Conto de Inverno

Second chapter of Rohmer's Tales Of The Four Seasons (before filming Winter's Tale he made Spring's Tale). This time the french director tells us the story of Felice, a girl in the search of her soul mate. Actually she had found him in some holidays, his name was Charles, and she got pregnant, but at the end of that summer of joy and love she gave him a wrong address... so she never saw his love again and couldn't locate him either. Five years after she's living in Paris, at her mother's house, with her daughter and she's going out with two different men, although she's not in love with none of'em. She can't love anyone but Charles. Will she ever find the lost love of her life? Does she believe in miracles? That's something we'll find out as we watch this Rohmer's film.

Gene Hackman said in some movie that "watching a Rohmer's movie is just like watching a plant grow". Obviously that'll be the opinion of most of the people (especially those who enjoy themselves watching Steven Seagal or Van Damme's movies); but there's something else in cinema (and in life) as well as kicks, guns, explosions, and parties. What about feelings, reflexions, love, doubts, philosophy? That's what Eric Rohmer seems to care about, and that's what he usually talks about in his movies. Ordinary people, living ordinary lives, with their ordinary problems, and their ordinary conflicts. In some way he's such a "voyeur": he puts his camera in some corner of the room and lets the characters express themselves. How they feel, what do they expect from life, what are their dreams, their fears... I think that's why he usually works with unknown actors and actresses: that way the audience feels like they're watching a completely unknown talking or crying, or laughing. I would not work the same if he picked Gerard Depardieu or Juliette Binoche for this sort of movies. Also he uses a literary language in the dialogues (dialogues, the base of Rohmer's cinematography), though his movies show ordinary situations the people in there definitely doesn't talk like normal people. Some may say that's a handicap, that people doesn't talk about existence and the meaning of life when they're having a coffee in some coffee-shop; but when I want to hear real-life dialogues with real-life sentences, rough language, and so I just go and watch some Tarantino movie.

I wouldn't recommend Rohmer's movies to anyone; 'cause I assume that movies such as Winter's Tale may result boring for many people. So I only recommend this movie (and the rest of Tales of the Four Seasons) to those who look for something else in cinema and (again) in life apart from hollow entertainment.

My Rate: 8/10

I just got a chance to see this movie after seeing all other Rohmer's movies I could get my hands on. After seeing it, I must say it's a superb Rohmer, one of his best, certainly the most accomplished of his Four Seasons, highly reminiscent of My Night With Maud, which still remains my favorite film of the perpetually youthful director. Here you will also find a philosophical discussions on the nature of beauty, love, Pascal's wager (familiar item for a Rohmerian, isn't it?), discussion on personal ('intimate') vs. Catholic faith, the immortality of soul. Of course, the heavy doses of philosophy are beautifully integrated into the film, just like in Maud. These discussions seem organical, natural -- the characters really mean what they say here. Like one character said to the main heroine, "You're articulate, because you let your feelings talk" and "I love you because I can read your heart", even if the heroine seemingly has a change of heart every 5 minutes :)

I must applaud the lead actress(who's also a great beauty) for her heartfelt, genuine performance. I felt like I knew this woman somewhere before, that I could understand her every action and her every thought. The film is also bittersweet, like a many Rohmer films, yet in this film the melancholy feeling is more pronounced, somewhere on par with 'My Night with Maud'. It also reminded me of Richard Linklater's "Before Sunrise"; this film beautifully depicted what feelings Linklater's Jesse and Celine might've had during those long 9 years of separation -- the feelings of longing, of hope, of great joy they'd find in meeting each other again, of "the joy so great it'd be worth giving your life for", in the main heroine's words.

What else to say -- I loved these people, they felt real, genuine, and above all hopeful and blessed by love. I loved Felicie and her absent Charles as much as I loved Rohmer's Maud and Jean-Louis, Linklater's Jesse and Celine, David Lean's Laura and Alec -- that is to say a lot. By the end of the movie they've become my friends.

