There are a lot of spoilers in what I'm about to say:
The way I'm thinking about this movie is with a little more attention to Chloe. She doesn't believe in marriage, but rather, she believes in spontaneity, in being true to the moment. Frederic, on the other hand, is too scared, probably of old age and death and so he clings to the goofy little boy life/the safe abode of the family construct so that he can always have a sense of having achieved something. He has to have things, he has to own things in order to appreciate them. Whereas Chloe can never be owned, because she is too free and generous, too busy living and moving through life, spreading her love and talents around, honestly. She also makes some predictions for Frederic's future, that I believe will happen. For example, she says that eventually Frederic will cheat on his wife even if it's not with her, that some future girl will reap the benefit of all the work she's done. And, what a great deal she does! She is completely honest with him, while he only spews lies to her, telling her that he loves her, that they make a cute couple. Also, he says that he wishes he could be married to her as if he were living two perfect lives. The problem is that he never behaves as if he believes what he says. For example, every time they're about to have intercourse, he starts yapping to Chloe about his wife, which to me means that he is giving preference to one "wife" rather than living two "perfect lives simultaneously" as he said he wanted. He is shown to be an empty-talker, whereas Chloe is the honest do-er. In the end, Frederic leaves Chloe just after she has shared with him her most vulnerable, naked state, to go back to his wife with whom he still can't be honest, and who isn't honest with him either. The movie ends as Frederic and his wife have intercourse, not wildly, but very calmly and cleanly, dispassionately. To me, this shows that Chloe's prediction has a good chance of coming true, since their life together seems to be rapidly deteriorating, regardless of the fact that they remain together at the end.
In short, I think Rohmer has given us a subtly anti-bourgeois movie, almost subversively so.
P.S. It would be nice, Blaine3-2, if you would delete some of the blank space in your answer, since I almost skipped over the following comments, as I thought there weren't any after yours.
*This is a place to write anything I think is important or smart or cute. It ends all my comments.*
reply
share