Triple agent

Eric Rohmer will undoubtedly sustain in cinema history as a unique writer and director of French films. He is far more interested in dialogue, conversation among his characters, and ideas than he is in plot or storyline development. His films affect many as too didactic, too much like a lecture series on current events or historical events to be considered a movie. Perhaps that is the case, as watching a Rohmer film takes total concentration and thinking.

Such is the case for his 2004 TRIPLE AGENT. Set in Paris of 1936-37, it is essentially a re-thinking of a true story that about a spy, a bit of history that is still unsolved. To understand this film requires a working knowledge of the political movements intertwining during the time: France's Popular Front, Hitler's rising influence in Europe, the Stalinist era, the Spanish Civil War with Franco and his adversaries, etc. The mix is all placed in the thoughts and discussions of Fyodor Voronin (Serge Renko), his Greek painter wife Arsinoé (Katerina Didaskalu) and their interactions with the changing people of the political ploys (played with sincere verve by Cyrielle Claire, Grigori Manukov, Dimitri Rafalsky, Nathalia Krougly, Amanda Langlet, Jeanne Rambur, Georges Benoît, Emmanuel Salinger among the large and confusing cast). The 'story' emerges from Fyodor's relationship to the political leanings that pull his attention away from Arsinoé and the complications of his physical structure with his intense involvement in the political and ideological climes.

The film works for those with enough savvy to catch all the intrigues of that period in European history. But for a film so completely dependent on rhetoric and smart dialogue this project suffers greatly from the poor subtitles: while most of the French is translated for us, much of the Russian and German is not, as though we all have access to those languages. The result is a static, dry, intense film in which much is lost due to technical flaws. The cast is excellent but the editing and clarity of each character's role falls by the wayside far too often. Rohmer's genius is there, but it is an acquired taste. Would that the viewer had the background knowledge somehow supplied to support the fine story that is being related! Grady Harp

Though denied a commercial theatrical release in the States (American indie fodder from Sundance now all but fills the old art house maw), this is a typically involving, if determinedly talky, pic from vet helmer Eric Rohmer. Known for his pointillist studies in manners & mores 'francais,' this late work tackles large political issues with a similar minimalist approach. In the years leading up to WWII, the last of the White Russians in Paris are struggling to maintain a presence just as the communist Popular Front comes to power and Stalin launches his deadliest internal purge back in the USSR. Rohmer keeps his focus on the wife of a Paris-based White Russian official as she watches for clues that might indicate just what side of the political fence this unflappably reasonable man leans toward. Or is he merely acting different parts for different situations? Rohmer's film-making is all essentials now, but the gusts of dialogue & functional camera set-ups needn't fool you. Rohmer remains an intensely visual artist with the easy mastery of the art that conceals art. Everyone is superb in their roles, but watch for Cyrielle Clair as a wealthy gossiping friend, she's Parisian chic itself.

As is explained in the prologue to the film, it is based on a true story, although some names, situations and facts have been changed or added. The addition of any facts I feel were probably few, as the film wanted to give a sense of the unknown. The use of historical french newsreel footage throughout gives an partial documentary feel to the film, yet the fine direction by Eric Rohmer, editing and quality of acting draws you straight back into the story every time.

I came away from seeing this film at the Hong Kong Film Festival 2004 with many thoughts. The film has been very well written as a pre-World War II drama/thriller. With many twists and turns in the plot, most of them between the lead characters, Fiodor a 'white russian' (a russian against Joseph Stalins communist ideals) and his greek wife Arsinoe, who live together in Paris, the russian man being 'in exile'.

This is the kind of film that I could watch a hundred times and always come out at the end with different opinion of Fiodor, such is the complexity of the story. The acting benefits well for using actors with applicable nationality/heritage, ie Fiodor, russian, played by Serge Renko and Arsinoe, greek, played by Katerina Didaskalu. Giving the accent the right 'edge', especially in the case of Serge Renko, as the characters speak mainly french in the film. Serge also gives a proud russian 'stiffness' to his character making his behaviour very creditable.

The locations selected for the filming were well chosen and the set's well thought out. Some people may find this film a little faltering, but to me it felt as if the screenplay writer wanted to interfere as little as possible with the original true-life source material. Leaving the viewer to make up their own mind.

An entertaining film that I would watch again, if only to try and make up my mind about Fiodor. Watch it, think about it and then watch it again is my advice.

Rating 8.5-9/10

This film takes you to another world, the uncertain times between the two World Wars, though no one at the time knew it. It concerns White Russians living in France, and uncertain which way they should jump if there was another war.

Do they team up with Germany, their enemy from the Great War, and now much further from their own ideas, run by vulgar Nazis rather than a right-wing elite close to their own view? Or do they keep their heads down and hope to avoid upsetting France's Popular Front government, which does not like them? How do they react to the Spanish Civil War?

There are also surviving links with Red Russia, especially with Tukhachevsky, from a similar social background but the Red Army's top commander.

The real-life basis concerns General Evgenii Miller (Dobrinsky) and General Nikolai Skoblin (Fiodor). I'll not say more, to avoid spoilers. Just that the film does not give a definite solution to the mystery, though it points to one. You can find one account on the Wikipedia. On the DVD you find Skoblin's niece giving a very different interpretation.

Despite unresolved mysteries, and some liberties taken with solid fact, I found this a very watchable film.

Eric Rohmer masterfully uses Paris as a canvas to brush the complex profiles of his characters, a quartet of retired White Russian Generals, a Greek painter married to a member of the quartet and their friends exiled in 1937 Paris.

Rohmer's mastery: His use of authentic buildings of the period with subtle deco stylization and other White Russian meeting points (the canteen of the Rachmaninov conservatory and a wooden Orthodox church near Butte-Chaumont), along with brilliant dialogues subtly lit with conversation on Picasso, Abstraction and realism in Art. Both the Communist couple and the White Russian couple in the movie will be steam-rolled by the events. Rohmer's use of newsreels is also extremely symbolic. The Paris World Fair of 1937 is shown with its stone colossus in the competing Soviet and Fascits pavilions seeming ready to crush the movie's characters as the end appears.Blum is seen making a speech among a forest of risen fists.

The relativity of life and that of free-will is the real subject. Is Fiodor pulling the strings or is he just just one of the puppets lost in the dubious cauldron of the Germano-Soviet pact of 1939 brewing in the shadows? Extraordinary work of a mature genius that makes one think that freedom is just appearance. Great actors with the beauty of french spoken rolling the Rs (Fiodor) or whispering them (his wife). Tragic unexpected ending. Rohmer revisits Hitchkok for a final "Coup de Theatre"!