Denys Arcand is known for some memorable films, in which the sparkling dialogue of his characters either intellectuals or belonging to the higher social classes is an important part of the style and of the substance. The hero in ‘La chute de l’empire americain‘ (‘The Fall of the American Empire‘) belongs to the same category – he is a young PhD in philosophy who works as a ‘delivery boy’ for a courier company. His interaction with the world, including with the women in his life, often takes place through dialogues full of precious thoughts and quotes from famous philosophers and writers. The film is kind of a closure to a trilogy started in 1986, with one film made at about each 16 years one from the another. Here our hero accidentally witnesses a burglary ending with gunshots, corpses and two bags full of money in his possession. As we know from other films, a large amount of money left behind and coveted by gangsters can be a problem in life rather than a blessing. This is where this movie begins, this is the pretext of a story that could easily be placed in the category of comic action thrillers, if Arcand had not tried to say something more about the morals and mechanisms of the world we live in.
The movie poster is quite mis-leading. The Statue of Liberty appears on it, but the movie is not about the United States. The story takes place in Montreal and French connoisseurs who have the chance to see the movie in original version can enjoy a copious portion of the delicious ‘Quebecois’ flavor. The directorial approach is also very Canadian, relaxed and detached, and if we want to watch this film as a romantic comedy sprinkled with robberies, scams and gangsters, some mean, some philosophers, we can enjoy ourselves quite well. What contributes to the pleasure is the story that flows fluently and which reserves enough surprises and twists, as well as the charm of the lead actor Alexandre Landry and of his superb partner, Maripier Morin, who is at her first feature film but has all the qualities to become a ‘Bond girl’ of the future.
Denys Arcand however intended to say more with this movie. The social and moral commentary is elegant, but clear. None of his characters is a 100% good guy or good gal – not even the main hero, the stressed economic, social, personal philosopher, the young man deeply involved in charity actions who never forgets to sneak a few pennies into the beggars’ hands. Neither are the policemen, nor the gangsters, nor of course the tax advisers. Is our society (Canadian, American, or from any corner of the capitalist world) far too corrupt for even the most honest citizen of the planet not to have to resort to lesser or greater crimes to achieve happiness? Does the noble purpose (helping those in need) excuse the (criminal) means? Is it really acceptable to steal from thieves, as the saying, probably valid in many languages of the earth, goes? Denys Arcand seems to have an opinion, but for the viewers these just questions, maybe the beginning of a discussion. Not even the images of the oppressed in life screened before the credits cannot, I believe, convince all the spectators of this film of the seemingly anti-moral thesis of the director. Or maybe, as the main character explained in one of his uninvited dissertations, what ultimately matters is what the heart tells us, not what the intellect dictates. The less we take it seriously, the more we can enjoy this movie.