ElMaruecan82 On the surface, "Happiness is in the Field" belongs to that realm of French slices of lives Etienne Chatillez specialized in, he who painted such humorous and sociologically relevant portraits since his breakthrough movie "Life is a Long Quiet River". Indeed, watching a Chatillez film is always a premise for delightful character-driven escapism, and on that level, the title couldn't have been more evocative. We all seek happiness but Chatillez does better, he provides us the answer. "The nerve!" I want to protest… as I felt that (this time) the director lost the charm, wit and tenderness of his previous films and seems more presumptuous than usual.The film tells the story of a man on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Francis, played by Michel Serrault, gets a visit from the IRS, a strike from the employees of his plumbing supply factory and the daily snobbish rudeness of his uptight wife Nicole (Sabine Azema) and his spoiled daughter. The only thing he doesn't get yet is cancer but health troubles are coming. The only oasis of fun is with his friend Gérard aka "Gégé", a character with an appetite for food and wine only equaled by his lust for women. The way he tenderly calls Francis "honey bunny" is misleading as the film quickly clears any hint of homoerotic subtext. Gégé gets any woman he wants easily, too easily sometimes… as easily as when he orders the house's finest wine. But I'll get back to the film's latent machismo.So, Francis is having a hard time and it is no real surprise when in the midst of a lunch with Gégé, his face takes a high plunge into the plate. Francis has a stroke and this is the first signal of his imminent mortality, especially if he stays on the same stress-inducing and self-deprecating path. And in these twists of Karma so typical of Chatillez, one night during his convalescence, he watches a TV program where Dolores, a duck breeder, of Spanish ancestry (she's played by Carmen Maura) comes with her two adult daughters, to issue a missing person's notice and expose the picture of the father and husband, Michel, who disappeared twenty-six years ago. Naturally, he looks exactly like Francis. Nicole's hysterical outburst was the first of the many over-the-top moments that left me puzzled.Francis' first reaction is denial but after an interview with a sleazy journalist played by Patrick Bouchitey, and under the pressure of his staff, family and friends, Francis finally decides to pretend that he's Michel and starts a new life "in the field". And of course, it's a rebirth. But Chatillez is rather stingy on explanations and many parts are left unexplained, we never know why Nicole goes all cuckoo about it, we never know what Francis said to the Spanish woman so they could get together, it's all in the situations, and the acting. But while his ellipses usually work with his films, in a story full of such enigmatic characters, it feels like cheating. And it gets worse when Gérard takes the abandoned Nicole to a restaurant.I'm not the one who usually cries for wolf when it comes to feminist issues, but I've never seen a movie so blatantly misogynistic. I used to hate the snotty attitude of Nicole but then seeing her being bullied by Gégé and becoming a "better" woman just because he banged her in the car as if it was the only way to break the ice, and calling her ugly names, because she "likes it". I know it isn't supposed to be a statement about women, and the rudeness of Gégé's manners also annoyed his friend, but there's a sort of consensus that the best way to reach happiness is to overcome the social barriers we have between us, even if the price is vulgarity. Or is it a metaphor from the title and happiness consist also on acting like farm animals.In another scene, Francis only learns the shady truth about his alter-ego's criminal past when, following the advice of Gégé (who else?), he slaps the sweet and devoted Dolores, and I simply hated that part. Is it supposed to be a turning point for the man who's been a weakling until that point? It is difficult to appreciate how mean-spirited the film is toward women for the sake of Francis' character's arc. In the end, you have two wives agreeing on keeping things secret because each one found equilibrium; both were treated badly in a way or another… but they liked it. It happened very rarely to me but I related to these women and I felt sorry for them. Chatillez is free to toy with his characters and I'm not saying such women wouldn't exist but I felt hard to empathize with both Francis and Gégé, and this comes from someone who's tired of the whole 'Girl Power' trend."Happiness is in the Field" should have been a bowl of fresh air for me, and I think it could have made these bold and deliberately vulgar moves interesting if the film didn't feel so empty at some points, it seems like we never grew to know more the people except in stereotypical situations. I accept that happiness would be on the field but I wish the journey was a bit more interesting and wouldn't lend credence to those who see misogyny everywhere. Well, this film does and out of all the French directors, I'm sad that it comes from the one who made a gem like "Tatie Danielle". Happiness might be on the field, but this one left me bitter, and angry.(On a side note, the title inspired a famous French program where farmers and peasants try to find the true love and it was called "Love is in the field", proof that Chatillez still had the flair to find expressions or name that would enter everyday speech).

