A long-gestating passion project for Tran Anh Hung, The Taste of Things <\/i>takes as its starting point Marcel Rouff\u2019s eccentric, echt-French novel The Life and Passion of Dodin-Bouffant<\/i>, Gourmet<\/i>, which follows Dodin-Bouffant in the wake of the death of his longtime cook and occasional sexual companion Eug\u00e9nie. For his adaptation, Hung retains a few of the book\u2019s incidents but otherwise chooses to tell the story of Dodin-Bouffant and Eug\u00e9nie\u2019s life before<\/i> the novel starts. A period romance set in 1889, Taste<\/i> begins with a lengthy sequence of pure cooking\u2014when I saw the film at Cannes, a woman behind me moaned in pleasure when a massive turbot was unveiled. (French chef Pierre Gagnaire is credited as the film\u2019s \u201cgastronomic director.\u201d) But the emphasis is equally on the unorthodox, undemonstrative but luminous relationship between Dodin Bouffant (Beno\u00eet Magimel) and Eug\u00e9nie (Juliette Binoche), their shared adoration for food merging and becoming indistinguishable from their love for each other.<\/p>\n
Hung\u2019s film reflects his interest and respect for the French culinary tradition. Born in Vietnam and raised in France, his lavish attention to detail is characteristic of a career that began with his 1993 debut feature, The Scent of Green Papaya<\/i>\u2014set in Vietnam, shot entirely in France and subsequently submitted as the former\u2019s nominee for Best Foreign Language Film; this year, The Taste of Things<\/i> has been chosen as France\u2019s submission for Best International Feature Film.<\/p>\n
To interview Hung, we reached out to legendary documentarian Frederick Wiseman\u2014a fellow adopted Francophile and passionate foodie whose latest film, Menus-Plaisirs\u2014Les Troisgros<\/i>, offers an equally attentive gaze on the real-world kitchen of a Michelin three-star restaurant.<\/p>\n
The Taste of Things<\/i> has a one-week qualifying run on December 13, then enters limited release from IFC Films on February 9, 2024.\u2014Vadim Rizov<\/i><\/p>\n
Hung:<\/strong> Hello, Fred. I\u2019m happy to talk to you. So, you are in Paris right now?<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Yeah, I\u2019m in Paris. I more or less live here most of the time. And where are you? Are you in Paris or in America?<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> No, right now I\u2019m in DC. I\u2019m making a tour for the movie to show it to Academy members.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Unfortunately, I\u2019m not in a position to be able to do that. Documentary films, the publicity aspects are always underfinanced, and often the production aspects as well. So, it\u2019s good to do this conversation.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> Yes, I know. So, Fred, why did you want to make this documentary about the family Troisgros group?<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> It came up by chance. I lived in a friend\u2019s house in Burgundy in the summer of 2020, and I wanted to give them a present for having put up with me for months. So I looked in the Michelin, and there was a three-star restaurant nearby. I made a reservation for lunch, and, after lunch, the man who I later discovered to be C\u00e9sar Troisgros came out and worked the room. And with no premeditation, when he came to our table, I blurted out, \u201cI make documentary movies. Would you ever consider having a documentary made at your restaurant?\u201d He said, \u201cLet me talk to my father,\u201d came back a half an hour later and said, \u201cWhy not?\u201d We exchanged some emails, and I waited till the spring of 2022, when COVID had subsided, and shot the film. When the family saw the movie in April, we talked about the origins of the film. He told me his father wasn\u2019t there [the day of our meeting], but he had gone to the kitchen and looked me up on Wikipedia. I\u2019ve never read my entry in Wikipedia, but, in any case, it worked. And that\u2019s how I got to make the film. I thought, you know, it fits\u2014a restaurant is an institution. I have a very imprecise definition of an institution that fits into the series that I\u2019m doing. And you, how did you come to make your movie?<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> Also by chance. I read this book written in 1924 by a Swiss writer, and in the book there were some very interesting pages about how people talk about food. It was really marvelous, and that was why I decided to adapt the book, but I adapted it very freely because I didn\u2019t like the story told in the book. So, I tried to tell another story that happened before the book, only because I wanted also to find a story that deals with marital love. Sometimes, marital love is quite boring in cinema, so it was a challenge for me to do something about this and mix it with cuisine. That was the beginning of the idea.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Compared to what you had to do, I think it was relatively easy for me to shoot in the kitchen because I just hung out and shot whatever was going on. I think I was [at the restaurant for] seven weeks. About 40 percent of the time was probably in the kitchen. That was the hardest to shoot, but things were repetitive. I could shoot [the same actions] in different ways and see how it looked in the rushes, or shoot [them] in different ways just so I had coverage in the editing. You had to stage. That must have been an enormous amount of work.