Thorkell Ágúst Óttarsson

Here is the promised third (and last) part about Eric Rohmer. First let me add a little general info about him before I get to the films. One thing I forgot to mention was his deep respect and love for people. You never feel like Eric judges his characters. He loves them all, no matter how flawed they are. This is what makes his films so good. Rohmer is all about character drama and the less you judge and the more you love humanity the better the drama gets. This also make his films more demanding for the viewer, because he/she is never told what to feel or whom to like.

Rohmer also loves arts, especially high art, and this is quite evident in his films. People discuss arts, there are books in the shelf, paintings on the walls and music in the background and all of this has something to do with the whole story.

Now to the films. Most great directors make a few bad films along the way, especially those who make many of them. The bad ones are often the first ones and the last ones (if they live to be old). Rohmer is no exception. Some of his last films are not among his best, especially the last three, but still, he was never dull or uninteresting. Even though I wish that he had not ended his charier with Romance of Astrea and Celadon, I still would not have wanted to miss it.

So here are the films from his last 20 years, minus the only two films I have not seen by him: 4 aventures de Reinette et Mirabelle / Four Adventures of Reinette and Mirabelle (1987) and L’arbre, le maire et la médiathèquej / The Tree, the Mayor and the Mediatheque (1993). I will add them to this third part once I get my hands on them.

Eric Rohmer – Conte de printemps / A Tale of Springtime (1990)
A Tale of Springtime is like The Aviator’s Wife, in that nothing really happens. There is no great plot, no clever theory and no great conclusion. The film is mainly about characters and friendship, or rather the springtime of relationships. The time when people get to know each other, how troubles in relationships are set aside (for life to grow) and how new life can be breathed into stale things. It is a tale of (human) spring. Jeanne, a philosophy teacher, is invited to stay with Natasha, a teenager. She gets to know Natasha’s father Igor and his girlfriend Eve. Natasha believes that Eve stole a necklace from her and hates her for that. In fact she plans to replace Eve with Jeanne, as her father’s girlfriend. SPOILERS. I liked how there is a hind of hope in the end of the film, like a time of spring. Maybe Eve will like Natasha now, since she knows that she did not steel the necklace? Maybe the new flowers
Jeanne brings home is a sign of new life in her relationship with her boyfriend (whom we never see in the film). END OF SPOILERS.

I did not find the conversations in this film, or the relationships as interesting as in most of the other films I have seen by Rohmer. That does not mean that it is bad. A good Rohmer film is better than most others 6.5

There is an 40 min. interview with Eric Rohmer on the DVD, made in 1990 (five years before the DVD existed and 10 years before the DVDs took over). There Eric Rohmer says that he believes that the future of cinema is in VHS or something like that (maybe something similar to CDs). He believed that people would soon start to buy films just like they buy books and that this is where rare titles and older films would find their audience. When asked if this was not the end of cinema, since people would see the films in the comfort of their home, he said that he did not belong to that cult. One could enjoy film perfectly in ones own living room, just like you can listen to operas on Cd’s. What an amazing man! Love him!

Eric Rohmer – Conte d’hiver / A Winter’s Tale (1992)
A Winter’s Tale is a brilliant film. Again the season reflect the spiritual condition of the main character. Félicie is frozen (like the
winter) inside because she fell in love with Charles on a holiday and accidentally gave him a wrong address when they separated and lost contact. She finds out that she is pregnant and can’t get over him (she never got his full name and has no idea where he lives). Félicie tries to continue with her life. She has two boyfriends whom she has to choose between. Both of them are only second best to Charles and she wonders if she should settle for (one of the) second best or wait for Charles. Her friends and family point out to her that the chances of finding Charles are next to nothing. She has to move on!

This film is like the sequel to My Night at Maud’s. It has the same theme, even down to Pascal. This film is even more religious than the first one and it is in fact a brilliant Christmas film (who would have thought that Rohmer would make one of those! SPOILERS. Félicie goes into a church and says a prayer there. This changes everything in her life. Suddenly she decides to take a leap of faith. She is going to wait for Charles, even though she may never find him. Félicie makes an opposite wager to Jean-Louis in My Night at Maud’s. She does not make a Pascal wager on love, she makes one against it. She is willing to risk living alone for the rest of her life, just for a small chance of finding (her) true love. It is not before she is willing to take that leap that she finds him again. This is anything but the Pascal wager. She is not taking the safe way out (for a shallow Pascal faith), but rather risking everything for something that might never be. Even though this film is a love story, I see it more as a religious parable. The story is even sett in religious context. It takes place around Christmas. Félicie goes into the Church and gets an answer. She asks her friend to pray for her with as much conviction as he can (which he does). Her trust/faith/conviction is strong and it looks like her prayer’s where answered. Charles could be seen as a symbol for the gift of faith, given to those who trust in God, against all odds. If one looks at the film like that then it can be argued that it is about finding true faith (not true love), instead of just surviving, like Jean-Louis in My Night at Maud’s? The reward of the faithful is in equal measure to the sacrifice they make. And Félicie gets a much richer reward. 9/10.

