Ma nuit chez Maud

Can love be reduced to an intellectual calculation? Can faith? What role do the emotions play into this calculation? Blaise Pascal, a French scientist and philosopher, put down his thoughts regarding the Christian Religion which were published after his death and came to be known as "Pensees" or "thoughts". Here Pascal puts forth the case for belief: "Since the duration of our lives is but a moment and the state of death eternal . . . those who are guided by their own inclinations and pleasures without reflection and concern" for the reality of death eternal, are idiots and should be "condemned". He asks, "What would you wager? . . . God is, or He is not. Reason can decide nothing." And not to wager is not an option. Pascal reduces belief to a win/loss calculation with the following: "If you gain, you gain all. If you lose, you lose nothing." MY NIGHT AT MAUD'S is a film devoid of conventional film devices to sway you one way or the other such as music, special effects, close-ups and general sentimentality. This is a film full of dialog and intellectual meanderings, but it is the emotions of the characters, those subtle distortions of the face, and the voice behind the eyes captured by a lingering camera that speak the truth. On the surface, this picture appears one dimensional and the end merely a continuation of the beginning, but under the surface, the characters have been transformed. One's actions may be controlled by intellectual pragmatism, but the emotions govern the inner world with a volotility that cannot be controlled. Single minded conformity to a religious proposition may bring security and comfort, but can love be divorced from the emotions? Can emotions be governed by the intellect? As to Pascals Wager, if one clings to this rigid proposition, despite the changing landscape of the emotions, perhaps shunning love itself, can the conclusion that "nothing is lost" still be held?

Ma nuit chez Maud AKA My Night at Maud's is Eric Rohmer's third Moral Tale. Eric Rohmer, together with Truffaut, Godard, Chabrol & Rivette, formed the French New Wave, which offered a new view on narrative. Rohmer's films are often seen as more mature compared to his other French New Wave companions. My Night at Maud's is a moral study, which dialog achieves to catch the viewer right from the start.

Two men, Jean-Louis and Vidal meet again after 15 years. They decide to go to visit Vidal's friend, Maud. In Maud's apartment the group of three have interesting discussions about Pascal, philosophy, moral and religion. What makes these discussions so interesting is the difference of Vidal, Jean-Louis and Maud. Jean-Louis is a catholic who believes in the holiness of man. Vidal is a Marxist who replaces God with history, he believes in history instead of God. Maud is an atheist, who believes in true short-term happiness. When Vidal leaves the apartment, Jean-Louis gets to a moral dilemma.

Jean-Louis talks a lot about a young blond woman he saw in church, Francoise. He doesn't know anything about her, but she represents religious and an ideal woman to him. Where Maud is the opposite to him. Jean-Louis doesn't believe in short-term happiness. So as he spends the night at Maud's he gets to a moral dilemma. According to his religious beliefs he should resist the temptation of Maud. Again his lie to Francoise is Christian compassion, but it's also a desire to hide his dishonesty.

My Night at Maud's goes very deep. It's not just about what's on surface: the intellectual dialogs and the moral dilemmas. The intelligence of Rohmer goes much deeper. And that is what I like in his films, even if you don't understand everything, the films have something that make you watch them again and again. I'm 17 and when I walked into a dark theater to see this fine film, I was blown away. When the film is over, you have came from a moral journey. So Eric Rohmer's film, obviously doesn't just stop at being the battlefield of ideologies.

My Night at Maud's is the third in the Six Moral tales series. In this film, an introverted Catholic engineer (Jean-Louis Trintignant) is introduced by his Marxist friend Vidal (Antoine Vitez) to Maud (Francoise Fabian), a charming and worldly divorcee and ends up staying the night in her apartment. Jean-Louis, Vidal, and Maud spend the evening talking about philosophy and religion, particularly about their differing views on Pascal and his wager. The wager goes something like this: Given overwhelming odds against the existence of God (for example, 100 to 1), we must bet on that one chance. For if God does not exist, and we lose the bet, then our loss is inconsequential. But if God does exist, then our lives gain meaning and our reward is eternal.

After Vidal leaves, Maud tells Jean-Louis about her marriage, her ex-husband's Catholic mistress, and the tragic end to her affair with the only man she truly loved. When he is persuaded to avoid a snowstorm and stay overnight, Jean-Louis has to overcome Maud's advances and his own temptations to remain faithful to his ideal mate, a blond, Catholic girl (Marie-Christine Barrault) he recently met at church.

