I have ever watched. In a lighthearted setup the film explores something very important about life and art. 

Yannick is a 2023 French black comedy film written, shot, edited and directed by Quentin Dupieux. The film stars Raphaël Quenard as a heckler who takes a Parisian theater hostage and rewrites the play under his own direction. (source: Wikipedia)

Here are my thoughts on the film after having viewed it for the first time. I usually watch movies more than once. So..💁

The way we consume stories, and the ways in which it resonates and touches us rests a lot on our own life experiences. 

I am drawn to layered stories that portray life’s complexities. I look forward to characters evolving  and coming to terms with their most uncomfortable sides. 

 Yannick unfolds in a theater. (Of course, you can do the analogies of life being theatrical, and this set up being a representation of that. One can make plenty of such observations in a movie with such a dramatic setup). The movie plays with the subject of artists and their snobbery. At times artists take themselves seriously, sometimes more than their art. 

It’s not uncommon that people who are not part of the sophisticated art world, or can’t “appreciate” or “understand” are looked down upon. A blanket respect is expected of anything and everything to do with art. 

We have all heard stories of actors throwing tantrums. And then here comes this movie, and this character, Yannick.  Throughout the film he shows a mirror to artists with their exaggerated sense of self-importance, believing  themselves to be the pillars of art and considering their chosen art-form to be the greatest and the noblest.  Yannick wastes no time in letting the performers on stage know what he feels about their so-called artwork, i.e, the play.  

“hey your art doesn’t stand in front of someone like me. I have a hard life.  My life is difficult, you know.. I traveled 45 minutes by train,  and then walked for 15 minutes to attend your performance. My job is tough. I’m a complete working class person. And what has given you the right to tell me off and look down upon me and teach me what is real art? “ says Yannick (these dialogues are not verbatim).

I find this even more interesting considering the film features a Parisian theater. What better backdrop than Paris (France). A hub of so-called “high” exclusive sort of art. Its history and foundation are deeply intertwined with the nation’s colonial past, marked by the exploitation of cultural and indigenous artistic heritage in regions such as Algeria, Indochina, West Africa, Central Africa, Madagascar, and the Caribbean.

Through its protagonist Yannick, the film takes a glaring look at elitist ideas pertaining to the art world. Often art enthusiasts and aspiring artists, especially from the marginalised communities, find it challenging to navigate such dominant ideas about art. It often boils down to seeking acceptance in prestigious art circles.

When art becomes overly self-important, it can lose its essence, especially for someone like Yannick, who just wants to enjoy a good play.

In many ways he is the real patron. If art doesn’t speak to an audience like him, who is so invested in watching one play, and for this he takes the effort to travel all the way to other, far off parts of the city. He is your audience! He is your dedicated, ideal audience who is actually taking the pains to show up for your play. He is the kind of audience that deep down every artist desires.

Instead the stage actors put him down by telling him off about the subjective nature of art and how he doesn’t understand art in the first place. This starts bordering on arrogance but Yannick persists with his questions and criticisms, and refuses to allow the actors to carry on with their play. This forms the hilarious central conflict of the film when it comes to plot. 

From hereon the theme of the film starts progressing seamlessly, and becomes a thread that ties all the other elements in a nice little pack. 

 Then comes a point when Yannick is  like, I will write a better story, you know. He takes the center stage, right there in the theater because only NOW he has found the time to sit and write a story. And so he writes.

Talent alone is often overrated; what truly matters is having the opportunity and finding the right space to nurture one’s artistic side. Unfortunately in a deeply unequal world, most aren’t as fortunate. Therefore, art often ends up being something that only a privileged few, or those with some amount of leisure time at hand can indulge in. 

The capitalist system often prevents many people from pursuing the arts because it doesn’t provide a sufficient livelihood. Artistic and creative pursuits are integral to our human experience, but unfortunately, our systems compel us to choose a career path at a young age and expect us to stick with it for the rest of our lives.

World history is full of violent chapters. Colonialism must have killed many artists or forced them to remain hidden. Wars must have gobbled artists. Marginalisation has made sure plenty of deserving artists never see their work materialize due to gatekeeping and lack of access to platforms. 

When the west saw the rise of its Mozarts, Beethovens or Da Vincis, artists belonging to an entire continent must have perished as slaves. 

It’s still a privilege to be able to pursue a career in arts, despite an abundance of easy resources at hand. Many pursue arts on the side while maintaining day jobs or multiple jobs to support themselves. Yannick is an exaggerated representation of the non-privileged. 

Ultimately ‘greatness’ can be hollow and its cousin ‘success’ an empty balloon. When you take a closer look there is probably nothing exceptional about having “made it” . The sheen fades off when viewed from this angle. The likelihood of ‘success’ is on the higher side if you have money in your pocket (of course there are exceptions to this).  

This movie acts as a mirror to the vainer side of artist. There is nothing great as such about having “made it”, because there are an equal number of people who could have been where you are just as easily. 

You don’t matter. Eliminate yourself from the picture because art is supposed to directly speak to the Human in us. Maya Angelou writes in one of her essays from her most famous collection I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings  about artists being a mere instrument.