Eric Rohmer – Les rendez-vous de Paris / Rendezvous in Paris (1995)
I really loved this collection of three uber Rohmer-esquire short films. They are all about love and coincidence in the city of love – Paris. Each story starts with an introduction by two street musicians. The first film is about a girl who believes that her boyfriend might be cheating on her. The Second one is about a girl who has a boyfriend but also a lover on the side. The third film is about a painter who falls for a married woman he sees on the street. She goes home with him to look at his paintings and they discuss love and art, Rohmer style. All of these films have a great twist at the end.

These three films feel like another series. Each is so complete, so well thought out and interesting. This is a hugely underrated film, with does not only show interesting sides to Rohmer’s favorite subject, Love, but also many of the most beautiful places in Paris. A must see. 8/10.

Conte d’été / A Summer’s Tale (1996)
This is the third film in Rohmer’s seasons series. Here the season of summer reflects the state of mind of Gaspard, a young boy who is in love with a girl he waits for, in hope she will show up, while on summer holiday. He finds another girl who is interested in him and whom he could fall in love with, and then falls in love with the third girl. He has the luxurious problem off having to choose between the three of them. Here is a young man with all the luck in the world. Three gorgeous women (man, Rohmer does have good taste in women). SPOILERS! The problem is that he lacks the backbone to take control of his life and therefore never enjoys the harvest from the chances life hands him. Like he says in the film, nothing good ever happens to me. I think we all know the type. I liked that he ended up with nothing but sorrow for not picking the girl who was most interested in him and fits him the best (well, that’s how I understood the song in the end).Summer is indeed the time of promise, but not fulfillment. It is interesting to compare this film with Tales of Winter (SPOILERS for Winter!!!) There we have a woman who has nothing but strife and confusion but finds salvation in the end. In Summer we have a man who is haded all the gifts of the world but loses all of it. A good film 7/10.

Eric Rohmer – Conte d’automne / Autumn Tale (1998)
Autumn Tale concludes the “Tales of the Four Seasons” series. Isabelle and Magali er best friends. Magali is a widow and would like to find a man but does not know how to go about it. Isabelle, who is married, places an ad in the papers and starts dating a man to see if he is good enough for Magali. A well made film with a sweat story. Here the season again reflects the feelings and the life of the characters. In the film we find middle aged people trying to find love, (in the autumn of their love life?). Magali grows grapes (to make wine) and she does it the difficult way. She is not after quantity but rather quality. Her life is the same way. She refuses to find love the easy way. She wants to find true love or no love at all. It has to be a “good harvest”. I did not find the dialogs in this film as interesting as in most other Rohmer films but the story is more complex than one might think. SPOILERS! It may not be spelled out in the film but I think it is quite obvious that Isabelle starts to like the dating game and would love to be on Magali’s receiving end. She finds playing with the fire exciting, something which she might find lacking in her own marriage. So in a way Magali walks away happy in the end and leaves Isabelle confused about her own feelings toward Magali and her own husband. 7/10.

Eric Rohmer – L’anglaise et le duc / The Lady And The Duke (2001)
The film takes place during the French Revolution. Grace Elliott, an English aristocrat and her friend, the Duke of Orleans, find
themselves on opposite sides of the conflict. Grace takes the site of the Royalist but the Duke stands with the Revolutionaries, even though it may cost the life of his own family members. The Lady and the Duke is another attempt to make a historical drama
with the help of other arts. In Perceval le Gallois Rohmer made a brilliant use of music, cinema, theatre and poetry. Here he tries to
do the same by using painted backdrops. It does not really work. In Perceval he went all the way and created a fascinating whole but here we are thrown from a realistic setting to a painting, back to a realistic setting and so on. It feels like a cheep way to make a historic drama, rather than a successful artistic style. The story is interesting but has too much melodrama for my taste. I did however like that it showed the horrors of the French Revolution (which I personally don’t like and think is hugely overrated. The
American revolution was much more successful and meaning full that this murder feast). 6/10.

Eric Rohmer – Triple agent (2004)
Rohmer does a spy thriller, except there is no action scene, no explosion and all the interesting stuff happens off camera. Based on a true story about a White Russian Army general Fyodor in 30s France who was a spy but no one was sure for whom he worked (must have been really good). He might even have been a triple spy, deceiving everyone from Marxists, Soviets and Fascists to his own wife Arsinoé. The material is fascinating and the film looks amazing. Beautifully filmed and very well acted. The main problem is the dialog. Rohmer is usually so good when it comes to conversations but here it feels forced and unnatural, more like a speech or a history lesson than a natural dialog. A great film to look at but lacs the natural flow of most of his previous films. 5/10

Eric Rohmer – Les amours d’Astrée et de Céladon / Romance of Astrea and Celadon (2007)
This is Rohmer’s last film. It is a period drama like the two before it (The Lady and the Duke and Triple agent). The film is set in fifth
century Gaul. Astrea wrongly accuses Celadon of infidelity and forbids him to address her again, or at least until she gives him permission to do so again. Grief-stricken Celadon throws himself into a river. Astrea is left to grief Celadon, little knowing that Celadon was saved by a nymph who has fallen in love with him. Celadon has to try to escape from his rescuer and find a way to reunite with Astrea without disobeying her.

