LIFESIZE (GRANDEUR NATURE)

France, 1974, 101 minutes, Colour.
Michel Piccoli, Valentine Tessier, Rada Rassimov, Michel Aumont.
Directed by Luis Garcia Berlanga.

Lifesize is not a film that would be welcomed by many audiences. It is a serious study of a man in a state of isolation, loneliness even mental collapse. Lifesize refers to an inflatable doll that the hero of this film becomes infatuated with. Clearly it does not work on a realistic level but is symbolic in its treatment and themes. The preoccupation with sexuality and madness and violence is quite striking and the film is not a mere exercise in sensationalism. The star is Michel Piccolo who has appeared in so many fine French films. An interesting though sombre film.

1. The meaning of this title and the French title? Was this an interesting film? enjoyable? was it a satisfying film, probing human nature, the material worth discussing about human nature?

2. How successful was the film in visualising an obsession? The nature of the obsession and its meaning? The psychological quirks behind the obsession? What attitude did the film take towards the obsession? How serious was the treatment? how comic? blend of the two?

3. What did the film say about sanity and madness? The sanity of each of the characters especially the central character? How much in each character? the main account of Michel's madness? What is an obsession? Why does it take hold of people? what facets does it play on? Did the film give insight into this?

4. How was Michel a figure of 20th century man? The identity as a man, his self? in the presentation of basic drives, work, identity, place in society, life and death? emotional drive, Michel's relationship with his wife? The meaning of his falling in love with a doll? The reason for his buying it in the first place? His fondness of it at the beginning? His life with the doll? The inter-relationship of insecurity, love, sanity? Is this what 20th century man is like?

5. How real was the film? How unreal? What is the nature of reality? how subjective, from a character point of view rather than from objective circumstances?

6. Was Michel presented as an interesting character? Our initial response to his opening the doll? The contrast with his ordinariness? His role and work as a dentist, his relationship with his wife? Why did he want the doll? How did she contrast with his wife? His wife's response to the doll itself? The account of his actions with the doll? filming her, all the details, the capacity for recreating his own fantasy without interference? Marriage to the doll? And yet the perennial presence of betrayal? His decline into ill health even with the doll? Killing the doll? Killing himself? Death as the ultimate reality?

8. The function of the Spanish couple? Caring for him, countenancing what he did? The irony of the husband being filled with the doll? The implications that an ordinary husband can be exactly the same as Michel? The same difficulties in life, relationship with his wife? Fascination by the doll by creating one's own fantasy?