Since Y AURA-T-IL DE LA NEIGE A NOEL? often appears to be a documentary, the film succeeds in reflecting the gritty realism of French farming society, the plight of the minorities working in it (particularly women and children), and the dysfunctional families this society spawns. These are universal themes. They are played out primarily by a young mother of seven children, shamelessly exploited as farmhands by her man, who has a "legitimate family" in a nearby village. Their daily life is very naturally exposed on film, accentuated by the changing nuances of the different seasons of the year, ending in winter, during "Noel" or Christmas. All this, however, sounds a lot better than it plays on the screen. Even at 90 minutes, the film seems overly long, and is tedious watching for most audiences. There may not be a more captivating way to address these issues, but ultimately, it is a bore for all but die-hard fans of the social realism genre.
9 Reviews
Ambiguous look at depressing-magical rural life.
alice liddell14 June 2000
On the face of it, the life of The Mother and her children might seem tough but idyllic, working hard on a provincial farm, part of a loving family, happy in their own solidarity and inventiveness. Even at the family's lowest ebb, when the alternative of living in a cramped council flat is seriously mooted, The Mother can say, at least you live in the country.
But WILL IT SNOW FOR CHRISTMAS is no unthinking pastoral of blazing sun, beautiful countryside, and hearty rustics. In a world where the neverending sun is a dangerous, oppressive glare, where the land is a bleak, uniform, thoroughly mastered mistress demanding constant attention, where the locals are mean-minded, avaricious bigots, this is pastoral as Bresson might have made it, beating down on its characters, loveless, thankless, relentless.
The image of wholeness and harmony that opens the film, though hard, is deeply schismatic. As they are constantly reminded, the children are the illegitimate offspring of The Father who houses them in a seemingly pleasant farmhouse, with no sanitary or heating amenities, while he exploits them as cheap labour with his two older, 'legitimate' sons, living with his own family who are ashamed of the 'b-----ds'. Initially, he seems tough but fair, a loving father, but as the film wears on, the extent of his cruelty becomes apparent, never melodramatised, rooted in the rural French values of land, greed, sexual desperation and exploitation.
CHRISTMAS is rare in showing a world of work. When you think about it, it's strange how something so completely fundamental to our lives, our identities, our social, economic and political relations is so absent from our films. With the hardly typical exception of policemen, the world of work only acts as a handy character signifier, or, at most, a setting for plot. But it's never simply represented as itself.
Here we get lingering sequences of pure work, and we see its truth, how, for most of us, its thoughtless repetition deadens us, mechanises us, makes us mere animals, brooding and resentful, ready to lash out at whoever we feel is to blame for it, leaving you so tired you can't even read at night. The film is not entirely successful here - my dad came from blighted farming background, and his grim experiences don't really find any correspondances here. But work is an extraordinary revealer of character, and in a film full of quiet, insightful observations of The Mother, a woman of so much love she is in danger of losing it, the most powerful is related to work, after she's discovered The Father has made a pass at her daughter - she sits alone, bowed, under a purple twilight, beside a truck of randomly strewn fruit crates.
So the images of wholeness and authenticity we idealistically associate with the countryside are actually riven with schism. The film describes two worlds - that dominated by The Father, one of virtual slavery (the casting of Daniel Duval, director of LA DEROBADE, an exploitative study of female degradation, is surely no accident), grind, abuse, as inexorable as the seasons; and the indoor world of the family, privileged, remarkably, considering things, still full of love and optimism.
There are brief moments of epiphany throughout, when the relentless 'realistic' visual register is suspended by something more subjective, a space untouched by Father and work. This culminates in the magical Christmas climax, as we see, framed in the darkness, behind a small barred window, an ambiguous image of family: on the one level cramped, imprisoned, shrouded, isolated; on the other harmonious, loving, a source of light and communication, a world of dream and stories that contrasts with Father's exploitative world of mechanical human relations.
