DID ANYONE ELSE NOTICE THIS ABOUT THE PROFESSIONAL?
Nice catch Mark. Makes me see the film in a new light.
“Cleaner” is actually pretty amusing, but it creates a doule pun: i. obviously, a cleaner is a person who cleans stuff (like shoes, shirts, etc.) and ii. the word “cleaner” in French (i.e. Besson’s native tongue) is “nettoyeur,” the same term used colloquially for “hitman.” If you watch the VF, you’ll hear them saying “nettoyeur” which has the double-sens by dictionary entry, making it somewhat less surprising that Mathilde was able to pick up on it so quickly.
Mathilda seems like a pretty street wise youngster, the combination of innocent child who still sleeps with her toy bunny rabbit and watches “Transformers”, and street kid who smoke cigarettes (more “street” than “wise”) and gets beaten by her father (a grotesque scumbag involved in peddling angel dust). When you stop to think about it, her obvious fascination with violent cartoon “Transformers” makes a neat bridge between her childlike innocence and the violence of the adult world. So I’m not surprised she knows what is meant by a “cleaner”, given the cesspool of a neighbourhood that she inhabits. It’s an interesting etymology you’ve mentioned, Anonymouse, but I think it translates pretty well into English. I think Mathilda is an adorable character, but Nikita, on the other hand (from the film “Nikita”) really got on my nerves sometimes. And I think “Nikita” could have been so much more—we never find out what makes Nikita tick, and the film loses momentum towards the end. It’s a reasonably engaging film that struggles to find its footing. Luc Besson got it exactly right with “The Professional”.
Yes on the symbolic mark. Leon and Mathilde are both two-sides-of-the-same-coin characters, as Mathilde’s street-wiseness is also matched by young naivety, her understanding of the importance of the relationship matched by her understanding of the wrongness of the relationship (such as when she uses it against them with the "He’s not my father… he’s my lover. " scene).
Didn’t know “cleaner” was perceived as funny, makes me think people’ve been watching too many Cedric the Entertainer movies.
—PolarisDiB
I didn’t even notice THE PROFESSIONAL, much less anything in it.
“Léon isn’t trying to dupe Mathilda by saying he’s a cleaner—he already knows the little girl is too smart for that.”
Leon is pretty slow. in fact, he is rather dumb. that’s why the scene is funny. no way would he be assuming the kid is ‘smart’. tha’ts why the scene is funny. She is smarter than him.
Don’t confuse “semi-literate” with “dumb”— Léon is smart enough to know Mathilda isn’t stupid. Also, just because Léon doesn’t recognise Charles Chaplin, that doesn’t make him uncultured—he probably just doesn’t get out much. He’s a sensitive fellow who loves his plants and takes great care of himself. He’s intelligent, maybe not just in all ways you recognise. I don’t think he should be passed off as stupid just because he can’t read when he meets Mathilda. Furthermore, he by-passed the opportunity to watch “Pulp Fiction” (remember, this was 1994, although I reckon “The Professional” is, at least, pretty much timeless) and instead went for a Gene Kelly flick—so the man DOES have some movie based intelligence! Léon has this great child-like wonderment about certain things (note his expression when he’s at the cinema) and he embodies the child-adult duality as does Mathilda.
people laughed when he said, “cleaner” because the audience didn’t know any better… and i would assume besson knew and did this “double entendre” intentionally. people give too much credit to the majority of mainstream audiences.
imho, leon was being very straight with matilda when he told her that he was a cleaner. no joke, no assumptions. he was, innocently and honestly, telling her that he was a professional hitman. being in the environment (urban/street) that they were both in, it was obvious that leon knew what he was conveying to her and she reciprocated and confirmed by saying in a questioning tone that he was a hitman. in this case, hitman and cleaner were synonymous in meaning and would had made no difference if he outright said that he was a killer and matilda responding that he murdered people for money for a living. but the previous is more entertainingly better to phrase than the later, as demonstrated by the “laughter” of the audience.
like i said, director/writer/etc probably had known that most people would laugh. so matilda’s response was necessary to immediately terminate the laughter/notion and get back to the film’s reality.
and i do believe the use of “intelligence” was wonderfully portrayed in this film. yes, leon could not read… but had the ability to learn and comprehend since matilda was teaching him. and, culturally, he did not understand pop or “american” references. keep in mind that he was a fob (fresh off the boat) / first generation from another country. this was referred to by tony and leon’s accent.
but he knew what he knew very well. and was very knowledgeable about the art of killing and was portrayed in the film as being a top echelon assassin. in this regard, matilda, regardless of what she knew, was very naive about. so depending on your perspective, either of them could be very “smart” or very “dumb”. they both had their own “intelligence” and their perception of street smart, based on their environment.