Rohmer uses the same style here as he did with his other period films. The acting is theatrical and the costumes are lifted from romantic paintings, not reality. This is a sweet film, sometimes too sweet for my taste but it does have its moments. I especially liked the gender-bending close to the end (maybe not the scenes them selves (thought some of them where quite sexy) but the fact that Rohmer did it). This is the closest Rohmer got to making a film about bi/homosexuality, and he had to go all the way back to the fifth century to do that.

It is strange that Rohmer would end is film career on three so un-Rohmer-esquire films. Surly he did know that these could be his
last films (he was 87 when he made this film). Did he feel like he had nothing to add to the genre he created, did he feel like he was not in touch with modernity (and felt he had to go back to the past) or did he just want to try out new things? The Tales of the four seasons would have been a more fitting ending for Rohmer but these three last films do have their moments and charm. 6/10

First few words about Rohmer. In my last introduction I forgot to mention that Women are usually in the center of Rohmer’s films and they are almost always more interesting characters than men. There is more depth to them and one can feel that Rohmer is much more interested in them than his men (who are often just there to push the story of the women forward). His actors are usually very beautiful and skinny but outside beauty does not always mirror what is within.

Rohmer is an actor’s director, i.e. (almost) all actors are brilliant in his films, even amateur actors who have never acted (I have only seen one example of bad acting in his film and that was an amateur actress). What is especially interesting is how well the dialog fits the speaking rhythm of the actors. This is actually no accident because Rohmer would tape this actors speaking and then write the text so it would fit their natural rhythm. And this is not the only example of an amazing preparation for his films. He would also study carefully which colors would fit his films and then find locations with these colors (or paint them if needed). Let’s not forget that his films where dirt cheep so it is not like he could build studios that would fit his criteria.

The Comedies & Proverbs” series, is a collection of six films he made during the 1980s. Each of these films begins with a proverb. All of the films are about young middle class people in love. I have seen many people complain about Rohmer repeating him self in his films. That is only partly true. Yes they are all about love but they are all about different sides of love. The Aviator’s Wife is about people who settle for less than they should; A Good Marriage is about a woman who is too impatient to wait for love; Pauline at the Beach is about the games of love, Full Moon in Paris is about the danger of not committing to the one you love, The Green Ray is about the importance of finding your self before you find someone to love and My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend is about how love will often go it’s own way, even across social laws. My only problems with his films is that he only address hetero sexual love. One would think that someone who is so interested in the different shades and sides to love would also investigate homosexuality, which is part of the whole equation.

What amazes me about the “Comedies & Proverbs” series is how good they are. There is not one weak link there. This is especially interesting since the films where made in the 80s, a decade that produced world record of bad films. Most directors did bad in the 80s. Rohmer however stood strong and his films from the 80s have aged surprisingly well. Another director who made good films in the 80s is Woody Allen, who is often called the American Eric Rohmer, and rightly so, because their films are quite alike. Many believe that Allen was influenced by Rohmer, but I don’t know if Allen has ever commented on it.

Eric Rohmer – La femme de l’aviateur / The Aviator’s Wife (1981)
The Aviator’s Wife is the first film in Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series. The proverb for this film is: “It is impossible to think about nothing”. I’m not sure how that proverb fits the subject of the film. It is about Francois, a young student, who is in a relationship with an older women (Anne) who he suspects is cheating on him. Francois follows the man (an aviator) who he believes is her lover. Lucie,a younger girl thinks that he is following her and starts talking to him. All these people are quite different. Anne is independent, and cold. Lucie is lively, charming but immature and Francois is kind, but naive and needy. This film is really not about plot at all. It is all about characters. The middle part of the film is where it shines. The conversations between Francois and Lucie are mesmerising. The last scene (in Anne’s apartment) was way too long, IMO and dragged the film down. Maybe it had also something to do with the fact that I could not stand Anne (the actress is good, it’s just the character she plays I did not like and could not stand). I also felt the film needed some conclusion. It is strange that this film is called The Aviator’s Wife. We only see the aviator’s wife once and only in a picture. Why name the film after an off screen character? Is it because her pregnancy sets everything that follows in motion? She does not know the main characters in the film and they don’t know her but still, her condition affects them all. Do not watch this film for the plot. You will not find much of it here. But if you want real people and some thoughts on relationships and love then this might be your cup of tee. 7/10.