The exquisite Joycean epiphany of snow is similarly double-edged - is it dreamt or real?; either way, the problems aren't resolved - the children might be saved, but she is trapped behind the window, alone but secure. This lovely film, never as depressing as an outline of its story might suggest, full of an animating camerawork that belies its characters inability to move, is very similar to Lynne Ramsey's later RATCATCHER, but, while its stylistic tastefulness means it never risks Ramsey's glaring lapses, its reserve means it doesn't quite capture her haunting poetry either.
But WILL IT SNOW FOR CHRISTMAS is no unthinking pastoral of blazing sun, beautiful countryside, and hearty rustics. In a world where the neverending sun is a dangerous, oppressive glare, where the land is a bleak, uniform, thoroughly mastered mistress demanding constant attention, where the locals are mean-minded, avaricious bigots, this is pastoral as Bresson might have made it, beating down on its characters, loveless, thankless, relentless.
The image of wholeness and harmony that opens the film, though hard, is deeply schismatic. As they are constantly reminded, the children are the illegitimate offspring of The Father who houses them in a seemingly pleasant farmhouse, with no sanitary or heating amenities, while he exploits them as cheap labour with his two older, 'legitimate' sons, living with his own family who are ashamed of the 'b-----ds'. Initially, he seems tough but fair, a loving father, but as the film wears on, the extent of his cruelty becomes apparent, never melodramatised, rooted in the rural French values of land, greed, sexual desperation and exploitation.
CHRISTMAS is rare in showing a world of work. When you think about it, it's strange how something so completely fundamental to our lives, our identities, our social, economic and political relations is so absent from our films. With the hardly typical exception of policemen, the world of work only acts as a handy character signifier, or, at most, a setting for plot. But it's never simply represented as itself.
Here we get lingering sequences of pure work, and we see its truth, how, for most of us, its thoughtless repetition deadens us, mechanises us, makes us mere animals, brooding and resentful, ready to lash out at whoever we feel is to blame for it, leaving you so tired you can't even read at night. The film is not entirely successful here - my dad came from blighted farming background, and his grim experiences don't really find any correspondances here. But work is an extraordinary revealer of character, and in a film full of quiet, insightful observations of The Mother, a woman of so much love she is in danger of losing it, the most powerful is related to work, after she's discovered The Father has made a pass at her daughter - she sits alone, bowed, under a purple twilight, beside a truck of randomly strewn fruit crates.
So the images of wholeness and authenticity we idealistically associate with the countryside are actually riven with schism. The film describes two worlds - that dominated by The Father, one of virtual slavery (the casting of Daniel Duval, director of LA DEROBADE, an exploitative study of female degradation, is surely no accident), grind, abuse, as inexorable as the seasons; and the indoor world of the family, privileged, remarkably, considering things, still full of love and optimism.
There are brief moments of epiphany throughout, when the relentless 'realistic' visual register is suspended by something more subjective, a space untouched by Father and work. This culminates in the magical Christmas climax, as we see, framed in the darkness, behind a small barred window, an ambiguous image of family: on the one level cramped, imprisoned, shrouded, isolated; on the other harmonious, loving, a source of light and communication, a world of dream and stories that contrasts with Father's exploitative world of mechanical human relations.
The exquisite Joycean epiphany of snow is similarly double-edged - is it dreamt or real?; either way, the problems aren't resolved - the children might be saved, but she is trapped behind the window, alone but secure. This lovely film, never as depressing as an outline of its story might suggest, full of an animating camerawork that belies its characters inability to move, is very similar to Lynne Ramsey's later RATCATCHER, but, while its stylistic tastefulness means it never risks Ramsey's glaring lapses, its reserve means it doesn't quite capture her haunting poetry either.