This was the first film I'd seen by Eric Rohmer and it was a puzzle to penetrate the uniqueness of his style and rhythm. Rohmer presents his characters in very natural, almost mundane situations, and heightens the realism by using only natural sounds of the environment. On the surface, the film appears very simple but underneath there is much complexity. Jean-Louis is conflicted between his Catholic principles and his love of sensual pleasure. He lives in a world centered almost entirely on himself, engaging in much philosophizing about choice but never choosing. He operates out of how he "should" or "should not" act rather than out of his experience of what works. When life does not fit his pictures, he deceives himself with endless rationalizations. Through his experience with Maud, however, he is shaken out of need for complete self-control and discovers the epiphany of grace.

Rohmer has a light touch and employs intelligent and witty dialogue to bring his characters to life. In the process, he creates an impersonal elegance that is totally captivating. Rohmer doesn't set out to change our lives just to make us think, and in My Night at Maud's, he succeeds admirably.

This is the third entry in Eric Rohmer's "Six Moral Tales" film series, following the charming romantic short "The Bakery Girl of Monceau" and the somewhat bland, but still well made and written, 55 minute film "Suzanne's Career". Out of the three "Moral Tales" that I've seen, "My Night at Maud's" is easily the best, and most mature. The first two, while fine films, seem more like warm ups to this film.

"My Night at Maud's" is a spectacular work of art, which mainly consists of the intelligent discussion that goes on in the apartment of a woman named Maud over the coarse of one night. Of course, plenty of other things happen as well, but most of the film takes place during this one long discussion. Joining Maud is the main character, Jean-Louis, a Catholic man who seems to be in love with a woman (named Françoise, who becomes more of a major character later in the film), but hides it from Maude and his Marxist friend Vidal.

The film is an hour and 50 minutes of watching these wonderful characters talk and talk about various things, mainly things dealing with religion, love, etc. While a film almost entirely consisted of various characters chattering away may sound boring, it really isn't, mainly because the talking is so much fun (and really interesting) to listen to!

The film is also beautiful to look at, with gorgeous, black and white cinematography that really enhances the pretty cold tone of the film.

A really great piece of filmmaking!

"The heart has it reasons which reason knows nothing of." --Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

This is the Eric Romer film they warned you about. There is a lot of talk, talk, and more talk. But the talk is very interesting. One of the main topics of discussion is Pascal's famous wager. Pascal believed that if there is even the slightest chance of the Christian heaven being true, then as a matter of probability, one ought to be a believer. Even a minuscule chance of everlasting paradise is worth the bet because infinity (eternity) times even a very small number is infinity. And, of course, if not believing puts one in however small the danger of eternal damnation, then again one should be a believer. But, as Vidal (Antoine Vitez) sagely remarks in the movie, infinity times zero is still zero.

Jean-Louis Trintignant stars as a 34-year-old Catholic mathematician who has a way with women. He runs into his old school chum, Vidal, who introduces him to Maud (Francoise Fabian), who has a way with men. Funny but they don't quite hit it off even though she manipulates him into spending the night with her. Their conversation is witty, subliminal and revealing. Maud believes in the supremacy of love, Jean-Louis in being morally flexible. Although a believing and practicing Catholic, he tells Maud that one is not going against God's will by chasing girls anymore than one is going against God's will by doing mathematics.

The girl that Jean-Louis is currently chasing is 22-year-old Francoise (Maire-Christine Barrault) a blonde, Catholic girl that he has spied at church. At first it seems that although he is certain that she is perfect for him, she is reluctant. They too fence with words as they try to mislead and reveal at the same time, and the audience is intrigued, so much so that at times you might forget you are watching a movie. In this sense a Romer film is like a stage play. Whereas contemporary directors try to get by with as little dialogue as possible, to let the action itself reveal character, Romer is not shy about using dialogue to reveal character, plot, theme--the whole works.

The film begins with a long close shot of Francoise's profile as she listens in church, turning twice briefly to face the camera. She is pretty and intriguing. Although we won't realize it until the movie is mostly over, she is the focal point of the balance between the world views of Jean-Louis and Maud. After the night at Maud's during which Maud uses her intuition and sly intelligence to figure out Jean-Louis's character, he spends the night with Francoise. She uses her instincts to figure out not his character so much as his aptness for her. And then it is revealed how Francoise figures twice in the life of Maud. I won't anticipate the revelation, but be sure and watch for it. Suffice it to say that there are two reasons that Francoise is far from Maud's favorite person! The film ends, as French films often do, with the ironic affirmation of bourgeois values.

For today's DVD hound this movie will play slowly or not at all. The use of dialogue as something over and above the plot and action of the film will seem demanding and perhaps old fashioned. The deliberately drawn out scenes at church may cause you to yawn. But I recommend you stay with it. The movie has a quality that lingers long after the action is gone. The underlying philosophy about the nature of human love and how it conflicts or is compatible with reason and/or religion really does reflect to some extent the quotation above from Pascal, whose spirit is akin, although he denies it, to that of Jean-Louis, the careful protagonist of this very interesting film.

(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!)