Eric Rohmer – Le beau mariage / A Good Marriage (1982)
A Good Marriage is the second film in Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series. The proverb for this film is “Can anyone refrain from building castles in Spain?” Sabine likes to build castles in the sky. She has given up on relationships with married men and is determent to get married. She even announces this to her friends and family. The only problem is that she has no one to marry. Her friend, Clarisse introduces her to her cousin Edmond and Sabine decides that he is the one. Now she only has to get him interested. But can one force love or does it have to happen by it self? I thought the character Sabine was very well written. She likes to believe she knows her self, knows what she wants and has full control of her life when in fact she does not. We she her tell others one thing and then act completely different. Most of us are like that. We tend to believe that we are more mature than we actually are. I thought the film was a great character study and I loved watching Sabine deal with her own naiveté. SPOILERS. I liked how Rohmer introduces the man she is going to fall in love with in the beginning of the film and then does not show him again before the end, and then only hint’s at what will follow with one smile. 8/10

Eric Rohmer – Pauline à la plage / Pauline at the Beach (1983)
Pauline at the Beach is the third film in Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series. The proverb for this film is “He who talks too much will hurt himself.” Here the proverb refers to not being able to keep your nose out of other people’s business. Fifteen year old Pauline travels with her older cousin (Marion) to the seaside. There they meet Marion’s old friend, Pierre (who is in love with Marion) and a playboy called Henri, whom Marion falls in love with. Pauline falls in love with a young boy her age (Sylvain) but things get complicated once Sylvain is wrongly suspected to be unfaithful to Pauline. This may sound a little complicated but actually is not. This is one of Rohmer’s nasty films (in the sense that it shows the darker side of people when it comes to love; anger, unfaithfulness, jealousy, playing with other people’s feelings…), and resembles Claire’s Knee in that respect quite much. It is also one of Rohmer’s most sexy films (mainly because of Arielle Dombasle (Marion), who is drop dead gorgeous in the film). It is a very satisfying film. Well structured, acted and written. There are a lot of ironic twists here, the biggest one being that Pauline, the 15 year old, whom all the grown up want to protect and teach about love and life, comes of as more mature than all of them. The ending shows that she is the only one who knows how to follow the proverb (not talk too much). 8/10.

Eric Rohmer – Les Nuits de la pleine lune / Full Moon in Paris (1984)
Full Moon in Paris is the fourth film in Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series. The proverb for this film is “He who has two women loses his soul, he who has two houses loses his mind.” Louise has never lived alone. She lives with her boyfriend Remi but has an extra apartment, to have some time for her self. She wants be able to live two lives, one with her boyfriend and one without him. She is not looking for an open relationship but she does want to have friends of the opposite sex and would not mind if her husband did the same. But is that possible? Can one live independent lives and keep friends of the opposite sex and still be faithful to one another? I really loved this film, even though it was full of terrible 80s music and fashion. The characters where well written and the arguments and conclusions quite convincing. SPOILERS. I liked how we see Louise gradually moving towards having an affair, just like Remi had predicted. She thinks that she can have her cake and eat it too, only to realise in the end (when it was too late) that she would end up with neither. Relationships is something one has to work on and Louise was not willing to invest much time in hers. She knew that what she was doing was wrong, like when she sees Remi at the restaurant. She hides because she does not want him to know that she was seeing Octave. And what are her intentions with Octave? She knows that he is in love with him. She knows that she is keeping him away from his wife and she knows that Remi would not approve if he knew how Octave feels about her. Is she keeping him warm in case something would happen? Why does she call him in the end? Because she needs a friend or because she needs a lover? We are not told but I suspect the latter.  And how are we to understand the title? Full Moon in Paris refers to the full moon in the end of the film where everything goes wrong? I don’t think Rohmer is blaming the moon, but rather saying that sometimes passions overtake us, especially if we put us in an vulnerable situation, just like Louise and Remi did in this film. The proverb says it all: “He who has two women loses his soul, he who has two houses loses his mind”. 8/10

Eric Rohmer – Le rayon vert / The Green Ray / Summer (1986) 
The Green Ray / Summer is the fifth film in Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series. The proverb for this film is “Ah, for the days that set our hearts ablaze.” This is one of many Rohmer films that are quite Woody Allan-ish (or rather the other way around). I think Ebert is quite funny in his review about the film, when he says: “If Eric Rohmer were basing a film on your diary, he would only use the entries where you observe that nothing much happened.” It may sound strange that a film based on the proverb “Ah, for the days that set our hearts ablaze” is mostly about days where nothing happens, but a better proverb could not have been found for this film. In a way it is true that nothing much happens but there is so much happening when nothing is happening. Delphine is finding herself and that is the big journey. I think the reference to Jules Verne is not just limited to “The Green Ray” but also to the great journeys in his novels and the greatest journey in the world is understanding one self and others. That is why no matter where she went, she was always at the wrong place. It wasn’t the place that was the problem, it was her own self.  SPOILERS. I love the end in this film. I thought it was so moving and beautifully symbolic. Finally we see the day that sets the heart ablaze but like often in his films it is only hinted. We see the promise, but not the fulfillment. END OF SPOILERS! By the way, has anyone here ever seen green ray / Green Flash? (I’m not talking about the film but the optical phenomenon. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_flash ) 9/10

