L'ami de mon amie

" I want to be loved for who I'm, not who I pretend to be " .

When we pick up an Eric Rhomer's film, we are pretty sure how it is gonna be in terms of narration. Having said that, this one depicts the relationship crisis, love and how feelings keeps changing over the time through the four leads who gave very convincing and natural performances. It is slow but grows on you towards the end and gonna put a smile on your face. I liked Blanche's character, which is relatable to introverts and the rest who can't express their inner feelings to a person whom they admire/love as we just get stuck/freeze while we try to strike a conversation with the person we adore and does some random stuff is definitely crazy yet devastating feeling at the same moment. Here the leads have their own take on relations , as they come in and get out of it due to ambiguity but eventually they get what they yearned. Conversations between Blanche and Fabien has more impact than the rest of the movie. A good flick, liked it !!!

A young woman, Blanche (the lovely Emmanuelle Chaulet), works in the City Hall of a trendy New Town near Paris (somewhat to his discredit, Rohmer's films always occurs in middle class and upper middle class milieus, never in working class neighborhoods or in the immigrants building projects). Having recently arrived there, Blanche lives quite a lonely life, until she becomes friends with another young woman, Lea (Sophie Renoir), through which she met her boyfriend Fabien (Eric Viellard), and an acquaintance of the couple, Alexandre (François-Eric Gendron). Basically, the movie follows the time honored plot of exchange of relationships. A is with B, and C with D, but then A will start a liaison with D, which will make C jealous, and would start going with B in revenge and so forth. The title in French is a pun: the boyfriend of my friend would (could) become my boyfriend. Rohmer is known to be a political conservative, but here he is hardly a moralist, since he examines the sexual freedom of today's youth without condemning it. The movie is slow and talky, but these characters are believable and appealing (if somewhat shallow and a bit better looking than ordinary).

This film is among the best of Rohmer's films. Why ? Because he observes our little snobberies, our small little lies, and in his detached way he loves humanity for them. It is set in Cergy which back in 1987 was a sort of new ' paradise ' just outside of Paris. Two young women who work and study there become friends, and one has a boyfriend and the other does not. There is a fourth in this, a supposed perfect young man who can seduce anyone. The four become entangled in a dance of love, both in retreat and in advance, and light though the subject maybe it has a profound knowledge of our illusions, and our ability of changing lovers that very often hurts no one. And the wonder of the scenario is that like the titles of two Shakespeare plays,' Much Ado About Nothing ' becomes ' All's Well That Ends Well. ' Those who accuse it as being superficial should realise that the surface is deceptive, and that obvious depths are often even more superficial, often becoming self dramatics (on the part of the directors) and the situations he or she creates, or simply portrays, to often imposed melodramatic formulas. Rohmer watches and catches the glance and the gesture that rings true and many do not have this gift. All four, Sophie Renoir, Emmanuelle Chaulet, Francois-Eric Gendron, and Eric Viellard are superb, especially Chaulet and Viellard, who have a chemistry together which is a joy to see. If the sceptics try to convince that Rohmer is shallow just remember that one of the masters of so-called extreme cinema, Quentin Tarantino, loves Rohmer's films. If I had to watch only one director it would be Rohmer. I0 of his best films on a desert island would be my ultimate choice.

Rohmer used 4 or even 5 character affair, dip with the scent of peculiar triangles.

Unlike other French New Waves directors, who vernally succeed. Rohmer dug his bravura technique at the late year, and also inherited the mature, non-jocular, less-mechanical (or too dry to be mechanical) style.

He tried using these 5 individuals with the most simple, direct, lucid cinematography, which included minimalism settings capered with his iconic use of color, and no fancy editing which made the picture quite bland, deconstruct the story of love.

The color is beguiling, the Emmanuelle Chaulet is simply divine. The pace is slow, but the romance is overt. I'm just not such deep in love as the film did, need to be rewatched when people fall in Descarts' unrequited love.

