L'amour, l'après-midi

Great film by Rohmer. Another one that puts moral dilemma to the "grand jour". Emotions, feelings, passion, love: those are the ingredients so dearly associated to Rohmer. He explores human fallibility by telling us the story of Frédéric (Bernard Verley). He's married to Hélène (Françoise Verley), but along the way comes Chloé (Zouzou). Will he let go to temptation?

Like other movies from Rohmer, "L'Amour l'après-midi" is presented like a book. It's a great combination of cinematic and literary experience.

Out of 100, I give it 84. That's good for *** out of ****.

Seen at home, in Toronto, on November 18th, 2002.

Chloe in the Afternoon is the last of six moral tales of Eric Rohmer and my favorite of the three. Frederic (Bernard Varley), is a happily married, well-to-do lawyer married to Helene (Francoise Verley), a somewhat chilly English professor. He is attracted to other women and misses the time when he was free. "I feel marriage closes me in", he says, "cloisters me, and I want to escape. The prospect of happiness opening indefinitely before me sobers me. I find myself missing that time, not too long ago, when I could experience the pangs of anticipation". Frederic rationalizes that his fantasies about other women are merely a reflection of the depth of his love for his wife. In one amusing sequence, he dreams that he possesses an amulet that gives him control over the will of any passer-by, a power of which he takes decided advantage of.

When Chloe (Zouzou), a free-spirited friend he used to know shows up, Frederic finds a release in her companionship and is able to confide in her in a way that he is unable to do with his wife. They spend afternoons together talking about love and relationships. She confesses that she doesn't want to be married but would like to have a child, particularly one with Frederic. The central tension of the film is the choice Frederic must make between his passion for Chloe and his love for his wife. Although he is tempted to have an affair with Chloe, he spends too much time pondering the pros and cons and doesn't act. Chloe on the other hand is in love with Frederic and has a come-what-may attitude toward his entanglements.

Like Jerome (Claire's Knee) and Jean-Louis (My Night at Maud's), Frederic is weak and indecisive and is forever attempting to justify his inability to choose. He stands on the edge of temptation but is never quite ready to jump. Rohmer does not, however, make any moral judgments but hints that Frederic's temptation and pangs of conscience are something most of us go through at some time in our lives.

Though there is a lot of talking in Chloe in the Afternoon, it never seems false or tiresome. This is a very charming film that Pauline Kael called "in every respects, a perfect film". It has a natural rhythm with characters that are so real that you don't want to leave them when the film ends. As Frederic's ultimate choice looms, we are privy to some sharp and insightful dialogue that illuminates the complexity of relationships. The story is told from the husband's point of view and we are left wondering how different it would be if told by his wife. Her tears at the end provide a clue.

TFO, a French-language network, has been showing the Contes moraux for the last few weeks, and the strengths and weaknesses of Rohmer's approach are easy to see. When he has fine, committed actors like Francoise Fabian and Jean-Louis Trintignant in Ma nuit chez Maud, he can create a flow and vibrancy in the story-telling that make us forget the didacticism of the script (who cares about Jansenism and Blaise Pascal, anyway?).

Where he fails is in not being able to create three-dimensional characters, or not being able to coax a good performance from an actor. The glaring example of this is Brialy in Le genou de Claire who, wearing a thick beard, seems to sleep-walk through his part: his erotic obsession with a girl's lissome kneecap never comes to life. In the film in question today, Bernard Verley has a bland, pudding-like face that hardly provokes any interest in the viewer. How can such a pallid bourgeois be appealing to a bohemian girl like her?

Francoise Verley as the wife has all the best moments; certainly the final scene is more interesting than what went before. She is not a beautiful woman, but her quiet strength and natural acting style are very convincing. Zouzou does not have the underlying restless energy and fierce sexuality you would expect in a girl who drifts from man to man, and her acting skills are minimal. All in all, a good film when concentrating on the family dynamics, but those scenes at the office between Verley and Zouzou are often tiresome.

I have been all over the map with the Six Moral Tales. In this one, a very handsome man who seems fixated on all attractive women (at times he is such a self-centered snob) and who has a waif-like wife and child at home, finds he is being pursued by the lover of a former friend. They begin a relationship, meeting in afternoons while he is supposedly at work. His job allows him freedom to roam while his wife is mostly at home. What happens between them is a continuous conversation about his right to do what he is doing. She is a strong, almost masculine woman (still quite attractive and sexy) and she allows him to be introspective all along the way. This becomes more a discussion on morals and the state of the world when it comes to how men and women treat each other, than a story of romantic interlude. Of course, one who sees this in isolation and knows nothing of Eric Rohmer, would first find it a bit dull, and then probably say how unrealistic it is. But a point is made. I saw all six of these films many years ago and am now looking at them more closely.