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> It\u2019s more complicated, of course, for my film. It was a real challenge to shoot the beginning scene when we see Dodin and Eug\u00e9nie cook together. Eug\u00e9nie and Dodin worked together for almost 20 years, so there is a sense of harmony in their work. I wanted to convey this harmony to the audience. That\u2019s why I had this very complex camera movement mixed with their movement in the kitchen, so that I can create a kind of ballet to express this idea of harmony. That was difficult because, as you can see in the kitchen when they work, they can move freely to grab a knife or a spoon or an ingredient. So, we had to put everything in the right place so that I could create this harmony around their gestures.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> You had to choreograph each movement. In the Troisgros [kitchen], it was self-choreography, and I had to figure out how to shoot it. It appears as if it were choreographed for the film without asking the people working in the kitchen to do anything.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> I think it succeeded very well in your film because the rhythm, particularly in the kitchen sequences, is really lovely. You don\u2019t feel it\u2019s forced. You feel their natural movements are related to the work at hand. I really like the precision that I can feel in your documentary. Somehow, the cooks are very good actors. They knew exactly what they have to do in the kitchen. They didn\u2019t know how they were being filmed, so their movements are natural movements to them because they have so much experience working together.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> It was up to me to have it shot in a way that suggested that it was choreographed. It was choreographed except that, in reality, it\u2019s not choreographed. I had to figure out how to frame it so that it looked the way it looked in your film, because otherwise it would be boring.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> What I noticed is that since you are in the kitchen with professionals, when you make a close-up of hands making food, we never doubt that it\u2019s real. But for me, I needed to show the link between the hands and the face of the actors to give this feeling that these actors actually cook themselves. It\u2019s like when you have a scene with an actor playing piano\u2014you have to show the face and hands at the same time to be sure that it\u2019s really the actor who played the piano and not someone else. But for you, it was not the case because everything was real.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Within a sequence of peeling asparagus, I had to make a judgment whether the close-up of the hands on the asparagus was long enough, and then quickly move the camera to the face. Because I wasn\u2019t sure how many asparagus he was going to peel, I had to gamble that I got it. I mean, I knew that probably another day he would peel asparagus, but I always tried to get it within the context of the original movement\u2014the same person peeling asparagus and the close-up. Then, I could look at the rushes and, if I didn\u2019t like it, the next time I saw asparagus being peeled we could shoot it again from a slightly different angle. I never felt that the people working in the kitchen were acting for me, because they were too busy doing their work. It was up to me and the other members of the crew to move around them\u2014not to interfere with their work but at the same time to get the shots that I wanted. But you\u2019re lucky in this kitchen because it\u2019s quite a large kitchen.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> Yes, it was quite a large kitchen, and the light was very good. But we were in very close, and we had to, to some extent, try to anticipate their movements so we could get out of their way when they move quickly carrying a pot of boiling water. And you handle the camera yourself or you have a cameraman for that?<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> No, I have a cameraman whom I direct. I have a viewfinder, and we\u2019re communicating by signals for different kinds of shots.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> And during the shooting itself, do you have a monitor to check everything?<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Yeah, hanging around my neck.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> What we are saying reminds me of one scene in a movie made by Martin Scorsese when he shot the Rolling Stones concert [2008\u2019s Shine a Light<\/i>]. It was very funny because we see the preparation of the concert and then, at the moment [when] it will start, Martin really wants to know which song the Rolling Stones are going to start with because for him it\u2019s very important to know how they start to know how to film it\u2014is it a song that starts with a guitar or with drums? The Rolling Stones didn\u2019t tell him, and it was quite funny to see the scene. I never make a documentary because for me it\u2019s too difficult. I never dare to do it because there are so many things that you cannot anticipate, and I\u2019m really not good at it. I have to prepare everything.