Not Only That ...
writers_reign5 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
... but it'll still be snowing in July, metaphorically at least, for this mother and her seven children. By pure coincidence I saw this film within days of Au Hasard Balthazar so that I couldn't help but be struck by the similarities, both feature, for example, the abuse of dumb animals but in the former Balthazar really IS an animal whilst in the latter it is Dominique Reymond who is both dumb first for ever getting involved with Daniel Duval and second for staying with him to BE abused by him and there is, of course, an extra twist in that Duval is himself an animal so that the end product is one animal abusing not only a dumb woman but also their own children. In its cyclical nature the film also resembles Etre et Avoir without the joy. There is no doubt that Sandrine Veysset has written and directed a fine film which treads a fine line between documentary and fiction. We are plunged into the action with no preparing the ground - ironic in a film in which farming plays such a large part - and left to work out that Reymonde has, for reasons not explained and thus open to such interpretations as that old catch-all low self esteem, at some time in the past become the mistress cum slave of Duval who in turn has a legal wife and another family in a neighbouring village. He seems to be totally without finer feelings and views his mistress and their seven children as cheap labour first, second and last and at one point he even accuses Reymonde of refusing to 'service' him which speaks volumes of how he sees her although he has already provided an insight into his sensitivity when he makes sexual overtures to his own daughter, which is why Reymonde is reluctant to continue sexual relations with him. The thing that Reymonde has in spades is both a highly developed maternal instinct and an incredible amount of love for her children which is evident in everything she does. If ever a film illustrated Oscar Wilde's oft-quoted 'we are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars' it is surely this wonderful movie. Overwhelming.
Perhaps it will, perhaps it won't!
dbdumonteil19 October 2003
First movie made by Sandrine Veysset and launched a week prior Christmas in 1996, "will it snow for Christmas?" was rewarded by the Louis Delluc price in 1997 and it was a beautiful commercial success in France. This commercial and critic success was partly deserved.
The director Sandrine Veysset draws an engaging description of this family who lives in a farm located in the south of France and whose living conditions aren't always easy. She shows compassion and tenderness for her characters and notably towards the mother. She also manages to making them engaging towards the spectator. As for the father, he's a violent and hateful human being. In short, he's a total trash and however, I think he never falls into the caricature. Sometimes (although it rarely happens), he can show a touch of humanism and kindness.
Moreover, "Will it snow for Christmas?" is a film without plot and where nearly nothing happens. However, you aren't bored because Veysset succeeds in arousing the spectator's interest and making the work sequences gripping.
In spite of these qualities, "Will it snow for Christmas?" also includes certain weaknesses and unlikelihoods, especially with the mother, how could she have seven children with a man she hates? Moreover, work in a farm is quite hard especially for young children but in the movie, they don't seem to suffer a lot even if they complain from time to time. You can also judge the last sequence as a convenient and a bit syrupy sequence.
Even if "Will it snow for Christmas?" isn't a perfect movie due to an important number of faults, it remains watchable.
The director Sandrine Veysset draws an engaging description of this family who lives in a farm located in the south of France and whose living conditions aren't always easy. She shows compassion and tenderness for her characters and notably towards the mother. She also manages to making them engaging towards the spectator. As for the father, he's a violent and hateful human being. In short, he's a total trash and however, I think he never falls into the caricature. Sometimes (although it rarely happens), he can show a touch of humanism and kindness.
Moreover, "Will it snow for Christmas?" is a film without plot and where nearly nothing happens. However, you aren't bored because Veysset succeeds in arousing the spectator's interest and making the work sequences gripping.
In spite of these qualities, "Will it snow for Christmas?" also includes certain weaknesses and unlikelihoods, especially with the mother, how could she have seven children with a man she hates? Moreover, work in a farm is quite hard especially for young children but in the movie, they don't seem to suffer a lot even if they complain from time to time. You can also judge the last sequence as a convenient and a bit syrupy sequence.
Even if "Will it snow for Christmas?" isn't a perfect movie due to an important number of faults, it remains watchable.
I have not been so thrilled since Pierrot le Fou!
JL-513 November 2001
Thank you to viewers who stayed to the end, that's what the credits say!
It is true that some people left the house after twenty minutes. I have felt amazed, puzzled, wondered, what a beautiful movie! What a strange movie to!
