Desideri nel sole

This film contains the complexities of youth, friendship, and romance without, it seems, even trying. The Algerian War hardly matters beyond its being a war, one of which from the 20th century into the 21st is happening somewhere. The music, which is as affecting as songbirds in May and more playful, enchants scenes with the engaging energy of the mystery of life. The film is a wonder of filmmaking, a film imbued with an immortal soul that reaches out in friendship. The title: The "Oxford English Dictionary" tells that "philopena" is a game in which when a nut, usually an almond, has two kernels, two people each take one half of it. Then, when next they meet, the first to say "philopena" may demand a forfeit of the other. This is often a friendly romantic game, a form of flirtation. Many online references cite an accompanying greeting with the expression, e.g., "Hello, Philopena" and in French, "Bonjour, Philippine!" Philopena/Philippine is also a name for the game." Rozier's title for his film is "Adieu Philippine." This may be taken as a goodbye to the game of flirtation of Michel with the young women with him and of them to him--the goodbye that concludes the film. But the title is also capable of meaning more metaphorically. Michel is the nut that when opened by the girls is found to contain a "Philippine," or in context, two hearts. When Michal is asked about a love interest, he says that he will wait to see which girl waits for him, or who will greet him, or who in the parlance of the game will play the game, win it, and make a romantic demand of him. "Adieu Philippine" is the story leading up to the goodbye to his divided heart, which each young woman is enthralled to possess and he to have given, or so the sweet longueur of their goodbye demonstrates in Rozier's beautiful film.

This is a very uneasy amalgam of a satire on the French television industry (the production of a cheap show called Montserrat), a commentary on French society (the dinner scene with Michel's family spouting slogans), and an improbable travelogue on Corsica. Since it does not--could not--hang together to form a unified work, my rating is lower than it might be.

The acting is first rate especially the two young women, Liliane and Juliette, who act with an impressive naturalness. Vittorio Caprioli is excellent as the oily and fairly stupid Pachali, a man who promises everything and delivers nothing. I'm left with the feeling that if Jacques Rozier could have kept to a central theme when writing the scenario the movie would have been really memorable, in the way of the first two Doinel films of Truffaut, or Godard's Bande a part.

With A bout de Soufflé (and other Godard films), Adieu Philippine is in fact the only film that deserves the 'Nouvelle Vague' label term and that kept the promises of this generation, of a new way to approach cinema. (Truffaut looks very classical in comparison). A real liberation of the cinema's language : variation of feelings, tones (sentimental comedy, Algerian tragedy, boulevard, etc...) on the screen followed by variations of technique's shooting (television, improvisation, etc...), of montage or setting, a jubilating firework as an hymn to joy of life, imagination. For this and other points, Adieu Philippine has the role in French cinematography that in Italy Otto e mezzo may have played though in another way and much more secretly. Rarely characters have been given such importance, such vibration in every day's little things. The close-up on a young 'stupid' girl's despair dancing face to you is one of the numerous unforgettable moments of this still refreshing poem sometimes worried by the threat of death.

Like most of the nouvelle vague works ,"Adieu Philippine" seems dated now.Some people will praise it to the skies ,other will find it a bit boring and tedious.

The first part is the best:the depiction in a quasi documentary way of the TV studios,the meal at the hero's home where his parents and grand-parents are discussing barroom politics ,the stupid commercials -the movie was prophetic for that matter-.The spontaneity of the actors is convincing.

There's a sword of Damocles hanging over the hero's head:in two months ,he will be drafted and will have to fight in Algeria ,French dirty war.That's perhaps the most amazing thing:nobody,neither the future soldier nor his girlfriends or relatives seem to take it seriously.He will go,period.That makes the movie unintentionally a bit reactionary,particularly if we compare it to old wave Autant-Lara's contemporary "tu ne tueras point".

The second part is nouvelle vague flesh on the bone:a very loose plot, and a very loooong ending.Sincerely,I doubt the 2002 audience can relate to such amateurish directing.Some will say the hero wants to make the best of what is left to him :but nothing vibrates and everything seems hollow.

The movie was a flop and did get critical acclaim afterwards.So,my opinion is probably not very orthodox.

At times, this feels like a documentary, or some kind of home movie where the director said "you guys just do some stuff, I'll keep rolling and we'll tart it up in the edit". At others, it's really quite entertaining (such as the filming of the igloo commercial). However, for me, it was just too episodic and, frankly, went on far too long such that by the end I was just bored. The acting wasn't bad (and in places very good), but it felt like they didn't really have much to work with, and the tone and lighting was all over the place - so I'm not that surprised that I haven't heard of this director before. Of its time, I guess.