R.X., you make some excellent points. However, I don’t think the Charles Chaplin impersonation is an “American” reference—remember, Sir Charles was BRITISH! Ditto Marilyn Monroe—she WAS an American, but you must understand that The Little Tramp and Norma Jean transcended cultural and national boundaries—they were known EVERYWHERE. At the very least, they were huge in places like France and Italy. Madonna (another individual impersonated by Mathilda in the film) is probably more instantly recognisable to people nowadays than either Mr. Chaplin or Ms Monroe. As for Gene Kelly, a lot of people might not know he did “Singin’ In the Rain” (I think there is a tendency by casual film viewers to confuse him with Fred Astaire) but they would recognise the song (even if only from Stanely Kubrick’s “A Clockwork Orange!”). However, Léon is obviously very much into Gene Kelly films, so he got that one right.
hello mark and thanks…
as far as madonna, she didn’t become world re-known until the mid/late-eighties. the set piece for this film, i would say was early eighties circa 83/84 in nyc due to the transformers, matilda singing, “like a virgin” instead of her more popular songs, and matildaś sister working out to denise austin on tv in “let’s get physical” retro gym attire. since leon didn’t watch tv or radio (he never touched them… while this was the first thing matilda touched as soon as she enters a new living space as well as her fighting with her sister in the old apt about the tv), then of course he did not know who madonna was… as the rest of the world didn’t as well.
marilyn manroe… when matilda was doing the skit playing her, she wasn’t doing something taken from a film the actress did, but as a reference to norma jean in real life. if the only thing leon did was watch films and take care of his plant for entertainment, how would he know that it was her? the two that he knew were film references, “singin in the rain” and “the alamo”.
charlie chaplin… yes, although he was british, i would say that it was an american reference as well. he did make films stateside and is part of this culture. and no american child would had watched british programming unless you tuned into public broadcasting and watched dr. who. but as far as leon, i have no idea why he didn’t get this. was he THAT closeted? was that what besson was trying to portray?
singing in the rain… i have to agree with you that most people think it is fred astaire. but everyone else, other than him, gets shadowed unfortunately. regardless, that gave me a little laugh of acknowledgement in your statement.
Um, keep in mind guys that Leon references John Wayne, and Mathilde doesn’t catch the reference. Talking about these references in terms of the characters’ “intelligence” is a just a tad bit off the mark. What they reference, Wayne and Kelly over Chaplin and Monroe, is more a part of their character. Leon, surprise of all surprises, likes physical, strong men, and Mathilde, shockingly, likes glamor and magic. The two of them react to movies in the same way, ultimately, just as they are two sides of a single coin—they see in the movies a part of their inner dreams. I do not think that Besson put that sort of character description in there as something for us to talk about and debate at length, he just figured that these would be familiar enough aspects to the audience who is, after all, a movie-watching audience. That scene helps the characters communicate to each other as well as the audience, doing double-service in the development/exposition trade.
—PolarisDiB
I’m honestly tired of movies that make killers out to be sensitive people nowadays. It seemed interesting back in the day, but now it just seems trite, perhaps even dishonest.
If you kill people for a living, you are a scumbag, irrespective of whether you are good to your plants and your mother.
These films are not ‘morally challenging’. they are just stupid.
@polaris
interesting perspective. I’ve been enjoying your comments and responses. keep them comin!
@joks
so i guess the navy seals that went and assassinated u.s. cia trained bin laden, are all scumbags?
and this film was done two decades ago. does that constitute as old school?
