Out 1, noli me tangere (Jacques Rivette, 1971)

 

Jacques Rivette’s twelve-hour-plus Out 1, noli me tangere richly justifies the investment made in watching it (and that even goes for multiple viewings - I’ve completed it three times), even if it’s confoundingly difficult to summarize how that is. To make just a few random and inadequate points, the great length, and large blocks of time in which very little happens (nothing at all by conventional narrative measures) exists in tension with a sense of temporal fluidity and uncertainty: for example, the fact of so many characters wearing exactly the same clothes in scene after scene suggests a recurring state of stasis (while also constituting a kind of coding, and also channeling the recurring sense of limited economic resources); even more than usual, a cut from one scene to another in no way indicates here that the linked events are taking place simultaneously. The film follows two sets of characters working on classical texts, differing in their methods but neither seeming to approach a performance (the leader of one group, Thomas, mentions at one point that three days have gone by without really dealing with the material); the tightly focused nature of these projects contrasts (and intertwines) with two other characters preoccupied by hints of a mysterious group of thirteen that may or not actually exist, and if it does, may or may not be of much import (we eventually learn that the group did exist in a formative stage but is now dormant, its purpose never fully formulated, the fact of the investigation itself possibly inadvertently prompting it back to a kind of life), their efforts likewise carrying recurring aspects of play and performance (the film at various times references chess, solitaire, numerology, secret messages, dress-up and other forms of play). Likewise, while there’s no sex in the film as such, the rehearsals often crackle with erotic possibility (even from the very first shot); conversely, the few scenes that most seem to be heading toward carnal intimacy usually trail off into stilted, melancholy-tinged game-playing. There’s a constant sense of reinvention: a character wins a million francs and briefly speculates dizzily on what might change before the money is stolen, he and his friends then channeling their efforts into searching for the perpetrator, a project carrying, in an albeit limited way, a renewed sense of experimentation and improvisation (in these scenes, as in many others, we’re often aware of passers-by staring at the film-makers, which adds to the sense of vivid engagement with the possibilities of the immediate). Ultimately, the film confirms certain aspects of possible conspiracy while leaving others open (the prime mover “Pierre” is never seen or heard, although it’s tempting to think he’s in effect director Rivette, or an avatar or derivative thereof); it moves closer to intimations of the supernatural; it positions some characters for apparent fulfilment while leaving others dead or bereft, with a final shot reminding us of something we witnessed (much) earlier and which was never adequately explained, indicating that the end of the film, even one as long and stimulating and mind-altering as this one, is a merely contingent thing.