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
The second film in Eric Rohmer's Four Season series, Conte d'hiver is the story of a woman (Charlotte Very) who meets a man she falls in love with (Frederic van den Driessche) and has a daughter by (unknown to him) after they have said goodbye and she has inadvertently given him the wrong address, making it impossible for him to find her again. Five years later we find her in a strange menage a trois, attracted to, but not in love with, two different men each of whom she leaves for the other. Offering her different things, she is unable to choose between them, aware that she is still in love with the father of her child. Like its predecessor in the series, Conte de printemps, and so many other Rohmer films, this is a film replete with reflections on love and life. It is also a film about integrity, and the costs to oneself and others of emotional faithfulness to a lost love; indeed this is what gives the film its focus, as the purity of her lost love stands in counterpoint to the banal and seemingly meaningless choices that are available to her in her daily life. Charlotte Very's performance makes us care what happens to her, and the poignancy of her dilemma is brought home towards the end of the film by 'a play within a play' - a scene from a sumptuously produced version of Shakespeare's A Tale In Winter which should be required viewing for anyone who believes that Shakespeare and his contemporaries have nothing to say to a modern audience. This is a beautiful and moving film, which I would commend to anyone interested in the complexity of human emotions and responses.
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".
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
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
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