One clever bit of symbolism can’t hide the fact that Leon is lacking in almost every other respect. It seems to me that film-makers, such as Besson, who try to humanise contract-killers, take their inspiration from Jean-Pierre Melville’s La Samourai, yet completely miss the point of that film. Melville’s Samourai did not so much have a conscience as was bound by a code of ethics that reflected the protagonist’s resignation to his fate.
Besson gives his killers a conscience, but in so doing he also glamorises their trade. We now have a whole host of hitmen as human being pictures that derive their appeal firstly from the fact that the protagonist is a hitman, and secondly from the fact that they happen to be human. It’s a shamelessly sensationalistic device. Furthermore, when the protagonist’s die in these films there is a usually an end-note of redemption (which is kind of retarded when you really think about it). This was not the legacy that Melville had in mind – he understood that people who kill for money are lost souls beyond redemption and not one single gesture of humanity can change that fact.
So let me get this right: we’re worried about contract killer pictures glamorizing the lives of hitmen too much? What’s next on our agenda, to rally against bad language in films because it poisons our youth?
Oh, some people have moral convictions that override their perspective when viewing movies. I’m not going to argue against it because criticizing killers for being killers isn’t wrong. It’s dangerous to dehumanize killers, but I already know an argument into that area is going to become a real pain in the ass. I label this thread
derailed.
—PolarisDiB
So let me get this right: we’re worried about contract killer pictures glamorizing the lives of hitmen too much? What’s next on our agenda, to rally against bad language in films because it poisons our youth?"
yes, ban most rap music next. Kids can no longer spell. THey used to be able to 30 years ago. what happened?
ebonics, that’s what ;-)
“Oh, some people have moral convictions that override their perspective when viewing movies”
I loved Professional – when i was 16.
I’m not 16 anymore. i’m a 32 year old man. so i can’t handle the shaky arguments for these films anymore.
“Oh, some people have moral convictions that override their perspective when viewing movies”
I loved Professional – when i was 16.
I’m not 16 anymore. i’m a 32 year old man. so i can’t handle the shaky arguments for these films anymore.
Films like The Professional ask of the audience a great deal of moral suspension of disbelief. If a person ran across a person like Leon in real life, they’d think he was a murdering scumbag. Knowing, however, that Leon is a fictional character, and audience is willing accept the film’s morality while watching it.
“Knowing, however, that Leon is a fictional character”
Thanks for clearing up that simple misunderstanding Jirin, otherwise i would have continued to think that Leon was, in fact, a real person.
Much obliged.
MARK IS SUSPENDED IN GAFFA
There is a rather brilliant moment in Luc Besson’s “The Professional” that deserves to be highlighted, not only because it’s one of the most clever and meaningful pieces of film symbolism I’ve witnessed, but because it seems to be perceived as nothing more than a cute sight gag by many of my fellow audience members.
I’m referring to the moment where Léon (Jean Reno) embraces his little friend Mathilda (Natalie Portman, in one of the best child performances ever) and lifts the girl high up off her feet in a show of affection. Luc Besson then shows us Mathilda’s feet, about half a metre from the ground, dangling in mid-air, in much the same way we see the feet of one of Léon’s hanging victims at the outset of the film. This struck me the moment I first saw the embrace between Léon and Mathilda, and it underscores the Léon character as being the lover and the fighter, the protector and the assassin, co-existing in the same person, two sides of the same coin—an exquisite symbolic moment.
As long as I’m on the subject, has anyone else been in the cinema when Léon tells Mathilda he is a “cleaner”? Why does everyone find this so amusing? There must be some confusion as to what Léon means by the occupation of “cleaner” in this context. Obviously, Léon isn’t trying to dupe Mathilda by saying he’s a cleaner—he already knows the little girl is too smart for that. And of course Mathilda responds by asking “You’re a hitman?”, not so much an enquiry as an expression of amazement.
Last night I found the audience’s mirth over the cleaner comment all the more incongruous, as the previous feature, Luc Besson’s “Nikita”, used the word “cleaner” as another word for “hitman”—and even had Jean Reno playing the gun-for-hire in question. So I would’ve thought the use of the word in “Nikita” would’ve primed them for how the term is used in “The Professional”. I guess I just don’t understand, given the context of “The Professional” and how it’s laid out for us, why people find the word “cleaner” so amusing.