Rohmer's Films

I recently indulged myself with a 25 DVD set of Eric Rohmer's (all his films bar Astree and Celadon). It was quite inexpensive so I couldn't resist - though I am sure you can download it for free off a few websites. I am slowly working my way through it, I have managed three so far. A Winter's Tale was very absorbing, confirming that Rohmer's Tales of the Seasons is the best of his work. Love in the Afternoon, though interesting, was also surprisingly slightly icky in its depiction of near infidelity. Maybe the 70s appear so when viewed with a sensibility not in tune with the times (I can never appreciate Last Tango in Paris, for e.g.). It is also one of Rohmer's few films where the seemingly bad girl is the bad girl. I had seen Suzanne's Career before, but it remained as charming on a second viewing. Specifically I think the way it is shot and its themes complement and contrast other New Wave directors of the time and along with these films it is also a record of Paris at a particular time. The latter films of the directors do not seem to have such a commonality. All Rohmer's movies are essentially variations on young love and yet each time it looks wondrously fresh.

Rohmer was the film maker whose work inspired the "like watching paint dry' criticism. Possibly the criticism is helped along by the fact that Rohmer's films have a lot of talk, hardly any music and are not overly concerned with cinematic flourishes a la Godard. Of course criticism of arthouse cinema is as pointless as that of commercial cinema. Both occupy very separate spaces and are ruled by different concerns.

Plenty of New Wave films, albeit very sophisticated and influential, have a handmade feel. You get the feeling that a lot is improvised and the actors are friends and acquaintances. The New Wave directors pretty much invented the auteur theory but in their movies it functions quite differently from a mere directorial stamp or a signature style. Rather the movies are a reflection of their political, moral and philosophical concerns. It feels more or less like a cinematic monograph or essay, which is seemingly impossible in that medium. So for all their indelible images and for all their influence on cinematic techniques (not Rohmer but certainly Godard), their movies above all are about ideas. This is also why the films lend themselves so well to film criticism, completing the circle in a way, given that many of the directors started out with Cahiers du Cinema. Even viewed today, it's remarkable that they pulled it off so well in their early body of work.