Plot Details: This opinion reveals major details about the movie's plot.
La Cage aux Folles, directed by Edouard Molinaro, is an hilarious comedy that manages to also make some worthwhile social statements. A classic of European humor, it is a film worth seeking out for a night of good laughs.
Historical Background:La Cage aux Folles was shot in St. Tropez, France and released in 1978, at a time when neither homosexuals nor transvestites had been regularly featured in movies. The subject matter would, of course, be less remarkable today. Two sequels followed the original. Some viewers actually prefer La Cage aux Folles II (1980) to the original but others describe it as dreadful. Later, in 1996, an American remake was issued under the title The Birdcage, starring Robin Williams, Nathan Lane, and Gene Hackman. More about the comparison of the American and French versions later.
The Story: The story centers on a gay couple who have lived together for twenty years and who are also partners in another sense – owning and operating the Saint-Tropez nightclub that features cross-dressing men in song and dance routines as women. Renato Baldi (Ugo Tognazzi) and Albin Mougeotte (Michel Serrault) live together in an apartment above the bar along with a very obviously gay black housekeeper who prances around in little more than an apron. Renato is a practical businessman whose gayness is less than obvious in his mannerisms or appearance but quite obvious in his choice of household décor and help. Albin, by contrast, is quintessentially (some might argue stereotypically) gay in a most engaging and entertaining way – highly fluid in his movements, expansive in his gestures, sensitive and emotional, and given to high-pitched squeals of surprise or delight. Albin is also the star performer of the nightclub, under the stage name “Zaza Napoli.” Albin is going through a midlife crisis of a kind that might afflict any woman (or man-woman), feeling that he is losing his youthful good looks, is unappreciated, and unloved. As the film opens, Renato is having to try to coax Albin out of his doldrums for his next performance.
Albin suspects that Renato is having an affair, taking advantage of the times when Albin is performing on stage. Viewers are led to suspect as much when Renato does, in fact, receive a handsome young man while Albin is performing. They exchange fond greetings and kisses and Renato remarks that they will have a couple of hours without being disturbed. Soon, however, we are disabused of our misassumption when it turns out that the young man is Renato’s son, Laurent (Remi Laurent), who Renato and Albin have raised from infancy. Laurent confounds his father with something of a bombshell. He has met the woman of his dreams (in contrast to both his parents, Laurent is apparently quite straight) and they are planning to marry. Renato refers repeatedly to the poor girl, who he has never met, as a “whore” for taking his only son away, seemingly only half joking.
Laurent’s intended, Andrea (Louisa Maneri), is not having much better luck delivering the news to her parents, the Charriers. Her father (Michel Galabru), it seems, is a minister in a political party called the Union for Moral Order. Madame Charrier (Carmen Scarpitta) is possibly even more snobbish than her husband. They, of course, want to know what Laurent’s parents do for a living. Fearing their inevitable disapproval, she lies, announcing that Laurent’s father is a diplomat and the mother takes care of their several children. In the midst of this conversation, Charrier receives word that the French President has just died in the arms of an underage, black prostitute. As second in command in his party, Charrier will bear the brunt of the scandal. Madame Charrier suggests that an immaculate white wedding between their daughter and the son of a diplomat might be just the thing to save them from the blemish of the scandal. First, however, there will have to be the requisite meeting of the two families.
All of the foregoing has, of course, provided the set-up for the main event of the movie – the meeting of the two families. Laurent implores his father to attempt to fake something resembling a “normal” lifestyle, just this once, to satisfy the uptight in-laws. The sexually explicit knickknacks are put away in the basement and temporarily supplanted with crucifixes and the like. The manservant’s apron is shelved in preference for a tuxedo. Renato even enlists Laurent’s mother, who hasn’t seen him since his birth, to be there for him on this one occasion. But what to do with the sensitive Albin? A half-hearted effort to teach him how to appear “manly” (so that he can be passed off as an uncle) fails pathetically (though with greatly humorous effect). Refusing to be left out of the festivities, Albin ultimately shows up in drag as Laurent’s mother! When Laurent’s biological mother also shows up, the jig is up. Worse, the reporters show up at the door, hoping to catch the minister of the Union of Moral Order hanging out with a bunch of transvestites and fags. How Charrier is extricated from this situation by his newfound “friends” is the highlight of the film – but I’ll leave it for viewers to enjoy on their own.
