Canadian Film Forum

Grand_Shaman · Administrator Data inscrierii: 26/Oct/2007 Mesaje: 112

Welcome to or forum. I hope you will find it a nice place to share your views on the films we're watching. Comments are welcome in both French and English.

Here we go with my questions about today's film.

1. Research the film's historical background. Why and how did France "lose" the Nouvelle France? What did the French trade their colony against? Was there corruption amongst the rulers of the province?

2. Public History vs private history / hersory. How are the two histories balanced in the film?

3. Several French characters in the film speak fluently the Inuit language and seem very friendly to the Inuit, while the English appear to be more prejudiced against them What is the historical truth about this relation?

4. Melodrama or romantic elements? Which? How do they fit into the typology of melodrama / romance?

5. Redeeming qualities. Despite the film's weaknesses, are ther any redeeming qualities? If so, which?

6. Striking images with strong visual impact.

7. In case you disliked the film, or have reservations about it (I never said you should like it...) could you please state them, refering to composition, plot, cinematography and editing --rather than just characters.

larisa · Junior Data inscrierii: 30/Noi/2008 Mesaje: 7

i'm not going to begin by answering the seven items, but by sharing with you my opinion on the film.
i admit that i'm a fan of the romance films, but what's too much is too much. and this film is a good example of exaggeration. i can't deny that it has its good parts as well(for example the actor playing xavier :-D

), but still, it's too slushy.
if they meant to make it a historical film, then they should do some research in what concerns this genre. so, the balance between history and romance, is rather an unbalance.
then, it was too predictable. i sometimes watch soap operas :-D

and this "nouvelle france" reminded me of them( the music, the plot, but not the setting). first they couldn't elope, then he retured for her a bit too late, and last, but not least, one of them had to die.
still, it was a nice film, with touching music :-P

and beautiful scenery

ioana · Junior Data inscrierii: 01/Dec/2008 Mesaje: 10

So you watched a film and we weren't there. :-/

Well, I guess I'll find it somewhere.

See you. :innocent:

ramona · Junior Data inscrierii: 03/Dec/2008 Mesaje: 18

Vous avez regardé, donc, le film… J’aurais bien aimé y être présente, j’ai beaucoup attendu ce cours-ci.
J’espère qu’il y aura d’autres films aussi :-)

A très bientôt !

melinda.tindela · Junior Data inscrierii: 04/Dec/2008 Mesaje: 15

1.
Fall of New France
By the 1750s, the population of the rival British colonies to the south had surpassed 1 million, compared to barely 60,000 for New France.

In 1753 France began building a series of forts in the British Ohio Country. They refused to leave after being notified by the British Governor and in 1754 George Washington launched an attack on the French Fort Duquesne (now Pittsburgh) in the Ohio Valley in an attempt to enforce the British claim to the territory. This frontier battle set the stage for the French and Indian War in North America. By 1756, France and Britain were battling the Seven Years' War worldwide. In 1758, the British mounted an attack on New France by sea and took the French fort at Louisbourg.

On 13 September 1759, General James Wolfe defeated General Montcalm on the Plains of Abraham outside Quebec City. France ceded its North American possessions to Great Britain through the Treaty of Paris (1763).

(found at http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Quebec%23Fall-of-New-France )

Preferring to keep Guadaloupe, (...[and] Saint Pierre and Miquelon...)France gave up New France and all of its claims to the territory east of the Mississippi River to Britain.
(found in http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Treaty-of-Paris- (1763))
Corrupted ruler:
François Bigot , 1703-77?, intendant of New France (1748-59), b. Bordeaux, France. At Louisburg, where he served (1739-45) as commissary, it has been said that he indulged in fraudulent practices that contributed to the downfall of that fort. Powerful friends in France secured for him the office of intendant of New France. Bigot arrived at Quebec in 1748 and immediately instituted a system of official theft by which every branch of the public service was laid under tribute to enrich himself and his friends. His corrupt administration reduced the colony to bankruptcy and helped bring on the fall of New France to the British. After the capture of Quebec in 1759 he returned to France, where he was arrested, imprisoned for nearly a year, compelled to make restitution, and then banished. The date of his death in Switzerland is uncertain.
(found at http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Bigot-Fr.htm )

melinda.tindela · Junior Data inscrierii: 04/Dec/2008 Mesaje: 15

3.
When the Europeans arrived, the inhabitants of Eastern Canada belonged to three different language families. The Inuit were nomadic hunters. The Iroquoian group, including the Huron-Wendat (Hurons) and the Iroquois, were farmers, fishermen and hunters. The Algonquian group, including the Innu (Montagnais), Mi'kmaq, Abenaki and Algonquin, were nomadic peoples who lived by hunting, fishing and gathering. Relations between the French and the Iroquois were particularly strained. The Great Peace, a treaty signed in Montréal in the fall of 1701, brought some respite and enabled the colony to develop. During this time of relative peace, the French gained new territory and eventually controlled up to three-quarters of the American continent.
(found at [url]http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/education/sources/008001-110.01-e.php?adf=TRUE&adq[0][q]=New+France&adq[0][col]=Cluster_En&searchVar=Cluster_En&web=Theme&type=New+France[/url])

Still don't know if I'm doing this posting thing right... :-(

anca · Junior Data inscrierii: 30/Noi/2008 Mesaje: 15

topic 2

Dear Larisa, it is obvious that the two grounds are unbalanced, the private history being the foreground. But unlike you, I think that not the research is the problem, but the intention of scenarist. The idea was to show how public history can influenced human destinies. We manage to see that it did, and unfortunately, in a tragic way.

Coman_Alina · Trimis: 28/01/2009 21:59 Titlul subiectului: "Nouvelle France" (2004) question 5

I've read that the film is not historically accurate and that the cost of 30 millions hasn't been justified. But I think that the historical events were more or less for ambiance and not the focus of the producers. I was touched by the love story and by the mother - daughter relationship. Beautiful costumes, a nice story, spectacular shorelines, impressive landscapes - without being a masterpiece - a lovely way to spend friends because my husband wouldn't accept such a "girlie" movie. [/u]

melinda.tindela · Junior Data inscrierii: 04/Dec/2008 Mesaje: 15

The presence of a great actor - Gérard Depardieu - made the movie worth watching for me. I really like Depardieu. He is playing such an awful character here... :-/

but he is playing it well. :-P