Eric Rohmer – L’Ami de mon amie / Boyfriends and Girlfriends / My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend (1987) 
My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend is the sixth and last film in Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series. The proverb for this film is  ”My friends’ friends are my friends.” Now I don’t know if this is really a proverb or a twist on “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. I suspect the latter. Either way, it fits perfectly for the film. The English title of the film is even more suggestive, My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend. The film is about two friends, Blanche and Lea. Lea is in a relationship with Fabien and Blanche is secretly in love with Alexandre, the playboy of the town. Lea tries to help Blanche to get Alexandre while she deals with her own boyfriend, whom she does not really like all that much. But love has a habit of going its own way, often against social rules, like the one that you should not fall in love with the boy your girlfriend is in love with.  This is one of Rohmer lighter films and quite romantic. It is extremely charming and has some of the best acted scenes in Rohmer films, especially the ones with Emmanuelle Chaulet (who plays Blanche). This is another example of a very Woody Allen-ish film, which is actually wrong since it is most likely Woody Allen who was influenced by Rohmer. I loved the ending. It is so well played ( Emmanuelle Chaulet is amazing there) and so perfectly served (by Rohmer). A great end to a great series. 8/10

I’m watching the films by Eric Rohmer this month. Here is my review of the films I have seen until now (more to follow soon). First few words about his films. Eric Rohmer is one of those directors I really feel kinship with. There is something in his films that fascinate me and speaks to me. He reminds me a lot of Ozu. Both made films about relationships, worked with the same theme and the same actors over and over again, both wrote their own manuscripts and both made fragile poetic films. Rohmer is often the forgotten hero of the French New Wave. People will often talk about how naturally people talked in Godard films, and how interesting the discussions where. Godard had nothing on Rohmer when it came to natural dialog. I in fact doubt anyone has ever managed to film as interesting and natural dialog as Rohmer did. I also find Rohmer in many ways more interesting than most of the other French New Wave directors, but then again, I have always been more interested in the directors that stood on the sideline, like Jean-Pierre Melville and Robert Bresson. Eric Rohmer, François Truffaut and Claude Chabrol are in my opinion the best of the Cahiers du Cinema Directors, in that order. I find Godard overrated and I have to study Jacques Rivette better to make up my mind about him.

Anyway, here are some thoughts on his films from the first twenty years (minus few which I don’t have).

Véronique et son cancre / Véronique and Her Dunce (1958)
This is a nice short film about education and upbringing. A mother gets a guardian to help her son with his homework. She should be strict with him, very strict! The boy gets mixed messages, both from his parents and the lady who helps him. Does he need to learn these things or not? Does he need to understand what he is learning?… He sees no point in any of this because no one can give him an clear answer. He is in many ways too clever for the methods being used. 7/10

Le signe du lion / The Sign of Leo (1959)
This is Rohmer’s first feature film. It is quite different from everything he would do later on. There is not much dialog in this film and it has long silent scenes, with a lot of music (he used music very sparely after this). SPOILERS! The story reminded me of Hunger by Hamsun. We see how an artist goes form having just enough to having nothing, and ending up as a bum on the street. It does remind one of how important it is never to look down upon homeless people. I liked the end, because it looks like Pierre is no better than everyone else who would not help him. He leaves behind the only man who was kind to him and kept him alive all this time. I’m not sure how to understand the last shot of the stars. Is Rohmer telling us that we don’t control our destiny? It does look like that and if so then I have to disagree. We don’t control our misfortunes but we can’t blame (or thank) destiny for everything that happens. Anyway, I think it is a good debut film. Strange that it was hated when it came out, so much so that no one wanted to finance his next films. 7/10.

Présentation ou Charlotte et son steak / Presentation, or Charlotte and Her Steak(1960)
This is a short film about love. Walter (Jean-Luc Godard) tries to make his girlfriend jealous only to realise that he could end up loosing here in stead of dragging her closer to him self. This film lacks the poetic atmosphere which Rohmer is so good at creating in many of his other films, but is does show talet. Godard is quite good in it. 6/10.

La boulangère de Monceau / The Bakery Girl of Monceau (1963)
This beautiful short is the first of six moral tales. The film is about a young man who has fallen in love with a woman he does not know. He walks the same neighbourhood day after day in hope to meet her. She disappears for the longest time but meanwhile he gets to know a bakery girl which complicates things.

This film has a very sexy scene, even though everyone is dressed and it takes place on the street (I’m talking about the scene where the man talks to the Bakery Girl outside and touches her neck at the same time. I don’t know if others find that scene sexy. I think the reason it did something for me was because of the way it was filmed (almost from his view). I got the feeling that I was touching her while watching the film. Strange! It would be nice to hear if others had the same feeling.

