Les Mains sales (1951)
Directed by Fernand Rivers, Simone Berriau

Film Review

In his celebrated 1948 play Les Mains sales, the writer and philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre succinctly articulated the profound crisis facing Communism in the aftermath of WWII, and in doing so expressed, in the clearest terms, his intellectually reasoned ambivalence towards Marxism.  The play's success resulted in an admirable film adaptation a short while afterwards, produced and directed by Fernand Rivers, who had, over the past two decades, helmed a series of quality adaptations of literary and theatrical works, including Le Fauteuil 47 (1937) and Cyrano de Bergerac (1946).  It was to be the last film that Rivers directed and, furnished with an exemplary script and cast, it rates as one of his best.  For anyone interested in gaining an insight into Sartre's ambiguous political beliefs, and how these tie up with his even harder to pin down concept of existentialism, the film is essential viewing.

Rivers' moodily noirish adaptation retains the structure of Sartre's original stage play (including the flashback framing device) and essentially boils down to a private confrontation between its two main characters, the young idealist Hugo (Daniel Gélin) and the party leader he must kill, Hoederer (Pierre Brasseur).  These two protagonists personify the two extremes of Communist thinking that Sartre was equally adverse to - the uncompromising purist and the ruthless opportunist.  For Hugo, the method by which power is attained is as important as the ultimate goal of holding power.  By contrast, the older and wiser Hoederer is a pragmatist who knows that, in the real world, power can only be secured via some pretty grubby compromises, which include getting into bed with his political opponents.  It is a debate that rumbles on to this date - can politicial ideology ever be put into practice without betraying the principles on which it is based?

It is only because he imagines that Hoederer is having an affair with his wife that Hugo is able to bring himself to murder him, thereby fulfilling his mission without compromising his political beliefs - or so he thinks.  In the final act, Hugo realises he has been duped and that Hoederer was killed not for ideological reasons but for political expediency - to buy his party time to put into effect the leader's plans.  Hugo has been an unwitting pawn in a game of political chicanery and the only way he can save his honour is by not denying the lie that his crime was politically motivated.  It is an existential choice that will inevitably result in his death but, more crucially, it shows the futility of adopting a purely ideological stance in the pursuit of political power.

By this stage in his career, Pierre Brasseur was becoming used to playing villains of varying degrees of nastiness, so his casting as the supposedly treacherous Hoederer is no great surprise (in the original stage production, the part had gone to a very different class of actor, André Luguet).  Interestingly, Brasseur's Hoederer is not a raving Stalin-like lunatic but a rather likeable and humane individual who is committed to achieving good for his people.  By comparison, it is the idealistic Hugo - superbly played by Daniel Gélin - who seems to be the deluded fanatic, a man capable of killing another for purely ideological reasons.  It is by arguing with Hoederer that Hugo grows to respect his opponent and realises the fallacy of his own position.  In Sartre's eyes, both characters are flawed, each a betrayal of Marxist thinking, but Hugo is at least redeemed by an existential act in which he takes sole responsibility for his crime.  In doing so, he lives up to his nom de geurre Raskolnikov, the name he takes from the main protagonist of Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment.  The film ends with a memorably haunting close-up of Gélin as he walks determinedly towards the camera.  The expression we see on his face is not one of failure or fear, but one of implacable calm that betrays just a glimpse of triumph.  It is the expression not of a condemned man but of one who has been set free.

Film Synopsis

In September 1943, Illyria, a country in Eastern Europe, is drawn into the war against Nazi Germany.  Hugo Barine is the privileged son of a member of the ruling elite but he is so disgusted by the way ordinary people are exploited by the present régime that he joins the Proletarian Party, which is committed to the idea of creating a classless society.  On the orders of his superiors, he is tasked with assassinating the party leader Hoederer, who intends to betray his party's ideals by forging an alliance with the present government to put up a united front against the Germans.  After the war, the Proletarian Party will participate in a coalition government which will strengthen its power base and eventually allow it to become the governing party.  Hoederer's strategy is unacceptable to other senior members in his party and so he must die.  To that end, Hugo is admitted to Hoederer's household as his personal secretary, accompanied by his young wife Jessica.  Unaware of the threat that Hugo poses, Hoederer takes a liking to him and the two men soon gain a mutual respect.  Hugo's growing admiration for his victim makes it increasingly difficult for him to carry out his mission, but when he sees Jessica in Hoederer's arms he is outraged and shoots him dead without a moment's hesitation.  Having spent the next two years in prison, Hugo realises he is a marked man.  He knows he has one chance to save himself, by explaining his motives for killing Hoederer to fellow party member Olga.  But much has happened in the past two years.  Hoederer's plans have been put into effect after his death and now he is hailed as a hero of the party.  By denying he killed the former party leader for personal rather than political reasons Hugo knows he is signing his own death warrant...