Usually the screenplay, or the director, takes the spectator in consideration and explains to the viewers what it is all about. Not here: suddenly, you are in this farm, people live their lives, don't seem to realize you are there, they work and play and toil, and laugh and cry, and you are still there and you have to make it up for yourself. And you would like so much to be in the screen with them, and talk to them and try to help, and love them, and... and.. and.. And you are hot in the summer and you are so cold in the winter when she picks cabbages (or is it celeriac?) If I refer to Pierrot le Fou, it is because I have not seen anything so different and so catching since.
Thank you, thank you for such a beautiful movie. I'm so glad you ran out of gas!
It is true that some people left the house after twenty minutes. I have felt amazed, puzzled, wondered, what a beautiful movie! What a strange movie to!
Usually the screenplay, or the director, takes the spectator in consideration and explains to the viewers what it is all about. Not here: suddenly, you are in this farm, people live their lives, don't seem to realize you are there, they work and play and toil, and laugh and cry, and you are still there and you have to make it up for yourself. And you would like so much to be in the screen with them, and talk to them and try to help, and love them, and... and.. and.. And you are hot in the summer and you are so cold in the winter when she picks cabbages (or is it celeriac?) If I refer to Pierrot le Fou, it is because I have not seen anything so different and so catching since.
Thank you, thank you for such a beautiful movie. I'm so glad you ran out of gas!
That's life
valadas13 February 2002
Life in a French farm is as hard as in every farm in this world. As a matter of fact life is hard everywhere for those who have to work to make their own living. Mother Earth only yields its fruit if men work hard on it for that purpose. But beyond this men (and women)have their own problems and troubles in their mutual relationships. In this story we have a man who lives a double marital life. He's got his legitimate spouse in town with their kids but he's got another woman in his farm also with a lot of children she's got of him. Domestic conflict arises very often adding up to the harshness of farm life with all its uncomfortable features. The children are the noblest and purest element of the story with their innocence and purity. An in the end the snow falls on the fields like a symbol of purity of nature over man's misery and filth. The farmer's mistress looks at the falling snow through the window and she feels like if the snow were falling on her distressed soul too curing it of its deep wounds. This movie is filmed with utmost naturalistic simplicity in a documentary style with no background music. In conclusion we can say that if it is not a great movie at least it's a movie which tells us a story of true and real life in a very realistic way I mean a film that doesn't lie to us.
a film like the real life
DJZet55 November 2001
A real document of the life on a farm in southern France. The kids are playing so good, as if it was their life what they play! The feeling of the real life is also underlined because there isn´t film music. You have the feeling as if you are looking a documentation.
Will it send you to sleep?
ian_harris29 May 2003
Almost irredeemably dull. This movie reeks of subsidy, but not just the European Union Common Agricultural Policy kind. Would this film ever get made on a purely commercial decision basis? I doubt it, because it is "worthy" only because it covers rural poverty. It is not entertaining. It is not innovative. It is not great art. It is simply "worthy". But not, in my opinion, worth investing two hours of your life into seeing. Will it send you to sleep? It did that job for me.
More than another rural drama
gtran18 October 1999
Set in the rural Southern France of the 70's, this partly autobiographical movie chronicles a year in the life of a mother and her seven children, all working in the fruit and vegetable farm owned by the father, a handsome domestic tyrant who has another "official" family in a nearby town. The beauty of this film lays in its apparent simplicity, that mixes an almost documentary approach (the depiction of country life is nothing like you usually see in movies ; it was shot in continuity from summer to winter) with something close to the magic of a fairy tale. It's life, it's perhaps as realistic is it can be, and yet it's transmuted in something else. The happy, carefree children are endangered elves, and the only protection for these `little ones' (who don't seem to have individual names) is the warm, thick mantle of love offered by their dignified queen of a mother, who, in turn, can hardly resist the animal attraction of her `ogre'. Fortunately, there is no drama, no pathos, no hysteria, no violence shown. They're not necessary because we know what's going on. Instead, other images, like those of the children playing in the hay or running under a plastic cover, or the final shot have already turned this movie into an instant classic.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
