Conte d'hiver
- 1992
- Tous publics
- 1h 54m
IMDb RATING
7.2/10
6.7K
YOUR RATING
Five years after losing touch with a summer fling, a woman has difficulty choosing between her two suitors.Five years after losing touch with a summer fling, a woman has difficulty choosing between her two suitors.Five years after losing touch with a summer fling, a woman has difficulty choosing between her two suitors.
- Awards
- 2 wins & 2 nominations total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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.
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
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
The second of Eric Rohmer's Four Seasons. This is a beautiful movie. Low-keyed, quite, slow- but not at all too slow. Simple story with complex characters; Interesting to the end. I can't wait to see the other "seasons".
A most brilliant, brilliant movie. Rohmer here exhibits nothing but true mastery in this most insightful work on the power of love over all else. This is a movie for romantics, dreamers and those who have known what it is to live for love.
Being "a Rohmer", the movie is by no means fast paced but as each minute passes you lose track of time as you become ever more consumed in the story; and it's a story whose tension almost effortlessly builds as the movie progresses; fulfilled in part by Rohmer's brilliant direction but also by the exceptional performance of Charlotte Very. Her acting in this movie is so brilliant that it's sometimes difficult to recall that you are actually watching a fictional movie and not a fly on the wall treatise on the nature of love that never dies. The question one must repeatedly wonder concerns the nature of love and more particularly whether one can ever love other persons the same way you loved your first? Whether your views change or not from watching this movie, it would be difficult not to be moved by its tale. All I can say is that by the film's ending I really was hungry for more - which rarely happens to me when watching movies! That being said, this is definitely not a movie for everyone: If your "top ten" includes Transformers, 300, Fight Club then you should steer well clear of Conte D'Hiver. The action in this movie is only of the psychological sort. Rohmer fans will (needless to say) be instant converts. But if you enjoyed movies as diverse as Before Sunrise, or even Casablanca you'll certainly not want to miss Conte D'Hiver/A Winter's Tale. Without a moment's hesitation, I give it 9/10. And so should you! Please watch it & see why...
Being "a Rohmer", the movie is by no means fast paced but as each minute passes you lose track of time as you become ever more consumed in the story; and it's a story whose tension almost effortlessly builds as the movie progresses; fulfilled in part by Rohmer's brilliant direction but also by the exceptional performance of Charlotte Very. Her acting in this movie is so brilliant that it's sometimes difficult to recall that you are actually watching a fictional movie and not a fly on the wall treatise on the nature of love that never dies. The question one must repeatedly wonder concerns the nature of love and more particularly whether one can ever love other persons the same way you loved your first? Whether your views change or not from watching this movie, it would be difficult not to be moved by its tale. All I can say is that by the film's ending I really was hungry for more - which rarely happens to me when watching movies! That being said, this is definitely not a movie for everyone: If your "top ten" includes Transformers, 300, Fight Club then you should steer well clear of Conte D'Hiver. The action in this movie is only of the psychological sort. Rohmer fans will (needless to say) be instant converts. But if you enjoyed movies as diverse as Before Sunrise, or even Casablanca you'll certainly not want to miss Conte D'Hiver/A Winter's Tale. Without a moment's hesitation, I give it 9/10. And so should you! Please watch it & see why...
Did you know
- TriviaThe film is included on Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" list.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Discovering Christmas Films (2018)
- How long is A Tale of Winter?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- A Tale of Winter
- Filming locations
- Théâtre Gérard Philipe - 59 Bd Jules Guesde, Saint-Denis, Seine-Saint-Denis, France(Felicie and Loic see Shakespeare's A Winter's Tale)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $23,268
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $3,802
- Dec 21, 2014
- Gross worldwide
- $52,431
- Runtime
- 1h 54m(114 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.66 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content