Triple agent

Eric Rohmer will undoubtedly sustain in cinema history as a unique writer and director of French films. He is far more interested in dialogue, conversation among his characters, and ideas than he is in plot or storyline development. His films affect many as too didactic, too much like a lecture series on current events or historical events to be considered a movie. Perhaps that is the case, as watching a Rohmer film takes total concentration and thinking.

Such is the case for his 2004 TRIPLE AGENT. Set in Paris of 1936-37, it is essentially a re-thinking of a true story that about a spy, a bit of history that is still unsolved. To understand this film requires a working knowledge of the political movements intertwining during the time: France's Popular Front, Hitler's rising influence in Europe, the Stalinist era, the Spanish Civil War with Franco and his adversaries, etc. The mix is all placed in the thoughts and discussions of Fyodor Voronin (Serge Renko), his Greek painter wife Arsinoé (Katerina Didaskalu) and their interactions with the changing people of the political ploys (played with sincere verve by Cyrielle Claire, Grigori Manukov, Dimitri Rafalsky, Nathalia Krougly, Amanda Langlet, Jeanne Rambur, Georges Benoît, Emmanuel Salinger among the large and confusing cast). The 'story' emerges from Fyodor's relationship to the political leanings that pull his attention away from Arsinoé and the complications of his physical structure with his intense involvement in the political and ideological climes.

The film works for those with enough savvy to catch all the intrigues of that period in European history. But for a film so completely dependent on rhetoric and smart dialogue this project suffers greatly from the poor subtitles: while most of the French is translated for us, much of the Russian and German is not, as though we all have access to those languages. The result is a static, dry, intense film in which much is lost due to technical flaws. The cast is excellent but the editing and clarity of each character's role falls by the wayside far too often. Rohmer's genius is there, but it is an acquired taste. Would that the viewer had the background knowledge somehow supplied to support the fine story that is being related! Grady Harp

The action takes place in France, year 1936... An anti-Communist Russian exile that was on the White Army has to do such juggling acts to survive in those dangerous times.

Those who hate Eric Rohmer's works, his intellectual halo, his never ending dialogs will definitely hate "Triple Agent" as well. Yes, there are so much conversations, so many dissertations... and eventually you may lost the thread of the plot. I mean, this movie is not like "Summer tale", here you got stuff like spying and so, you have to know who's who, and that's pretty hard if the characters don't stop talking about anything. Maybe I'll have to watch it again so I get everything figured out.

PS: I'd like to underline the work of wonderful Greek actress Katerina Didaskalu. She's fascinating, and I hadn't have the occasion of watching her in a movie before.

My rate: 6.5/10

acting seems very natural--story not engaging One thing I have to say about "Triple Agent" is that the acting seemed very natural and convincing. The actors and director (Eric Rohmer in one of his last films) did a very nice job. On the other hand, the film is extremely talky--very, very little actually happens and when things occur, you mostly just hear about them. This makes for a slow film--one that needed some energy infused into it.

The film is about a couple--Arsinoé (who is Greek) and her White Russian husband, Fiodor. When I say 'White Russian' I mean that he is a an anti-communist Russian living in Paris after the Russian Revolution. He heads an organization of fellow expatriates and is clearly anti-Soviet. However, as the movie SLOWLY progresses, Arsinoé hears a lot from her husband that confuses her. He seems awfully friendly with the Nazis AND the Communists. And, his business trips to Belgium actually take him to Berlin. What gives?

As I said already, not much happens in the film--or at least you don't get to see anything. It's all told through conversations at Arsinoé's home. This style of storytelling is really weak...and the film lost my interest despite the fine acting. A weak script dooms what COULD have been a much more interesting film.

Eric Rohmer masterfully uses Paris as a canvas to brush the complex profiles of his characters, a quartet of retired White Russian Generals, a Greek painter married to a member of the quartet and their friends exiled in 1937 Paris.

Rohmer's mastery: His use of authentic buildings of the period with subtle deco stylization and other White Russian meeting points (the canteen of the Rachmaninov conservatory and a wooden Orthodox church near Butte-Chaumont), along with brilliant dialogues subtly lit with conversation on Picasso, Abstraction and realism in Art. Both the Communist couple and the White Russian couple in the movie will be steam-rolled by the events. Rohmer's use of newsreels is also extremely symbolic. The Paris World Fair of 1937 is shown with its stone colossus in the competing Soviet and Fascits pavilions seeming ready to crush the movie's characters as the end appears.Blum is seen making a speech among a forest of risen fists.

The relativity of life and that of free-will is the real subject. Is Fiodor pulling the strings or is he just just one of the puppets lost in the dubious cauldron of the Germano-Soviet pact of 1939 brewing in the shadows? Extraordinary work of a mature genius that makes one think that freedom is just appearance. Great actors with the beauty of french spoken rolling the Rs (Fiodor) or whispering them (his wife). Tragic unexpected ending. Rohmer revisits Hitchkok for a final "Coup de Theatre"!

Slow paced, and using a lot of dialogue, this film demands an attentive viewing. Decidedly, not recommended for people in a haste, wishing for a short respite between work and home. This film is Art, and History. Selected Pathé News reels from the period preceding World War 2 give us the context in which evolves a "White Russian" officer and his "Greek refugee" wife, living in Paris before, and during Nazi occupation. Is he a right-wing Russian, playing for the Nazis against a Communist France? Is he an underground agent of the Soviets, not opening his game even to affiliated communist friends? Is he a Nazi duping everyone else, as his wife once suspects? Is she as innocent as she tells, or is she a knowing part of her husband's triple spying schemes, or at least part of it? Spying is a question of technology, and that is shown in the end of the film, though the degree of technology used before our times of satellites seem ludicrous, but were terrific then. Spying is mostly a question of Humint (acronym for human intelligence), yesterday as today. French director Rohmer gives a master lesson in politics, History, human behaviour, love, and intelligence for all cinema lovers, based on true facts not fully explained even to this day. Highly recommended to spies of all colours, too - and they are legion...