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Well, you prepare things very well. But [when] making documentaries you learn to trust your instinct. You have to make decisions very, very fast [about] what to shoot and how to shoot it. The editing, you can take all the time you want and play with different alternatives. But it also depends on the subject of the documentary, because shooting in the kitchen at Troisgros was a bit like shooting at the Com\u00e9die-Fran\u00e7aise or a ballet company. When you\u2019re shooting a theater or a ballet company, there\u2019s a lot of repetition\u2014repetition in the actual rehearsals and repetition in the performances. Although no one performance is exactly the same, they\u2019re within a similar framework. So, you have the chance when you\u2019re shooting performance\u2014and [a] kitchen is part performance\u2014to do it many times, so that when you get to the editing room several months later you have choice. And that is not true of a documentary made, say, in a juvenile court or a welfare center or a hospital, because then nothing is ever the same. I don\u2019t ask people to do anything, and there\u2019s no repetition.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> When I\u2019m making a movie, I never do rehearsal. What I like is to discover things with the actors and the crew. I never plan how to shoot a scene before the shooting. When I get to the set and see the space, the location, only at that moment [do] I know how to shoot the scene. \u201cOK, you move this way and then from here you would say this\u201d\u2014a very rough idea of how the actors move in the space. Then, I would put the track for the camera and shoot it take after take. But you say that for you, somehow, in the Troisgros, because [the subjects\u2019 actions] are repetitive, it\u2019s something you can anticipate.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> But it\u2019s never repetitive in exactly the same way. You can\u2019t tell the cook [to have their] hands come into frame the way they did two minutes ago. You just have to wait and see whether his hands are going to come into frame and be sufficiently familiar with his movements so that you can make a lucky guess as to where to put the camera. But I\u2019m surprised to hear you say that [about your film]. Having seen the movie, I would think you have to have in mind where you\u2019re going to place the camera and what the focal length is going to be.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> I did it at the last moment because I have to discover it. You just said that you need to have a good instinct to anticipate things. \u201cInstinct\u201d\u2014it\u2019s something that is not given to you, right? It\u2019s the sum of your whole experience.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Yes, it\u2019s a sum of your whole experience. The issue is not to neglect my instinct. When something occurs to me, I grab it.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> I guess that it\u2019s a great pleasure for you when that happens.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> When it works, it\u2019s a great pleasure.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> There must be a God for that.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Chance has everything to do with it. You always have to be prepared to shoot.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> When I studied film in film school, I saw a documentary about workers on strike, and there was this scene between policemen and workers. I remember one shot: The camera is on the side of the policemen filming the workers and, at a certain moment, the policemen decide to go fight the workers. At that moment, we see the cameraman running to go on the side of the workers. By doing so, we have this feeling that the cameraman, meaning the director, is on the side of the workers and that he will be receiving the beating from the policemen. And when I saw it, I said, wow, this is so great and unpredictable. You have to be very conscious of the fight and to choose your side. You have to be conscious of what\u2019s going on in order to make the decision of both what to shoot and how to shoot it. And you have to be very quick.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> But in the sequence you describe, I would have left out the shot of the cameraman running to change [sides]. It\u2019s better for the illusion that you\u2019re trying to create. Everybody knows they\u2019re watching a film, but to the extent you can keep the potential audience within the framework of the illusion, participating in what they\u2019re seeing and hearing\u2026 There are films with main characters that like to call attention to themselves or to the camera movements. It\u2019s an individual choice. I don\u2019t say that one is right or one is wrong.