Zero for Conduct

Saw Zero for Conduct. It was set in a boys' boarding school. In a deeply allegorical move, the students decide to rebel against the teachers with their, like, rules man. To be fair however, the teachers are sufficiently harsh and repressive and cruel to make us side with the kids. Surrealist touches allow the film to safely talk about governmental and religious institutions and their, like, rules man.

The film is fairly brief at 45 minutes long and it makes a very distinct point about the administration creating its own enemies. One of the kids is not involved with the anti-teacher rebellion until he is lectured by the headmaster about his "unwholesome" relationship with one of the upperclassmen. This boy goes on to become the standard-bearer of the rebellion. Seeing as this film was made in the 30s, this is shockingly progressive.

Charlie Chaplin, who also used magical realism to great effect, receives a nod in the form of a playful teacher who does acrobatics and draws marvelous cartoons that come to life. Perhaps the director, Jean Vigo, sensed a kindred spirit in Chaplin, who seemed so sympathetic towards tramps and whores. Whores show up in this film, by the way. One of the kids is sent back home to his mother, a prostitute, who keeps his eyes covered with a blindfold when he's at home. The hypocrisy of middle-class pretensions is poked at once again.

The film hails from the heart of surrealism: anarchic, in love with chaos and disorder, totally against pretension and bureaucracy. The boys, the clear heroes, create glorious messes and hoot and shriek like monkeys. Yes, they are sometimes cruel to each other but, this film claims, they have good hearts underneath it all. I don't know that I completely agree with this conclusion, but then I'm not an anarchist, so this is hardly surprising. A clever little film. I enjoyed it.