Initial discussion: what the hell is going on?
“Are you going to tell us what’s going on?”
“I would if I could!”
“I would if I could!”
Les Revs is a narrative that is completely based on mysteries, enigmas, and hermeneutic codes. Its narrative is predicated on the fact that not all mysteries will be elaborated to the audience. Potentially this can be very frustrating, and suggests a niche and specialised audience
The genre of the first episode is unclear. Comprising a number of genre conventions from a range of completely different sources, the show is very difficult to categorise, which means designating a target audience is also difficult.
However, with it’s themes of characters coming back from the dead to ‘terrorise’ a small town, the show is arguably a classic example of a zombie narrative, albeit a highly unconventional one
A highly confusing narrative, completely based on hermeneutic codes is established to the audience. However, in the closing montage, the audience learns a range of facts that helps them to make some conclusions about the narrative.
However, like many TV serials there are a number of hermeneutic codes left unresolved in a cliffhanger scenario. These include: who is Victor? What happened to the girl? How did they come back? Why was victor just standing there? Why was she freaking out on the bus???
Les Revs is less of a conventional narrative and more of a puzzle that is based on feelings, emotions rather than trying to tell a conventional story. For example, in the final montage we cross cut between Lena losing her virginity and Camille having a panic attack in a coach. The audience must come up with their own interpretation of this scene: whether Camille is somehow psychically bonded to Lena and is experiencing sexual intercourse or she has foretold that the coach is about to crash. This complete lack of anchorage gives the audience complete freedom to create their own meaning. This is highly divisive and again appeals to a niche audience
However, which the show is highly mysterious,, it still is generally conventional of the mystery/drama genre
The show is about grief, death, madness and sex, all of which are huge and difficult situations to comprehend. For example Mr Costa is so traumatised by his wife’s return, he murders her, which is a difficult thing for many audiences to comprehend. Yet the most difficult thing to comprehend is that in this world, people come back from the dead. This deeply philosophical mode of address will appeal to certain audiences, and completely alienate others.
A highly suspenseful and confusing narrative that provides a challenging experience for the target audiences
Suspense: where information or a conclusion is withheld from the audience. Les Revenants is completely based on strategically withholding information from the audience.
One possible response would be to be intrigued in satisfying way. Yet other audiences may be frustrated or ‘weirded out’ by the show’s absolutely bizarre mode of address
The central premise is strange and alienating to the target audience. On the one hand, the show is arguably a fairly typical zombie narrative. Yet on the other hand, generically, les revs is highly unconventional, lacking conventions such as zombies eating people, extreme moments of gore, and pale dead skin. Potentially this provides audiences with an exciting and positive experience. Steve Neale argues that genre is based on a system of repetition and difference, and potentially Les Revs provides a unique experience to the audience
Character’s motivations and narrative elements are often left unclear to the audience. For example, the narrative thread involving MR and Mrs Costa is highly troubling, mysterious and problematic for the audience. It is heavily…
The central premise of this depressing and moody series is that the certainty of death itself has been reversed. Far from being an exciting and delightful circumstances, the characters universally react with confusing, fear, misery and distress
Les Revs is completely based around hermeneutic codes. What is going on? Where is this going? Why are people coming back from the dead? What determines if someone comes back? What was that twin thing about?
The final sequence is suspiring and distressing for audiences in a variety of different ways. Camille, apparently psychically linked to Lena, experiences Lena losing her virginity, however Camille experiences something completely out of context, has an enormous panic attack, and then dies. The ending to this episode is extremely confusing
The show provokes many questions, and positions the audience in a highly active and participatory mode of address. Les Revs is not a show that can be enjoyed passively, but instead is completely predicated on active audience engagement. This actively addresses an educated target audience
However, there are many aspects of this show which could appeal to a broader audience. The supernatural horror elements may of course appeal to genre fans, and a range of interesting and attractive characters. Finally the setting, shot in the French alps provides audiences with a visually pleasing setting
The setting is beautiful and intriguing, and also highly atypical of a supernatural horror. It provides an isolating mode of address that completely goes against the typical Parisian setting favoured by many French set productions that attempt to appeal to an international audience. It is also partly funded by the Alps tourism board
Applying narrative theory
Todorovian approaches - of limited use
Todorov argued that narratives move between a state of equilibrium (balance) and disruption/disequilibrium or un-balance. Examples of disruption include
- Mr Costa burning down the house
- The bus crashing
- An ugly memorial is being complained
- Victor arrives!
- Camille is forced to go on the school trip (and die)
- The bartender is murdered
- Camille come back!
- Lena loses her virginity
- Claire and thingy get divorced
- Mr Costa’s suicide
- EVERYONE COMES BACK
- A relationship is established between Lena’s dad and the barmaid
- Simon turns up!
Conclusion
Todorov’s theory is of limited use here , as disequilibrium occurs constantly throughout the narrative. And for many characters, their disequilibrium is actually another character's equilibrium! A good example of this is Victor forcing his way in to Julie's house. Now the little (scary) boy has a new home, a new mother, and a new equilibrium. However for Julie, suddenly having a (creepy) child is a massively disruptive disequilibrium. So in order to apply this theory, we must stretch it to its extreme!
Single strand or multi strand? - It's totally multi strand!
Unlike San Junipero, which by and large follows a single narrative strand (Yorkie and Kelly), Les Revenants instead works as a highly complex and detailed multi strand narrative. Different character's narratives criss cross with each other's, creating a satisfying yet decodable mess of separate narratives.
 |
| A diagram of the various narrative strands of episode one of Les Revenants |
Here's a few:
- Camille comes back and freaks out her family
- Simon comes back and looks for Adele
- Julie is forced to ‘adopt’ victor
- Julie’s next door neighbour is a flirt
- Victor crashes the bus (???)
- Lena and Camille’s twin thing
- Mr Costa kills his wife and himself
- Claire’s new husband
The range of various sub narratives can engage a range of different audiences!