discuss with me


is it just me or was this movie absolutely pointless?

firstly, i'd like to complain about the main character Jerome. He is 35 years old and he doesn't want anything more from a budding young girl, than to touch her knee?? then ALL of his desires are satisfied..?? to me his character just seemed too,, unrealistic. a normal 35 year old single man would have, I THINK, laid her to bed or at least make an attempt at it.. he seems so inhuman by being this way. and then denying that he wanted to sleep with her?? and just say that he made the moves for the girls for the desperately needed "inspiration" of his writer friend?? it sounds soo fake to me. it's ridiculous in fact! if he didn't even care for the girls in the first place and "thought of all women the same" then he shouldn't have even made an attempt at the romance..

and this "comedy" wasn't even funny, it was awkward. it didn't make me question what was moral or immoral, because at the end they go about the scenario like it was all just a game.. its not real even though i kissed a underage girl, ahahah!
and at the end claire learns NOTHING from her so called "consult" and doesn't dump Gilles,, he just explains his dumbass story and she goes about it like every thing's fine again. wtf?!? is there no GROWTH in this people?? any changes?? everyone stayed the same during the whole duration of the movie. no conclusion, no epifany, no sex? COME ON! why didn't anything happen?? why does it always feel like at the end of a promising movie some douche bag comes over and cuts the ending out of the film. i left i was left with nothing in my head, just some ramblings two old people had while they strolled along some beautiful french countryside, that i would never see. i was disappointed, for such a waste of my time.

but,,, on the other hand, Claire had a really sweet black dress. and Gilles was hot. so, i guess it wasn't all that bad.

please tell me if im wrong or not~

reply

[deleted]

Man....you are pointless ,not the film , what are you complaining about? Go get a life or stop watching hard to follow up/not solely for entertainment movies. Jeezzzzz

reply

Yes, ok_note, you're wrong.

Several of the user comments do a very good job of explaining what the film is about. It's rather subtle and (like most if not all of Rohmer's films) mostly about the difference between what the characters say and what is really going on.

So to address some of the points you made - although Jerome says his desires are satisfied by the knee, we're not meant to believe him. We're actually being given a portrait of self-deception.

The film is meant to be awkward rather than funny, and the fact that the characters treat love as a game is (as in Dangerous Liaisons) something we are expected to be critical of.

Claire stays with Gilles because she likes him and they are suited to each other, simple as that.

The idea that people have to grow and change over the course of a film is a common myth beloved of Hollywood screenwriting gurus. It is the audience's understanding of the characters that should grow and change here. Of course that does depend on the audience being open to that and paying attention.

What actually happens in this film, among other things, is that a grown man becomes so consumed by his own selfish pride and frustration that he makes a young girl cry. I'd say that was quite a significant event. It doesn't have to be as blunt as sex or death to be significant.

I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity.

reply

You seem to miss the point. This is a movie enriched in the art of subtlety; & a movie enriched in the dichotomy of appearance versus reality.

The diplomat is a gentleman, and remains so throughout yet is clearly deluded with his own sense of attractiveness & self importance. And is that such an unusual condition for a man who was once surely a most handsome youth, but is now reaching middle age? Claire simply does not find him in the least bit attractive - unlike her sister, Laura; who was almost won over simply by his being there. That in itself must have initially sent his confidence sky high. However, when Laura's sister, Claire, arrived it was instantly apparent that she had no interest in him whatsoever. As would be normal of a stunningly beautiful teenager, she had an unquestionably handsome hunk for a boyfriend. That was a does of reality from which most persons would find no quick escape. His ego, on the other hand, could not accept that a girl so stunningly beautiful would have no interest in him whatsoever. After all, his life was spent never quite being physically comitted to any one women in particular. He was a bit of playboy all his days... (and btw I've most rarely seen a more beautiful actress in any movie, as Claire was indeed extremely well cast for the part. There is not one mainstream actress working now who is half as beautiful as Laurence De Monaghan was back then. I can't believe she didn't become a huge star in her day. But I digress.) As the end of the movie showed, Claire was in fact quite repelled by him eventually, choosing to stay away from him as he left - pretending that she was sleeping. It seems that he did not pick this up at all, which goes to also prove how deluded he was.

Of course he would like to have slept with Claire, but that would have been an utterly unrealistic goal - given all the circumstances. Nor was it one that he'd particularly care to vocalise to anyone who'd care to listen. And he knew it too well. Most people would deal with such knowledge in a different way - with more of a sense of regret and edginess in her company. But he, being not so much "a normal 35 year old" as you put it, dealt with the sense of rejection by re-directing his desires such that he would not feel the sense of loss one would otherwise feel in such circumstances: All of us must know, after all, the feeling of desiring the realistically undesirable. And at different times of our lives we deal with this desire in different ways - according to how our experiences unfold. Also let's not forget that in the company of his friend, Aurora, he would have been the subject of great ridicule if he had desperately wanted Claire when he was about to betroth another woman: thus it would have been quite ridiculous had he shown such deeply hungering desire to win 'all of her' over - when he was so close to devoting his life to another woman entirely!

His focus on her knee was a manifestation of his inward desire to have sex with her; that is to say, to control her greatest weakness as he saw it. And by his definition he 'won' what he sought (by touching her knee after slyly orchestrating a chance to do so) and we must enjoy the spectacle of seeing someone being so awkwardly deluded by a completely unrealistic sense of achievement. It was one of the most cringe worthy scenes in the history of cinema and brilliantly acted by both. As spectators we could feel the reality of how much of a fool he was making of himself to Claire, who was well aware of what he was up to - being no fool herself.

Nonetheless, to read the movie solely as a comedy is to do it an injustice - that of misreading the subtlety of its being a most insightful intellectual study as to certain traits of the human condition.

Also, your criticism that Claire was "under age" was not a correct observation either, as 16 is not 'under age' in France nor is it so in most of Europe. Albeit the concept of a man in his mid thirties being involved with a female so young would of course be socially (if not legally) quite contemptible, or at least the subject of ridicule in social terms. And, his almost equally middle aged female friend clearly found his interest in the two girls amusing more so than contemptible.

Lastly, the real action of the movie was in the verbal exchanges between the players. This is the hallmark of the director's great movies. To seek 'action', 'sex' etc. in other forms is to open yourself to the prospect of great disappointment in a movie such as this. If you did not enjoy the brilliant and most insightful verbal exchanges (as I saw them to be) then of course the movie would be lost on you. I was brilliantly entertained by all the food for thought not to mention the stunning scenery and the dreamy pace of an existence that was so blessed for so few privileged people in this world: People for whom life's troubles amounted to little more than they should not ride their speedboat to close to other swimmers!

Overall, this was a masterly study by a great director, and no prizes for guessing that I loved it very much. Brilliant work Mr. Rohmer 9/10

reply

Fantastic summation. I agree entirely.

reply

great post!

i didnt find the knee scene to be particularly cringey though because i found claire to be receptive to it, on some level at least. in the moment she was open to the act in her unassuredness; it's only later when she treats it all with a shrug that the humour really comes through

reply

Excellent explanation of the film! I have seen it three times, and have always found it fascinating, subtle and uncomfortable. You have confirmed what I have felt about it...but I was never quite sure I understood it all until now.

reply