Ask me why I love this film and I could not tell you. I think it is the poetic feeling, the lack of pretence and the haunting simplicity. It just feels like reading a poem and I’m a sucker for poems The theme of this is revisited in the others moral tales, particularly My Night at Maud’s. It is quite interesting to compare the two, because even though the dilemma is the same the reason behind it is different. SPOILERS!!! Here the dilemma is more about how you treat others SPOILERS (for My Night at Maud’s!!!!) but in My Night at Maud’s it is more a question of a Pascal wager, should he pick the save bet or the girl who is more fun but does not offer a secure future. 9/10

La Carrière de Suzanne / Suzanne’s Career (1963)
This is the second of Rohmer’s moral tales. It is about three friends, Bertrand, a young shy boy, his best friend, Guillaume, who uses people, especially women and Guillaume girlfriend Suzanne, whom Guillaume uses and plays with, even going so far as to try to bankrupt her. Bertrand feels pity for her but has little respect for a woman who let’s people walk all over her. Does Bertrand really see her for what she is or is he maybe missing something? This is a nice film (even though it is not among the best of the moral tales. I especially liked the end. 7/10

Nadja à Paris / Nadja in Paris (1964)
This short could be called a city symphony because it is about Paris, but it is also about Nadja, a foreign American-Yugoslavian girl and how she spends her days in Paris, how she sees the people, the town and the culture. I don’t think it is really successful. I did not find Nadja interesting and Rohmer mostly used shots to compliment her text, instead of saying something with the camera. 5/10

Eric Rohmer – Paris vu par… / Six in Paris (1965)
This is a collection of six short films, all directed by French New Wave directors. The whole collection is rather strong but it does lack a unifying factor. The fact that it takes place in Paris is not enough, IMO.
- The first segment is “Saint Germain-des-Pres, directed by Jean Douchet, is a nice comedy about a french playboy and his one night stand with a young Canadian girl. The film is not a very flattering portrait of men.
- The next segment is “Gare du Nord”, directed by Jean Rouch. Most of the film is one shot (15 long). It starts with an argument between lovers. The girl walks out and meets a strange man outside who asks her to spend some time with him. Powerful short film with a shocking ending.
- The third segment is “Rue Saint-Denis”, directed by Jean-Daniel Pollet. It tells the story of a shy young man who brings a rude prostitute home. One almost got sympathy for Jack the Ripper after watching the prostitute humiliate the boy in this strange comedy.
- Eric Rohmer directs the Fourth segment, called “Place de l’Etoile”. It is quite different from any of his other films. It is a comedy about a man who encounters a crazy man on the streets of Paris and thinks he might have accidentally killed him. Rohmer proves that he is just as capable to make a farce as philosophical dramas. The film has a silent slap stick comedy feel to it.
- Jean-Luc Godard directs the fifth film, “Montparnasse-Levallois”. It is about a young woman who sends two letters to her lovers, where she confesses her love to one of them and wants to break up with the other. The problem is that she believes that she might have mixed the letters and tries to correct the matter.
- Claude Chabrol directs the last and the best segment. It is about a boy who discovers that he can use ear-plugs keep from hearing his parents argue. The Parent’s are played by Chabrol and his wife (at the time). Wonderful short film with a brilliant ending. An interesting collection worth watching, especially for the Chabrol segment! 7/10

Une étudiante d’aujourd’hui / A Modern Coed (1966)
A short documentary about women in French universities (in 1966). It does not really give much insight into the subject but it is interesting that filming women study was in someway informative and interesting at that time! And the narrator talks about the women like they are not the same species as men. It is almost like watching a nature program about some strange animal. This film shows well how far we have come in gender equality. 5/10.

La Collectionneuse / The Collector (1967)
This is the fourth of Rohmer’s moral tales and his first film in colour. Again, like in Suzanne’s Career, we have two guys who treat a girl badly. The girl is played by Haydée Politoff, one of the most beautiful women I have ever seen (how could anyone not want to sleep with her?). Haydée sleeps around and takes life as it comes. This irritates the other two who try to find happiness in inactivity. This sets into a motion a hunting game. The big question is who is hunting whom and to what end. SPOILERS. I liked how Haydée wins in the end by creating a desire and then walking away. Or that’s how I understood it at least. This film is not among the best of the moral tales and it might be the darkest of them all. Still it is a very good film and worth watching. 7/10

Ma nuit chez Maud / My Night at Maud’s (1969)
This is the third of Rohmer’s moral tales and my favorite of the six. The cinematography in this film is amazing! Anyone who doubs the cinematic nature of Rohmer’s films after seeing this film has to be blind. The acting is superb and the theory he is working with is so interesting. Spoilers! The main character makes a Pascal wager in love (or that’s how I see it). He picks the one he could most likely have a comfortable and nice life with (because they have more in common) rather the one he could love more and challenge him and make his life interesting (where he would have to take a chance). And here he shows us the weakness of the Pascal wager. Yes it might be wiser to believe in God (just in case) but then you might also be missing out of a lot of fun just because you want to be careful. The wager is therefore not as much of a win win situation as Pascal thought. Or at least that’s how I interpreted Rohmer’s interpretation of Pascal Pure gold! 10/10

Le genou de Claire / Claire’s Knee (1970)
This is the fifth of Rohmer’s moral tales. Jerome, a middle aged man soon to be married plays with the feelings of two young girls, to test his own emotions and theirs. One of them is Claire, but he has an unquenchable desire to touch her knee. Jerome is urged by a friend of his Aurora to play with the girls, just so she can get new material for her novels. Jerome comes off as less mature than these girls. He wants to believe that he is in full control but is not. The last scenes is interesting. SPOILERS! Was his action moral or immoral? Was he being kind when he told her about her boyfriend being unfaithful and then touched her knee, to comport her but at the same time to satisfy his own needs? Can some deeds be both moral and immoral at the same time? Is morality defined by intention or perception? One of the biggest troubles with the film is the actress who plays Aurora. She is really terrible! It feels like she is reading every line, as clearly and slowly as she possible can. 8/10.

