El amor en la tarde

No other director has exposed, analyzed and interpreted love relations as profoundly and as maturely as Eric Rohmer. His cycles `Six Moral Tales' and `Comedies and Proverbs', based on his own screenplays, are the best examples of how cinema can be at the same time `talkative', philosophic and incredibly effective. Rohmer's movies prove that cinema can fully explore love without being melodramatic, naive or predictable. `Chloe in the Afternoon' (`L'amour l'après midi') is the sixth and the last of his moral tales and tells the story of Frédéric, a married lawyer who loves his wife but feels tempted to have an affair with seductive Chloe, a friend of old times who reenters his now bourgeois life. As in the case of many of his other films, Rohmer's screenplay is in itself worth-reading, with intelligent dialogues and interesting ups and downs in the love triangle, but his directing of the three actors, emphasizing their ambiguities (Frédéric's principles and impulses; Hélène's apparent self-assurance and hidden anguish; Chloe's solitude and tricks), is also very impressive. `Chloe in the Afternoon' is a good reflection on the dilemmas of monogamy and the traps of possessiveness. One more to the admirable list of Rohmer's movies about love (8/10).

Great film by Rohmer. Another one that puts moral dilemma to the "grand jour". Emotions, feelings, passion, love: those are the ingredients so dearly associated to Rohmer. He explores human fallibility by telling us the story of Frédéric (Bernard Verley). He's married to Hélène (Françoise Verley), but along the way comes Chloé (Zouzou). Will he let go to temptation?

Like other movies from Rohmer, "L'Amour l'après-midi" is presented like a book. It's a great combination of cinematic and literary experience.

Out of 100, I give it 84. That's good for *** out of ****.

Seen at home, in Toronto, on November 18th, 2002.

Chloe in the Afternoon is the last of six moral tales of Eric Rohmer and my favorite of the three. Frederic (Bernard Varley), is a happily married, well-to-do lawyer married to Helene (Francoise Verley), a somewhat chilly English professor. He is attracted to other women and misses the time when he was free. "I feel marriage closes me in", he says, "cloisters me, and I want to escape. The prospect of happiness opening indefinitely before me sobers me. I find myself missing that time, not too long ago, when I could experience the pangs of anticipation". Frederic rationalizes that his fantasies about other women are merely a reflection of the depth of his love for his wife. In one amusing sequence, he dreams that he possesses an amulet that gives him control over the will of any passer-by, a power of which he takes decided advantage of.

When Chloe (Zouzou), a free-spirited friend he used to know shows up, Frederic finds a release in her companionship and is able to confide in her in a way that he is unable to do with his wife. They spend afternoons together talking about love and relationships. She confesses that she doesn't want to be married but would like to have a child, particularly one with Frederic. The central tension of the film is the choice Frederic must make between his passion for Chloe and his love for his wife. Although he is tempted to have an affair with Chloe, he spends too much time pondering the pros and cons and doesn't act. Chloe on the other hand is in love with Frederic and has a come-what-may attitude toward his entanglements.

Like Jerome (Claire's Knee) and Jean-Louis (My Night at Maud's), Frederic is weak and indecisive and is forever attempting to justify his inability to choose. He stands on the edge of temptation but is never quite ready to jump. Rohmer does not, however, make any moral judgments but hints that Frederic's temptation and pangs of conscience are something most of us go through at some time in our lives.

Though there is a lot of talking in Chloe in the Afternoon, it never seems false or tiresome. This is a very charming film that Pauline Kael called "in every respects, a perfect film". It has a natural rhythm with characters that are so real that you don't want to leave them when the film ends. As Frederic's ultimate choice looms, we are privy to some sharp and insightful dialogue that illuminates the complexity of relationships. The story is told from the husband's point of view and we are left wondering how different it would be if told by his wife. Her tears at the end provide a clue.

Veteran French actor Bernard Verley stars as Frederic who is the kind of man who loves women with a great passion, but finds that he can direct all that love physically into one woman. Chloe is a woman, cynical about men, confident of her power of seduction, a woman who never wants to marry. They were friends and now they meet again. He is married, a successful businessman. She is single, living from day to day. What will happen? Will she entice him away from his wife? Will he find the French happiness with a wife and a mistress?

The title, while good, is misleading, as is the sexy cover on this video. (The French title, L'amour l'apres-midi, is better; but that title in English was taken by Love in the Afternoon (1957) starring Gary Cooper and Audrey Hepburn.) This is about as sexy as a Disney movie (although there is some backside nudity), yet it is an intriguing story about love, human sexuality and the question of monogamy. I can already see some of the other reviews: "Too talky." "Endless talk and no action." Ah, but they are wrong. This is a fascinating film in which the action is subtle and true and very interesting.

Francoise Verley plays Frederic's wife. She is not nearly as pretty as he thinks she is. Nor is she as removed from his life away from her as he naively believes. Eric Rohmer's subtle direction makes it clear that she knows more than she will ever tell him, that she loves him and perhaps prays that he still loves her. But she is above saying a single word. One gets the sense that she knows he is a man so attractive to other women that it is inevitable that he will stray. But does he? The final scene in which we know why she is crying--although ironically, he does not--is just beautifully done and ends the movie at exactly the right moment.

Zouzou plays Chloe who is Parisian, bohemian and quietly desperate. As usual with Rohmer there is a kind of realism in the movie that defies description. The people and the scenes and the events are real; there is no straining for effect, and everything is understated with a characteristic Rohmerian message about human nature.

This starts slow and never really speeds up, but do yourself a favor and stay with it. The denouement is beautifully turned and the revelation of the three principal characters is as clear and clean and agreeable as Chloe after her shower.

(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)

TFO, a French-language network, has been showing the Contes moraux for the last few weeks, and the strengths and weaknesses of Rohmer's approach are easy to see. When he has fine, committed actors like Francoise Fabian and Jean-Louis Trintignant in Ma nuit chez Maud, he can create a flow and vibrancy in the story-telling that make us forget the didacticism of the script (who cares about Jansenism and Blaise Pascal, anyway?).

Where he fails is in not being able to create three-dimensional characters, or not being able to coax a good performance from an actor. The glaring example of this is Brialy in Le genou de Claire who, wearing a thick beard, seems to sleep-walk through his part: his erotic obsession with a girl's lissome kneecap never comes to life. In the film in question today, Bernard Verley has a bland, pudding-like face that hardly provokes any interest in the viewer. How can such a pallid bourgeois be appealing to a bohemian girl like her?

Francoise Verley as the wife has all the best moments; certainly the final scene is more interesting than what went before. She is not a beautiful woman, but her quiet strength and natural acting style are very convincing. Zouzou does not have the underlying restless energy and fierce sexuality you would expect in a girl who drifts from man to man, and her acting skills are minimal. All in all, a good film when concentrating on the family dynamics, but those scenes at the office between Verley and Zouzou are often tiresome.