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> For me as a filmmaker, it\u2019s something that I need to think a lot about. For instance, if you have a scene that is very moving, like a mother who has just lost her child\u2014she suffers a lot, so how can I make this shot of her? It\u2019s an ethical problem. You cannot be too frontal. It should not be obscene because of the suffering of people. So, for you, when you are shooting and making an interview, what would be the right distance?<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> I don\u2019t think there\u2019s any rule, and what\u2019s one person\u2019s obscenity is another person\u2019s pleasure. Like everything else in filmmaking, particularly documentary, you have to trust your own judgment. You only have one chance to get it. You can say, \u201cI didn\u2019t like that, do it again,\u201d but I can\u2019t. I\u2019ve never asked somebody who\u2019s being filmed to do it again. So, you have to make a quick judgment as to the angle, whether it\u2019s a wide shot or a close-up, etc. And the sequence, as it\u2019s edited, is always shorter than as it existed in real life. My films are highly edited. So, a sequence might be 35 minutes as it occurred, and the [scene in the] final film may be three minutes. And it may be a consecutive three minutes or three minutes assembled from 25 different shots. So, I don\u2019t think there\u2019s any straightforward answer to the question.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> You\u2019re right. I asked the same question to another director, Rithy Panh. He\u2019s Cambodian.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> Oh, I know Rithy Panh.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> Sometimes he has to film and ask questions [of] people who are suffering [because] of killings and things like that. And his answer was quite amazing. He said, \u201cI feel people [are] at the right distance where they can hit me in the face if they are not happy with my questions.\u201d It\u2019s a way to answer.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> I\u2019m not sure that\u2019s an adequate answer. Because I think if people are suffering, they\u2019re not necessarily thinking [about] the fact that someone\u2019s taking their picture. Usually, when it\u2019s a very emotional scene, people are generally more involved in what\u2019s happening to them, whether it\u2019s suffering or pleasure, than in dealing with the fact that they\u2019re being filmed. Basically, they forget about the camera, or they\u2019re not able to change their behavior. Actors can become somebody else, but most of us are not good enough actors. And if somebody tries to change their behavior because they\u2019re being filmed, it strikes you immediately as bullshit. I mean, it\u2019s no different than one\u2019s experience in real life\u2014if you think that someone\u2019s bullshitting you, take that into account. Anybody that survives in the world for more than three days has to have a good bullshit meter, and it\u2019s the same when you\u2019re filming.<\/p>\n Hung:<\/strong> Yes, I\u2019m happy that we have this talk about the moral point of view of what we are filming. It\u2019s very important.<\/p>\n Wiseman:<\/strong> It\u2019s very important, but I mean, you don\u2019t want to take advantage of people. I try to get people\u2019s consent, but I don\u2019t get written releases. I get tape-recorded consents when I can, but sometimes there\u2019s no time to do that. When I\u2019m shooting in America, if it\u2019s a public institution, I\u2019m also protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Any place that\u2019s supported by taxpayer money\u2014a hospital, police department, a high school\u2014you don\u2019t need to get written releases. It doesn\u2019t eliminate the moral question. But it\u2019s more a question you have to decide for yourself.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A long-gestating passion project for Tran Anh Hung, The Taste of Things takes as its starting point Marcel Rouff\u2019s eccentric, echt-French novel The Life and Passion of Dodin-Bouffant, Gourmet, which follows Dodin-Bouffant in the wake of the death of his longtime cook and occasional sexual companion Eug\u00e9nie. For his adaptation, Hung retains a few of the book\u2019s incidents but otherwise chooses to tell the story of Dodin-Bouffant and Eug\u00e9nie\u2019s life before the novel starts. A period romance set in 1889, Taste begins with a lengthy sequence of pure cooking\u2014when I saw the film at Cannes, a woman behind me moaned […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":123938,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","wds_primary_category":0,"wds_primary_column":0},"categories":[9286,3476,9285,3407],"tags":[4168,24632,7082,24626],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123936"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=123936"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123936\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":123939,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123936\/revisions\/123939"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/123938"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=123936"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=123936"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filmmakermagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=123936"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}