L’amour l’après-midi / Chloe in the Afternoon / Love in the Afternoon (1972)
This is the sixth and last of Rohmer’s moral tales and the only one where we have a married couple. Frederic is married to Helene, has one child and another on the way. In walks Chloé, a women he knew and has not seen for years. He tries to push her away to begin with but little by little he starts to talk him self into having an affair with her. This could actually be a Woody Allen film. The mood and the style feels very Allen-ish. I really liked this film. I think it is the second best of the Moral Tales films (the best being My Night at Maud’s). This is such an honest film about marriage and I’m guessing that most people have been in Frederic shoes (and also reacted the same way he does in the end). SPOILERS. The end is totally brilliant (and I’m not just talking about him running away (fantasies are often more luring than reality). I loved the scene when Helene breaks down. I’m not sure how to interpret that scene though and maybe it is intended to be open. Is Helene crying because she has also been unfaithful or because she knew about Frederic and Chloé and is just happy that he is back? Anyway, I think the moral issue of the film is why people are faithful. Why don’t we sleep around as a general rule? Where does that moral come from and why do we live by it. Great film. 9/10

Die Marquise von O… / The Marquise of O (1976)
Marquise finds out that she is pregnant but does not know how that could have happened. She has not had a sexual relationship for years. No one believes her story and even her family turns against her.

This is an unusual Rohmer film. It is in German, it is a period drama and it does not play like any other Rohmer film I have seen. In fact it reminds me more of a Bresson or a Herzog film (kind of like a mixture of them two). The beginning did put me off a bit. The whole set felt so fake (especially the war part), the costumes too clean, the acting too stiff and the camera work too TV like. It felt like a filmed play. The film did however win me over when I realised that Rohmer is working with a known silent film tradition called Kammerspiel. F.W. Murnau, Georg Wilhelm Pabst, Carl Theodor Dreyer and Carl Mayer all made Kammerspiel films (to name few of them), melodrama which usually focuses on character psychology and takes place in an isolated place and time. Rohmer even uses inter titles, like in silent films, to hint at what he is doing. 7/10.

Eric Rohmer – Perceval le Gallois / Perceval (1978)
Ever wondered how a Rohmer musical would look like? Perceval is your answer. This film is based on a 12th century book/poem and combines music, cinema, theatre and poetry. Perceval, a young man, becomes enamoured with some knights he sees and sets out to become one. Perceval’s journey, which takes him to king Arthur, the Fisher King and even Jesus Christ, is an exploration of the codes of the time. Musicals are by no means realistic and Rohmer is usually all about realism. One gets the feeling that once Rohmer decided to make this into a musical and use the poetic language of the original poem/book he decided to go as far away from realism as possible. He does not try to hide that the stage is fake. In fact he points it out. Its intense theatrical stylisation remind one of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. Even the characters explain in a poetic language what they are doing and why.

This may sound like a terrible idea but for some reason it works. I was enchanted by its strangeness and poetic feel and I loved the middle age music. I also liked how untraditional the story line is. We follow one person, then another, then the other again and (SPOILERS!!) then end with a passion play! This film and The Marquise de O are a strange side step for Rohmer and are so different from his other films that it is hard to believe that he directed them. Strange and fascinating film! 8/10

I just saw Antichrist (just got the Blu Ray). This is most definitely one of the best films from 2009. Why do people have such a problem with it? Yes it does have some graphic scenes but no more than in most horror films today! This is a beautiful and poetic but at the same time quite difficult and horrific.

OK, here is my take on the film. SPOILERS!!! It plays like a drama but it is in fact a horror film. I believe she is a witch and is afraid to face her own identity. She might also be mentally so disturbed that she started to believe that she was a witch. If it is the latter then her mental problems started before the child died. She had tortured the boy before that (by tying the shoes wrong to his feet) and she saw what was happening when he climbed to the table and did nothing.

There is also an underlying reality to this. We usually see mothers as symbol of love but mothers often torture their children and even kill them. I personally know off three new incidents in my small community where children have been taken away from their mothers because they tortured them. This is what Trier is talking about in this amazing film. Women are capable of much evil, just as men are. In the middle ages it was called witchcraft. Today it a psychological disturbance. The man in the film does not realise this. He thinks she is just getting over the loss of a child, when in fact she is getting over the loss of her old self and embracing her new self (as a witch). Ironically, he helps her to do just that.