A young woman, Blanche (Emmanuelle Chaulet), is working in the City Hall of the New Town of Cergy Pontoise, in the north west of Paris, on the banks of the river Oise. Alone, recently arrived in the Parisian Region, she befriended another young woman, a computer science student finishing its school, Lea (Sophie Renoir) with which she met her boyfriend Fabien (Eric Viellard), and an acquaintance of the couple, Alexandre (François-Eric Gendron).

The French title (l'ami de mon amie, the friend of her friend) is more explicit than the American or English one. (Boyfriends and Girlfriends): A reference to the saying 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' but distorted to 'the friend of my friend is my friend'. This title, an example of the irony of Eric Rohmer, the boyfriend of my friend could become my (boy)friend

This film belongs to the cycle Comedies and Proverbs, the former term being as important as the latter one in order to understand the meaning of the film. This cycle, filmed in the eighties followed the precedent older cycle, six Moral Tales. Where as the latter concentrated on middle aged married man tempted by another woman but who finally, in relief, returned to his wife, Rohmer in the series of Comedies and Proverbs, turns his attention towards younger female characters. But because it is comedy, the tone is also much lighter and ironic. Here he examines the sexual freedom, (which in fact he disapproves but never condemns overtly in his films), its consequences and how the younger generation is trying to live with a new set of rules.

One of these rules, never sleeps with the friend of her or his friend, as often, in earlier time with the traditional moral, is finally broken. But there is more than a tale of love and seduction. It is a study of characters and how love creates a web of relationship among this small group of young urban professionals. As the relationships between them evolve the spectator finally feels some sympathy for the protagonists, at first not very likable. Especially Blanche who is the center of the entire plot, if one can tell of real plot in Rohmer film. Alone self-pitying, infatuated with the irritating, pretentious, serial seducer Alexandre, she blossoms when stricken by real love. She is opposed to her friend yet rival, Lea, physically as well mentally. With dark hair and tall, Lea is freer sexually than the small light-haired Blanche awaiting the great love for two years. The quest of Blanche is the perfect true love, not just an adventure. Ironically, at first she blindly falls in love with the great local seducer Alexandre.

With discreet symbolism, Rohmer gives clues about the different players. Blanche (white in french), around whom the whole film revolves demands only a pure love. As Delphine in Summer (Le Rayon Vert), the precedent film of the same cycle, the very absence of love, this void, fills here with anguish. Its flat at Cergy Saint Christophe is decorated in minimalist white fashion, thus emphasizing the loneliness of its life. Blanche and Léa sport alternatively the same colors, green and blue, this swap of colors underlining the possible swap of boyfriends.

Rohmer, because of its interest in urbanization (the DVD version contains a documentary he made earlier on industrial aesthetics), sets the action of the film in the New Town of Cergy-Pontoise, described as a quiet, modern, ultra clean Utopia. In fact the spectator sees the town only through Blanche eyes, mainly the pedestrian streets around the center, the banks of the river Oise, the Ricardo Bofil buildings where she lives. But I don't think the Cergy depicted could be viewed, as often said, as a reflection of a superficiality of its young 'yuppies' characters. The purpose of Rohmer was to see the impact of modern architecture on love life. But the answer is in the film: It changes nothing. On the contrary it amplifies or underlines the love relationship between the different characters.

'L'ami de mon amie 'is an extremely enjoyable film, full of charm, thanks to the direction of Eric Rohmer and the talent of its young actresses, then in theirs early twenties, like the young women they play. The frozen moment of happiness at the end of the film, just before the credits contributes to its charm. But it is problematic: Have the protagonist found enduring love? Will their love relationship and in the same time, their friendship endure the strain of time? Nothing in fact is sure as irony is always present. But if ironic, Rohmer doesn't despise his characters. On contrary he shows a real tenderness and comprehension towards them, especially Blanche.

One of the lighter films of Rohmer, of course very talkative, it is characteristic of all its work, with good mannered young people in search of love while searching themselves. Because of the minimalist direction, it has not aged much since its shot in middle of the eighties. Yet, you can glimpse of the fashion of its period in the clothes of the players if you pay attention on certain details Nowadays, Cergy has aged and worn out a little. Never the modern utopia ironically depicted by Rohmer, it is still a well maintained active town.