I like Rohmer realistic films, without background music, without closeups. A young 23 years old girl, still quite narcissistic, suddenly decides to reshape her life, specifically, to get married. The idea overwhelms her so completely that she's no longer interested in selecting someone she loves, rather impatiently first available candidate. She believes that the power of her charms (looks and personality), her resolve, will win over anyone. She's being supported by her girl-friend and somewhat skeptical but loving mother. Her plans are frustrated despite of her extraordinary efforts. The man is simply not interested.
There are many lessons in this example. Personality of the main character is very well developed, palpable, vital. I feel I knew someone like that. None of the characters are idealized, they all are very real. We see a slice of life, specifically French life, with its values, culture, attitudes.
Rohmer, first and most importantly, a teacher, helps us to see something important in human relationships, something very subtle.
Rohmer died this year at the age of 89. He lived longer than any of the French New Wave directors, a movement he belonged to. He believed that his films are closer to a kind of novel rather than to a theater. In my opinion, his usage of cinematographic tools was too subdued, timid, as if he was not quite sure what to do with them - and this is reflected in my rating. But whatever tools he did used, he did it well. His uniqueness and importance is beyond any doubt.
There are many lessons in this example. Personality of the main character is very well developed, palpable, vital. I feel I knew someone like that. None of the characters are idealized, they all are very real. We see a slice of life, specifically French life, with its values, culture, attitudes.
Rohmer, first and most importantly, a teacher, helps us to see something important in human relationships, something very subtle.
Rohmer died this year at the age of 89. He lived longer than any of the French New Wave directors, a movement he belonged to. He believed that his films are closer to a kind of novel rather than to a theater. In my opinion, his usage of cinematographic tools was too subdued, timid, as if he was not quite sure what to do with them - and this is reflected in my rating. But whatever tools he did used, he did it well. His uniqueness and importance is beyond any doubt.