I loved the animals in the film, the way they are used and what they symbolise. There is a constellation map in the film which explains the meaning of the three main animals. The deer symbolises grief, the fox symbolises pain and the raven symbolises despair.

I believe that a good film should stay with you. Make you want to read what others have said, look at the extra material, think about scenes and even watch them again to be sure that you saw it right. Antichrist did just that to me.

Here is a crazy idea, I have been thinking about for some time. If you could only pick one director for each decade, whom would you give the decades to?

Here is my suggestion:

1890-1899 Lumière
1900-1909 Georges Méliès
1910-1919 D.W. Griffith
1920-1929 F.W. Murnau
1930-1939 Josef von Sternberg
1940-1949 Powell and Pressburger
1950-1959 Alfred Hitchcock
1960-1969 Michelangelo Antonioni
1970-1979 Andrei Tarkovsky
1980-1989 Woody Allen
1990-1999 Abbas Kiarostami
2000-2009 Chan-wook Park

How would your list look like?

This month I will be studying the films by Abbas Kiarostami, not only those who he has directed but also those he has written and are directed by others.

I stared my month on his first film, The Bread and Alley. It is a 10 min. long silent film about a dog and his clever way of
staying alive. The film is quite brilliant. It starts with a boy trying to get home, but there is a dog in his way who will not let him pass. In the end the boy throws a bread to dog and the dog lets him pass, and even follows him as a good friend (in hope of more food). The mother of the boy does not however like the dog and locks him outside. The dog lies down and along comes another boy and the story repeats it self. It is well filmed and has some nice music. I strongly recommend it! It can be found on Youtube.

Two Solutions for One Problem is a 5 min long film, which must have been made for children’s program on TV, and supposed to tech children that fighting does not solve problems. It is not bad and has some comical moments. It can also be found on youtube.

The Chorus is a wonderful short film about a grandfather who tunes off his hearing aid. I’m sure we would all sometimes like to do that. But there is a reason why we have been given ears, because no matter how nice it is to turn a deaf ear to the world, we need to hear to be a part of it (or at least try to hear). That goes for us as humans as well as for our governments (there might be a underlying political message here). There is also a nice joke in the end. This great film can be found on youtube.

If there is something Iranians know how to do then it is children films. They are always so sincere and meaningful. And the best thing is that they are just as interesting for grownups as they are for children. I”Where Is the Friend’s Home?” is one of many great children films from Iran and also one of many by Kiarostami. It is about a boy (Ahmed) who has taken (by a mistake) a notebook from his friend and has to return it, because otherwise his friend might be kicked out of school. The problem is that grown ups tell children to do good but when they try to do that, they are told to do other things, or just ignored. What should Ahmed do, do as his parents (and grandfather) tell him or follow his heart and do what he believes it right. This may not sound like a huge drama but the film had me at the edge of my seat most of the time. This is a film parents need to see. A wonderful film about how difficult it often is to be good in this world, especially when parents give you conflicting information.

To be continued…

September 2006 I started an Internet film club with a boy from Denmark. The members of the club pick one director or a theme each month to study (this month we are watching Abbas Kiarostami). The members watch the films by them self and then discusses them on the net with others. My blog is mainly going to be related to the activity of this club. This club has been the light in my life and made it possible for me to watch and study films in a more organised manner.

Here is a list of everything we have seen until now.

Those who would like to become a member can do so here.

“Cinema Europe: The Other Hollywood” (1995) is a brilliant docoumentary by Kevin Brownlow, Michael Winterbottom, David Gill and Dan Carter.

It should appeal to anyone interested in film history, especially the silent era. Its goal is to document the birth of cinema in Europe and its development all the way to the early years of the sound film – in just 6 hours! Six hours is way to short for such an endeavor but the filmmakers manage to pack amazing amount of information in to these six hours, so much in fact that one is left with the desire to see it immediately again.

The film is in six parts. The first covering the birth of cinema in Europe, the second one is about the Swedish silent film industry, the third one about the German Masters, the fourth one about France, the fifth one about Britain and the last one about the death of silent cinema and the arrival of sound.

One would expect that the German part would be the best of the six but it was unfortunately one of the least interesting, IMO. This may have something to do with the fact that I knew the German story quite well, but I just felt that it lacked insight and a clear direction. The same goes for the Swedish part. The narrator spends most of the time retelling the plot of the films in question, including their end.

The France and English parts are pure pleasure to watch. They are full of well based social insight and focus more on techniques and experiments than story lines. The British one is admirably honest and at part quite funny.

The transfer of the films they show is exceptionally good and the collections of the shots they gather together here is a goldmine. Many of the films shown from in the documentary are still not available on VHS or DVD.

On the down side though, I felt they often chose wrong scenes from the films they picked, and left out much superior scenes, but such is always a matter of opinion.

Cinema Europe is a true gem which I’m going to revisit again and again in the future. It should be on the shelf of any serious film buff.

Welcome to Icelandcinemanow.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!