Themes: The most straightforward theme, I think, of this film is a plea for mutual respect for one another and the diversity of lifestyles that exist. Any variety of lifestyle that does no obvious and significant harm to society at large ought to be not merely tolerated but cherished and enjoyed for the cultural diversity that is thereby created. The world would be a far less interesting and satisfying place if we were all alike – racially, ethnically, or by sexual orientation. My personal feeling is that I really have no need to know another person’s sexual preference except in two situations: if I’m hitting on that person or that person is hitting on me. At my age, both of those situations have become pretty much moot points! It is also sometimes appropriate or even desirable to learn about another person’s sexual orientation when we’re engaged in conversation about such issues as one’s personal experience with bigotry or discrimination or one’s take of issues of sexual politics. I don’t object to a person revealing their sexual preference to me if that suits their desires in some way or the value of a conversation. I don’t usually myself reveal what my sexual preferences are because I don’t like the negative inference inherent in such an announcement that it might be important to me that people know that my orientation is what it is and not something else. Besides, my personal belief is that sexual preferences are actually a good deal more complicated than the simple dichotomy implied by gay vs. straight.
Does a film like La Cage aux Folles do more harm than good in promoting tolerance? I think that the answer is “yes,” but not as obviously or fully “yes” as might initially appear to be the case. The character Albin is something of a gay stereotype. The manservant Jacob as well. Both exhibit effeminate speech and expressions, mannered gestures, and an exaggerated feminine sensitivity. I’ve know perhaps half-a-dozen gay people well and, of course, a much larger number casually and very few are people that one could suppose to be gay based on five or ten minutes of casual observation. I’ve also known at least one person who exhibited what might be called stereotypically gay mannerisms who was not gay – he was simply a rather foppish heterosexual. In featuring stereotypically gay people in movies and sitcoms, does the entertainment industry do a disservice to the many gay people who do not fit that stereotype closely? Well, I think something of an answer to that question lies in the comparison between La Cage aux Folles and its American remake from 1996 Birdcage. The characters in the French original were fully drawn as individuals despite one being stereotypically gay in outward manner. They evoked sympathy and compassion as individuals. Consequently, I think that La Cage aux Folles promotes tolerance even if it also feeds a bit off the gay stereotype for purposes of humor. You can’t help but be impressed by the humanity and decency of all of these characters – save perhaps the hyper-straight in-laws. By contrast, the characters in the American remake are more fully satirical, less well developed, and altogether less sympathetic. They provide little reason for viewers who may be intolerant or marginally tolerant of homosexuality to reassess their views or to develop a bit more empathy for gays. It’s somewhat the difference between laughing with (in the French film) and laughing at (in the American film) the characters. Perhaps the difference between the two films reflects a less hospitable atmosphere in America toward gays than in France.
Production Values: I very much enjoy the work of Michel Serrault, who played Albin in this film. He won a Cesar award for his performance here, so my respect for him was shared by some others. I enjoyed him even more in The King of Hearts (1966), where I think his performance borders on the brilliant. I’ve also seen him in Get Out Your Handkerchiefs (1978). He’s worth the price of admissions by himself – whenever he appears in a film. Tognazzi, on the other hand, holds the film together with his steady, understated performance amidst the madness the ensues all around him. Michel Galabru and Carmen Scarpitta, as the haughty in-laws, are superb as well. Many praise Benny Luke as the butler, Jacob, as well, though I found either the part or the actor a bit over-the-top.
Ennio Morricone provides a wonderful score for La Cage aux Folles, emphasizing sensitive, tender mood music. This adds to the sense of depth of the gay relationships, strengthening the films message that love exists in many forms. The superior score for this film is another advantage that it enjoys over the 1996 American remake.
Bottom-Line: Though overlooked by the Academy for Best Foreign Film, La Cage aux Folles received nominations for Best Costume Design and Best Adapted Screenplay. It won the Golden Globe in America as well as Best Foreign Film from the National Board of Review.
This is a foreign language film where you definitely want to search it out in the subtitled version rather than with dubbing. The dubbed version is so bad that I couldn’t even recommend watching it if no other alternative existed. It’s hard to find VHS copies with subtitles, but fortunately the DVD version provides the option of either subtitles or dubbing. This film is rated R, though it’s a bit hard to attribute that rating to anything other than homophobia. The film has no nudity, no sex, and minimal obscene language (just a few mean-spirited epithets tossed around). Even the gay smooches amount to no more than pecks. This is a film that most will find entertaining comedy, independent of your own sexual preferences. I highly recommend it.
*************************************************************************************************
You might want to check out these other excellent films from France:
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.