The most popular entries in the late Eric Rohmer's long and distinguished career are, undoubtedly, his "Six Moral Tales" which began in 1963 with the short THE BAKERY GIRL OF MONCEAU and ended with the film under review. For the record, I was genuinely impressed with the centerpiece of the sextet – MY NIGHT AT MAUD'S (1969), which is easily Rohmer's most popular film – and, many years ago, I had also watched the successive chapter LA COLLECTIONNEUSE (shot in 1967 but released in 1971!) but I have only vague recollections of that one and some of the later Rohmers that I have seen since then. But back to CHLOE' or, I should say, LOVE IN THE AFTERNOON which is the film's original title (although, obviously enough, it bears no relation whatsoever to Billy Wilder's 1957 tribute to his idol Ernst Lubitsch)! Speaking of idols, the lead actor here, Bernard Verley, portrayed (irony of ironies) Jesus Christ in one of the major works of my own personal cinematic idol, Luis Bunuel's THE MILKY WAY (1969) and, besides, the central situation of the movie is also dealt with in one of my favorite band's loveliest songs, The Velvet Underground's "Pale Blue Eyes" (which, likewise, dates from 1969)!! In CHLOE', Verley plays a happily married man (unsurprisingly enough to his own real-life wife Francoise, no less – in her first of just two screen appearances) who spends his daily idle time (train journeys, lunch breaks, etc.) entertaining the notion of betraying his wife with every woman he meets! In fact, much has been made of the fact that CHLOE' includes the only dream sequence (featuring cameos by the likes of Marie-Christine Barrault, Francoise Fabian and Haydee' Politoff) in Rohmer's entire oeuvre but, frankly, I did not find the reverie all that extraordinary in itself; actually, the purposefully cheesy electronic score (redolent of the then-currently topical sci-fi pieces for the intelligentsia) over the opening credits seems to me to have been more of a successful 'departure' for Rohmer . Anyway, flanked by two particularly attractive secretaries, Verley is never too far away from the company of desirable women but always manages to resist temptation and uphold his marriage fidelity vows…that is until the long-lost titular character presents herself unheralded in his office one day and just keeps coming back! Portrayed by the tomboyish, bob-haired Zouzou (more on her fascinating life history later), Chloe' is the epitome of sheer kookiness: free-spirited and fun-loving but also passionate and volatile. A past acquaintance of Verley (she was once his best friend's girl), she had subsequently gone abroad and through several short-lived romances but, not having accomplished much of significance career-wise, comes back to her roots and, consequently, Verley. After breaking up with her current casual boyfriend (who also employs Chloe' as a nightclub hostess), she asks Verley to find her a respectable job and, gradually, they take to meeting up every afternoon during his lunch-break (without, of course, letting the wife in on these innocent escapades). Eventually, he aids Chloe' to settle into a new apartment but one day she drops the bomb: confessing to him that he has been her ideal all along and she wants to bear his son! Verley and Zouzou do get to shack up at her apartment one afternoon and a bathing Chloe' invites him to dry her with a towel...but this is as far as it goes because, by the time she has gotten into bed, Verley has sensibly rushed out of there and back into the rightful arms of his wife! To return to the real Zouzou for a minute: born Daniele Ciarlet, she came to prominence in 1961 on the Paris scene as a nightclub twist sensation and, eventually, started hobnobbing with an elite crowd that included Andy Warhol, Bob Dylan, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones' Brian Jones (with whom she had a two-year affair), Marianne Faithful and Jack Nicholson! Rohmer's film, her looks and enviable connections should have rightfully turned her into an international superstar but, as with so many others before and since, she witnessed her career potential waste away via drug addiction and unwise decisions. Apart from Zouzou's utterly entrancing performance, the film's trump card is its flawlessly perceptive depiction of the marital state of mind and, more importantly on a personal level, that fine line that exists between friendship and love – where somebody's platonic feelings for, say, a colleague can transform themselves with time (and virtually imperceptibly) from affectionate camaraderie to genuine love. Perhaps I ought not to be admitting this here but, the erratic nature of my film-viewing habits for the last two months or so, can be directly attributed to just such an unforeseen event happening to me…although, lamentably I might add, I play the part of Chloe' in my own private everyday morality play!!