raymond-15 Fleeing to a countrified life style is a common escape for city folk immersed in problems. Francis Bergeade (Michael Serrault) grabs an opportunity to do just that when a TV show designed to find missing persons displays a convincing photograph of him for all the world to see. He soon finds himself leading an idyllic life on a farm with a kind and understanding wife, not like the aggressive spoilt brat he left behind in the city.Much of the humour of this film centres around his friend Gerard (Eddy Mitchell) who is a great manipulator of events. It seems Gerard is enjoying the company of both wives even putting a smile on the face of the lazy wingeing one. There is some entertaining script writing here, both witty and believable.Life on the farm is well photographed and the daily routine well documented, even the preparation of the goose pate of which there is plenty. There remains however the underlying suspicion that the real husband that disappeared 23 years ago could turn up at any moment. A criminal offence would thus be exposed.An investigation of the details regarding the lost husband leads to some surprising discoveries.It's a pleasant little film that has you smiling all the way through. Ignorance is bliss, they say. The revelation at the end casts a black cloud over the happy atmosphere. When all is said and done however, some secrets are best left alone.

dbdumonteil Everything goes awry in the life of Francis Bergeade: his firm is in strike, his wife Nicole despises him and he has a heart failure. All these reasons incite him, helped by his best friend Gérard to take Michel's place who disappeared twenty six years ago and who is demanded by his family. Thus, he arrives in the life of Dolores who breeds ducks in the south of France with her two daughters. He has made the good choice because it enables him to start a new life again, a more peaceful one...What the very overrated "Amélie Poulain" (2001) tried to reach, "happiness is in the field" (1995) achieved it: to make the spectator happy. Then, hats off to the director Etienne Chatiliez. It is all the more surprising as his third feature film very clearly stands out from the two previous ones. Indeed, there's no mark of social satire like in "life is a long quiet river" (1988) while the malicious humor that dominated "Tatie Danielle" (1990) is here largely absent. Instead, we can understand the movie as a quest for pleasure and welfare and especially the adventures that happen to Francis are positive and only aim at making him happy. Once he will arrive in Dolores' farm, he will find two main things: happiness and affection. Concerning the end of the film, I think it strongly contrasts with the end of Chatiliez's two previous movies which presented the disintegration of two universes (the Le Quesnoy's one and Jean's one) whereas here, the movie ends on an image depicting Francis' new family looking happy and united in front of the farm, at dusk with Gérard repeating to his best friend: "enjoy my pal, enjoy..." In a screenplay playing on the contrast (one of Chatiliez's best weapons), Florence Quentin the scriptwriter, also kept place to ridicule proud people, the more often through blunt dialogs (Francis' family, especially his wife are the perfect quarries to satisfy the scriptwriter's needs).As for the actors, they act their respective roles with an exhilarating pleasure. They take advantage of irresistible dialogs and really great situations. The tandem Serrault/Mitchell shines and their friendship impresses. We have rarely seen such a strong relationship in the history of French cinema. The second one offers an amazing composition as a devoted, vulgar and macho friend. Eddy Mitchell is famous in France as a singer but in Chatiliez's movie, he showed the full extent of his talent as an actor. We can also thank the director for having hired Sabine Azéma, very funny in her role of uptight middle-class person.However, there's one thing I don't understand: what was Chatiliez thinking of when he decided to bring Eric Cantona to the cast? I've got only one sentence to tell my opinion about him: he can't act and it is better to see him play with a ball.Fortunately, it is a comparatively minor fault which doesn't spoil the summary I give about this flick: a heart-warming movie which presents itself as a reliable lesson about joy of living. How great it would be if we could prolong our stay in Dolores' farm surrounded by splendid landscapes bathing in the sunlight!

ramboise The plot of "Le Bonheur est dans le pre" is a simple one, but the excellent casting, the finesse of tone and dialogues, the constant humour give this movie real class.The ending is a happy one, but by no means what one usually calls a "happy ending" (these words imply for me a certain amount of 'schmalz' and stupidity, which lBedlP definitely doesn't have !). It makes the viewer feel refreshed and well, content with a few aspects of the world he's living in.It's a modern fairy tale, worth seeing again and again (especially when you feel a bit depressed, or slowed down), an apology of the simple (and free) pleasures of life.Some might remember the 'Safrane' as one of the highlights of the movie, I prefer the one remark made by Cantona: "C'est pas lourd le confit !"