Anyone have any idea what the significance of the ending was? Francoise knew Maud somehow? Was she the girl that Maud's husband had had the affair with? I know it wasn't all that complicated but I think it was late when I was watching it, so it went a bit over my head....
anyway this was a fantastic film, maybe not the best Rohmer I've seen, but up there.
[deleted]
Maud knew who Francoise was but not vice versa. Yes, she was the one in the affair. Complicated is a matter of opinion though. Ive thought about this ending quite a bit and always feel as though there is something else implied that I'm missing(the beauty of all Rohmer's films). The fact that Maud is non-religious, astutely intelectual, and of course, alone, is of significance contrasted with the faithfully Catholic couple with child playing in the surf. But knowing other Rohmer films makes this an easy answer. He is stringent in not judging his characters which makes this yet another carefully crafted conflict to inspire thought and consideration.
shareHmmm...I think that Francoise did know who Maude was. Didn't you see the look on her face at the end of the movie, when she sees Maude at the beach? It was a very guilty look. I think she knew exactly who Maude was...
shareI thought that Maud and Francoise had had a lesbian relationship. That explained why Maud kept referring to the "blonde" in such an insinuating way. But now I am not so sure, she might have been the "other woman" in the triangle.
shareFrancoise had an affair with Maud's husband, who eventually left both of them, that is all. As far as I know, there is no lesbians or gays in any Rohmer's films.
shareYes that ending makes so much sense, I can't believe I didn't see it originally. Francoise was the one who had an affair with Maud's husband, but then it ended, and she met Jean-Louis who spent that one night with Maud. Wow, thats great, how did I not see that?
P.S. why did Jean-Louis tell francoise that he slept with Maud that morning? He tells her this not on the beach 5 years later, but out in the snow in present day, that last scene before the beach. He says I slept with her that morning before I met you. Why would he say that if it isn't true?
I guess Rohmer wants us to ask ourselves that.
Two possible answers:-
When he says Maud was his "last fling" (or whatever the French is) he's actually referring to his last flirtation with free thinking before settling down to bourgeois normality.
He's just showing off, he wants to impress his wife with what a lad he was.
I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity.
He could see in his wife's expression that she felt awful, not because of what he did, but she did (the affair with Maud's husband). So, he says it was a fling to make it sound more salacious and to make Francoise feel better about what she did. Much like that last scene before the beach scene. They hint at each others' past and Jean-Louis tells her they are "even." She then says they never have to talk about it again. Just like she does five years later on the beach.
share No one has posted here in a while but Ill throw in my two cents just in case.
As for Maud's and Françoise's connection, Françoise is the women who was having an affair with Mauds husband. And they both knew who eachother were.
As for the meaning of the ending, well, for me it boils down to this. For all of Jean-Louis' "morals" hes really done nothing but aid himself while as a result hurts others(and himself in the long run). Now I ask, how moral is that?
I dont believe as it's been mentioned that Maud is alone(i.e. punished) because she lacked faith while those with it have been rewarded. IMO Maud is a victum of others "faith". Jean-Louis wouldnt really take Maud seriously because she didnt meet his "conditions", yet his blonde despite everything else passes due Jean's pre concieved notions.
Here the "sinner" has been granted a "happily-ever-after" while the goodhearted Maud is left alone.
Thats not to say theres anything wrong with "beliefs" but theres a big difference between having faith and thinking as Jean does. Faith is more of an excuse for him.
Then theres the fact that I dont think Jean knows what love is at all(or he chooses not to accept it). Instead he chooses his lovers based on a concious level ahead of time instead of letting love take its natural course. I think this is proven by the fact that he picked out his blonde to be his wife before even meeting her and from that point on wasn't going to let anyone or anything stop that from happening hence blocking himself off from the possibility of true love(Maud). Thats not to say that I do not believe in knowing the person your going to spend your life with the moment you see them, Im saying that I think that's exactly what happened, only with Maud. But Jean was to stubborn to accept that. IMO Jean and his Blonde will not be happy in the end.
Such good replies--I hadn't put two and two together about the affair, either, and the ideas of Maud being punished or a victim or other's religion are such good food for thought.
I'd like to add that I also wondered why Jean-Louis "lied" to Francoise about sleeping with Maud (which has now been explained here), but I watched a tiny bit of the "On Pascal" feature, with the interview between the priest and Pascal scholar (I think--it was late), and they mention how Lying is the greatest sin, and if that's the case then Jean-Louis really goes against his faith in order to cement his relationship with a woman that he has chosen precisely because of faith.
And as the "Happily-ever-after" goes, I was actually struck by how free and unencumbered and more "happy" Maud looks at the end, while Jean-Louis is chained, imo, to a woman who looks to be moody, still unsure of her choice, slightly bitter and distrustful, and probably emotionally manipulative. Of course he made his choice, too ("choices" being "easy" for him, in his own words), strongly, as so many others do, and as has been said before, is probably very comfortable in that type of constant battle.