• “I was in the middle of the room, the play was on, and I was the star. But I had a great sense of humility, realizing that I was merely the instrument through which the performance was made. The audience was responding to the art, not to me. I understood then that as an artist, it is not about self-importance but about being a conduit for the creative forces.”
• “I think that most artists, whether they know it or not, are vessels. They do not create so much as they are created. The art flows through them and they are honored to be the medium through which it comes. It is humbling to realize that one is not the source of creativity but merely a channel for it.”

-I Know Why the Caged Birds Sings, Maya Angelou

With its central theme about art and artists the movie slightly pushes the envelope further in its critic. 

At the same time, the film explores the vulnerability and disappointments experienced by its central artist characters. When Paul Riviere manages to snatch the gun from Yannick’s hands he suddenly transforms into a completely different person, exposing his darker, neurotic side. It ends with a breakdown on stage in front of his audience. A real performance!  

Yannick tells him- bro what are you doing? now you’re kind of revealing your dark side, you know, calm down.

Paul, on the other hand, acts like an absolute jerk. A classic example of what happens when there is a gun in your hand and the power dynamics shifts. 

In this broken state Paul spills out his uncomfortable truth. 

This is shit. This set is shit. What I’m doing is shit. I would rather do a movie, act in films than this theater. I don’t give a shit about theater. 

And there you go. In front of everyone the facade collapses. The mask is off. The real character is revealed on the stage for everyone to see. Finally he gives an impactful ‘performance’. 

Yannick encourages everyone to clap. The half empty theater reverberates with an earnest round of applause. Paul’s expression suddenly changes in response to this unexpected turn. He is even relieved at the outlet. Alas, no more pretenses. 

Both Paul and Yannick seem to be grappling with the weight of unfulfilled dreams, disappointments, compromises and adjustments. Paul aspires to be a film actor but is confined to stage instead. He keeps doing theater even though his heart isn’t in it.  He is disappointed with his current acting career. Not an easy realisation at this juncture of  life for sure. You keep waiting for your moment under the sun, it never comes and suddenly you have caught the midlife crisis. Your dreamy youth left far behind. The formal education fails you as it never prepared you for the real life. The ‘work hard, chase your dreams, and make it in life’ feels nothing but a grand delusion. ‘Success’ is highly circumstantial. It’s a little drug.  Life is boring after all.

As an audience member, I rooted for Yannick when he finally had his moment in the spotlight, and the play he had written on the spot received genuine laughter from the audience. This suggests that the impromptu play might have been better than the one performed earlier by the actors. Some possible explanations for this are: either the audience truly found it entertaining, or they had been sitting for two hours and were naturally bored and tired. Consequently, even the slightest form of entertainment or deviation would be greatly appreciated (See how my own bias has seeped in where I don’t give much credit to Yannick’s work as a writer). 

This is somewhat of a microcosm of that part of the entertainment world where oftentimes the most meaningless, senseless or the brainless films become mass entertainers in certain societies at a certain point in time. Today we are likely to trash many of the earlier hits. But back then, cameras were not as accessible and a film was a novelty, and making one itself was a bigger deal. The story or performances took a backseat. 

Towards the end of the film Yannick interacts with two young women from the audience. Unlike others they are sympathetic and more understanding towards him. 

They are like, you have traveled from really far away, so you’re more invested in it. You’re more demanding as an audience. We live right here, somewhere nearby. So we don’t care as much. Like, it’s all right if something mediocre is presented to us, we won’t oppose it like you. 

This highlights the accidental nature of why some works resonate while others do not, illustrating the subjective nature of art. Some films once considered ‘great’ are now seen as dull. Additionally, the underrepresentation of non-white people in cinema means that many celebrated films and classics feature predominantly white actors. Therefore, a significant portion of the population finds it challenging to relate to such films, yet we have grown accustomed to this disparity. This raises the question: who decides which films are awarded? While awards can help in discovering noteworthy cinema, they are not infallible. Sometimes (and these days quite a lot. Thankfully so) these panels are called into question for being racist, sexist and even supporting artists accused of child rape and molestations  (The Roman polonskis and Woody Allens of the film industry). In a way, these institutions resemble the two girls from the audience who live close to the theater: they may not fully appreciate the diverse perspectives or the broader context of the art they assess.

At the end of the day, it’s best to not get swayed by awards and recognitions. As a viewer it’s alright if a highly recognised film doesn’t move you.  It’s okay to be a Yannick when presented with a certain piece of art.  

Yannick is a great cinematic character and the first time I watched this movie it kind of blew me away. This movie remains one of my favorites.  I watch a lot of content ( I hate to use this word in place of films and series for all things audio/visual) and certain stories compel me to record my impressions of it. Yannick is one such story. Writing stories is one thing and writing ABOUT stories is quite another. One can do a classic ‘review’ thing or go all the way investigating a personal angle to it. 

In any case, cinema is a hope! Interestingly some of the ideas that I discussed pertaining to the movie Yannick can also be applied to my own reality. I had been craving to watch a movie on the streaming platform Mubi for a really long time. But I couldn’t find the right time and mental space to sit down with a movie and truly savour it. And then when I do find the opportunity to finally watch a movie it turns out to be Yannick. Random chance that I click on this movie. On an idle Sunday afternoon, I was in the perfect headspace to enjoy this movie. Random chance that I click on this movie. On an idle Sunday afternoon, I was in the perfect headspace to enjoy this movie. Maybe it was a bit of both—stumbling upon a great film at just the right moment when I needed it.