This second in Rohmer's Tales of the Four Seasons begins with a rapid montage that shows the amazingly romantic beach vacation romance of Felicie and Charles. The two appear to be quite in love but continuation of their relationship is hindered by Felicie foolishly giving him the wrong address. Cut to 5 years later and Felicie is living with that mistake and Charles's daughter. Her subsequent relationships with men have not been successful and in fact around half of the film shows the two major ones in their late stages.

As I watched Felicie and her attempts to get along with her two suitors I couldn't quite decide how to interpret her actions. Clearly both men cared for her but she was unable or unwilling to care for them to the same degree. I wasn't sure whether to view her actions cynically and assume she was just using the missing man as a larger than life figure which other men couldn't hope to measure up to or to view them more generously and assume that Charles was actually her true love. The beauty of the film is that ultimately it could be seen either way.

Regardless of her true motivations it was quite clear that she really had faith in her love for Charles. In fact, it seems to be in her nature to take things on faith. She relies on intuition rather than logic to make decisions; this often makes her actions seem unintelligent but to simplify her this way would be a mistake. In a conversation about reincarnation she makes arguments that her friend recognizes as being similar to the philosophies of Pascal and Plato, two writers she hasn't read.

Although the plot of this film is more conventional (i.e. it has something like a resolution) than most Rohmer films it still manages to be quite effective and emotionally resonant. The cinematography is quite good, especially in the opening montage and the urban night scenes. Also, once again Rohmer does an incredible job of capturing the essence of a complex character. One of the best Rohmer films I've seen

It has been a pleasure catching up with the eminently civilised cinema of Eric Rohmer recently. He is a director who needs the re-see treatment every so often as many of his works tend to blur into one because of their similarity. Of course the beach ones look different from the urban ones but it is sometimes difficult to distinguish one group of characters talking around a table from another doing the same thing unless one knows the films really well. Although there is no denying that Rohmer is the master observer of the minutiae of middle class French everyday living, I find my response to his works differs considerably from film to film, always according to the degree with which he interests me in his characters. In one important sense however all his films are worth watching and that is the skill with which he evokes the most marvellous naturalistic acting from his actors, particularly from young women. Even a film as tiresome as "The Aviator's Wife" is redeemed by the the masterly performance by the young girl the hero meets in a Paris park. For anyone wishing to embark on an exploration of Rohmer, the tetralogy of films of the four seasons made during the late 'eighties and 'nineties will provide a particularly fertile experience. The characters in "Spring" and "Autumn" are admittedly the least interesting and I find the viticulturist and her matchmaking friend in "Autumn" rather tiresome. The young man holidaying in "Summer" has dilemmas in his relationships with three girls about which one really does not care, but the film is most agreeable to watch. If these three films represent Rohmer at this more mundane, "Un Conte d'hiver" is a different matter altogether. There is nothing discursive in a work in which the director seems to have balanced form and content perfectly. It is like a sonata form movement in music with a long central development bordered by a short exposition and recapitulation. In the opening, young man meets young woman on holiday. It is the passion of a lifetime that ends with the misadventure of a confused address. Unable to find her child's father the woman resigns herself to trying to find love in other men. She vacillates between a hairdresser and a librarian, nice enough people but we know as she does deep down that there can be no substitute for that idyllic holiday encounter. Our self identification with the dilemma of the young woman, marvellously played by Charlotte Very, is so acute that the resolution when it eventually arrives literally made me shout and cry for joy. In "Conte d'Hiver" Rohmer has given us one of cinema's great feel-good factor films to stand alongside "It's a Wonderful Life" and "The Quiet Man".

Rohmer turns philosophy's head around in this film from the last leg of his productive life. In his earlier films such as Signe de lion and the Collector we see the love triangles as weapons of mass destruction a la Schoenburg and Nietzsche. But in Conte d'hiver Rohmer brings fantasy into the possible though questionably improbable coincidences of life. Ava Loraschi, as the child, is particularly delightful as Rohmer directs her in a naturalistic, cinema verite style showing his Nouvelle Vague roots.