And as the "Happily-ever-after" goes, I was actually struck by how free and unencumbered and more "happy" Maud looks at the end, while Jean-Louis is chained, imo, to a woman who looks to be moody, still unsure of her choice, slightly bitter and distrustful, and probably emotionally manipulative.I agree that Jean-Louis is "chained" but I don't know about all of the other things you've suggested. Maud, for instance, was not happy during that last scene; she couldn't have been. There was a sadness to her meeting with Jean-Louis after so many years. He had married and had come to the beach on a family vacation while she was alone and once again contemplating (or was in the middle of a) divorce. After she bids him farewell, we last see her ascending a hill, her back turned to the camera. Hopefully, that means better things are in store for her but I don't know. She's alone. Contrast this shot with that of Jean-Louis and his family running excitedly towards the beach (not before avoiding a confrontation about his wife's failure to conduct herself according to their moral code and burying the whole thing altogether, hence their empty facade of a relationship) and you'll notice that none of them were truly happy. And sadly, it was the hypocrisy of the people who championed religious moral codes that deprived everyone of a meaningful existence... whereas the atheist - the one with no beliefs - was ironically the most moral.
thats a good insight to film pushnlacs. felt it under context but you made the point. This reminded me of "You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger (2010)" by Woody Allen.
shareJ-L is divorced from his own lifeblood, hence Maud's comment about his lack of spontaneity. And, as we the viewer recognise, his intellectualising. Francoise is a bit more mysterious but she does not want to admit her desire nature and previous trangression anymore than J-L would like to admit he has a succession of affairs base don lust and desire.
So in terms of a happy ever after ... they might be well suited and the final lie between them on the beach suggests how they might live together quite happily.
The good hearted Maud must accept that with truth and a desire for relationships based on truth she will spend periods alone. She may be able to patch up her second marriage so all is not lost to her.
I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.share
Thank you. I disagree with most of the interpretations of the ending in this thread (and some of them strike me as surprisingly gross misreadings), but yours hits the nail on the head for me.
During his night with Maud, Maud casts a light of truth upon some of his moral illusions. Why does he make his moral decisions? Are they merely made for the sake of his image in society? Does the way that he abstracts his morality as externally imposed rules of Catholicism mask his own selfish or at least personal motivations?
In the end of the film, it begins to dawn on him that Francoise is Maud's "other woman," and that the sight of her makes Francoise feel intense guilt and shame. He is about to assure her that he never had sex with Maud when he understands that saying he had sex will make Francoise feel better, as if they are again, in some way, "even." Notice how immediately effective his words are, allowing Francoise to shake off her malaise. Here, at the end-- owing to the delayed moral influence of Maud-- he makes a truly moral decision, one based on self-sacrifice for the sake of another, with no sense of social reward, abstracted principles, or evasion of responsibility through a notion of externally imposed fate.
It is a nuanced ending, it seems to me, with contradictory lingering emotions, but his final moral act has allowed for the possibility of some happiness in their lives.
Francoise is Maud's "other woman," and that the sight of her makes Francoise feel intense guilt and shame
why did Jean-Louis tell francoise that he slept with Maud that morning? He tells her this not on the beach 5 years later, but out in the snow in present day, that last scene before the beach. He says I slept with her that morning before I met you. Why would he say that if it isn't true?To spare her the embarrassment for being found out for having cheated with Maud's husband. J-L says this. And therein lies the strength of love and its moral hypocrisy.
I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.share
From what I interpreted...
Francoise was the blonde Catholic woman that was having an affair with Maud's husband. This was also the same man she was still having an affair with just before meeting Triningant. He then lied and said he slept with Maud to make her feel like they're both guilty of doing "cheating" on each other.
At the beach, he's about to reveal the truth, that he didn't actually sleep with Maud and was saying it to make her feel better. Then he realizes she is the blonde Catholic that Maud was talking about, because she recognized Maud and felt guilty, so he said she was his "last fling" - maintaining the guilt.
Well, Jean-Louis and Maud did actually sleep together (in the same bed). They just didn't have sex.
shareAt the end of the film, the connection between Maud and Françoise is revealed (to the characters). While this seems superficially important, it's actually irrelevant beyond what it's employed to demonstrate. (Perhaps that's why the viewer doesn't find out explicitly what that connection was, although it's pretty strongly implied.) Through it, we discover that after 5 years of marriage, Jean-Louis and Françoise still don't discuss their past and Jean-Louis proudly tells us how he filters what he says to his wife so as to keep her emotions sheltered. All of this is in stark contrast with Jean-Louis and Maud's relationship after only a single night.
At the beginning of the film, Jean-Louis tells us that he knew -- from a point before they ever met -- that Françoise would be his wife. While this seems superficially cute and harmless, it foreshadows how he eventually selects her over Maud based on a very crude and questionable principle (shared religious beliefs).
~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~