342-348 Six Moral Tales

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Post Reply
Message
Author
solent

#126 Post by solent » Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:43 pm

In one TV interview we are told Rohmer is a private man who does not do interviews. The 1977 interview features him exclusively and show him to be a quick, alert and intelligent man, more than happy to explain his art & happy to be interviewed. In the 2006 interview, although older and more stooped, Rohmer's intellectual vitality remains intact.

This box is as complete a picture of the tales for the home viewer as can be expected. I do not see how it can be bettered. The colour transfers are the best I have ever seen (I never saw any of these tales in the cinema, only on TV & video).

Napoleon
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

#127 Post by Napoleon » Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:34 am

Concerning My Night At Maudes.
colinr0380 wrote:Of course Francoise is at the beginning and end of Maud's, but the title and the enormous length of the scene at Maud's apartment make her the central figure
SpoilerShow
(am I wrong in thinking that it was Francoise who had the affair with Maud's husband, and that was what she was worried Jean-Louise had found out at the end of the film?)
SpoilerShow
No, I think Rohmer drops enough clues to make this the obvious conclusion. My plot-sense was tingling as soon as Maude mentioned her husband having an affair with a blonde Catholic. I'm not sure that Francois was afraid of Jean finding out about this (she had already confessed to an affair), more concerned about the past (and how in her puritan mind this past is at a tangent to her moral code) being dredged up.

User avatar
sevenarts
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 7:22 pm
Contact:

#128 Post by sevenarts » Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:22 pm

Just got this set today and I have to add my praise to the chorus -- I just don't get the sporadic complaints I see about not enough content. I've never seen any of the films before, so that alone is enough of a treat, but the real selling point for me was the inclusion of the (hefty) book and the wealth of short films (and On Pascal). Those are exactly the kind of special features I'll make the most use of and enjoy the most. I tend to feel that an artist's work can stand best on its own, so I usually only dip slightly into interviews, documentaries, and such, but to have more of the artist's actual work packed into the box is the best possible bonus as far as I'm concerned.

Tonight I was so excited I watched the first two Moral Tales plus the short films Presentation and Nadja in Paris. Was definitely not disappointed. The films present such a quiet naturalism that they seem to take on the rhythm of life itself. This is especially obvious in Nadja, of course, but also in the more plot-based Moral Tales, where the narrative thread is usually submerged in the fabric of the characters' everyday lives, and is usually not even obvious until the very end. I was fairly blown away by Suzanne's Career, which seemed pretty unobtrusive and quiet until the very final minute, with that stunningly sensual scene and the narrator's sudden, emotional shift in tone. It was remarkably effective, and felt somehow very natural -- the film's ending seems to emerge like an epiphany from the monotony of daily life, for us in the audience, much in the same way as it does for the narrator. It was delightfully unexpected, which is another aspect of these films that I quite enjoyed. Despite the well-worn boy/girl material, I never felt like the films were predictable in any sense -- I had no idea where these tangled relationships were heading, and not just in the "who'll end up with who" sense of a typical romantic farce. Just a really fresh and honest treatment of love and romance and dating. I'm really looking forward to diving into some of the features next, but already this box promises to rank among my favorite Criterion releases (and I own quite a few of their other worthy box sets).

User avatar
kieslowski_67
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland

#129 Post by kieslowski_67 » Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:04 pm

Have gone through the set twice already. This is easily my choice for DVD of the year and seriously cannot see anything that can top this achievement. "My night at Maud's" has never looked so good, and Nestor Almendros's DP work in "La Collectionneuse" is just marvelous. I thought that Rohmer's films were visually unimpressive before. Boy, was I wrong on this!
Last edited by kieslowski_67 on Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:18 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
gubbelsj
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: San Diego

#130 Post by gubbelsj » Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:08 pm

kieslowski_67 wrote: I thought that Rohmer's films were visually unimpressive before. Boy, was I wrong on this!
I've been having similar responses. I first stumbled across Claire's Knee as a college sophomore on videotape, and the picture was blurry and totally unmemorable. The story and dialogue really stuck with me over the years, but re-watching it now I'm amazed at what a visually beautiful work was hidden underneath that nasty VHS surface. The films look fantastic - a real service has been done.

User avatar
kieslowski_67
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland

#131 Post by kieslowski_67 » Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:09 pm

sevenarts wrote: I've never seen any of the films before,
You should try "comedies and proverbs" and "tales of four seasons" immediately after you finish the moral tales. Pay attention to how Rohmer gradually shift his focus from the jealous men (moral tales) to uncertain women (good marriage, Pauline at the beach, full moon in Paris, green ray, tale of the spring time).

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

#132 Post by zedz » Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:16 pm

kieslowski_67 wrote: "My night at Maud's" has never looked so good, and Nestor Almendros's DP work in "La Collectionneuse" is just marvelous. I thought that Rohmer's films were visually unimpressive before. Boy, was I wrong on this!
I think it's an easy trap to fall into because so much of the memory of a Rohmer film is related to character, performance, story and mood, and the visuals are so beautifully attuned to those values that they don't fight for independent attention. But, we're talking about Nestor Almendros here! Diane Baratier doesn't have the same cachet, but her run with Rohmer in later years is similarly impeccable and impressive.

User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

#133 Post by justeleblanc » Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:56 pm

Where were you SOBs three months ago when I made the statement that Rohmer was a very visual director and everyone took turns stapling my balls to the water boiler? It took you all long enough.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

#134 Post by Michael Kerpan » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:03 pm

kieslowski_67 wrote:Pay attention to how Rohmer gradually shift his focus from the jealous men (moral tales) to uncertain women (good marriage, Pauline at the beach, full moon in Paris, green ray, tale of the spring time).
If one really really REALLY dislikes the male characters in later Rohmer -- might one be even more allergic to those in the earlier films?

artfilmfan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:11 pm

#135 Post by artfilmfan » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:05 pm

kieslowski_67 wrote:Have gone through the sets twice already. This is easily my choice for DVD of the year and seriously cannot see anything that can top this achievement. "My night at Maud's" has never looked so good, and Nestor Almendros's DP work in "La Collectionneuse" is just marvelous. I thought that Rohmer's films were visually unimpressive before. Boy, was I wrong on this!
Agreed, agreed and agreed. :) This box set is a treasure. "La Collectionneuse" looks marvelous. I hope Criterion will release "Tales of the Four Seasons" someday because "A Tale of Springtime" and "A Summer's Tale" are also marvelous-looking.

And "Suzanne's Career" is simply great.

solent

#136 Post by solent » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:54 pm

SUZANNE'S CAREER is certainly an honest and truthful portrayal of what a plain Jane really got up to in the early days of the sexual revolution. Watching this film reminded me of my younger days [late 70s/early 80s] and made me think of how Rohmer has captured something essential about youth (and life as a student). [Note the inter-personal sexual politics played out between the various characters.] NAJDA is an educational snapshot of Paris places and Paris types c. 1963. A history lesson of sorts.

User avatar
ellipsis7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin

#137 Post by ellipsis7 » Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:27 am

For extended b/g to Rohmer's film philosophy and criticism check out TASTE OF BEAUTY - his collected writings 1948-1979 (trans. Carol Volk) still in print from Cambridge University Press...

User avatar
kieslowski_67
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland

#138 Post by kieslowski_67 » Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:40 am

justeleblanc wrote:Where were you SOBs three months ago when I made the statement that Rohmer was a very visual director and everyone took turns stapling my balls to the water boiler? It took you all long enough.
Calm down, please. The majority of us only enjoyed Rohmer films from TV and poor quality DVD releases. The only Rohmer film that I watched on the big screen was "aviator's wife" about 20 years ago when I was a teenager. I was not able to appreciate Rohmer's talky narrative then.

BTW, honey, please show us a little more than just your lovely knee.:)

User avatar
kieslowski_67
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland

#139 Post by kieslowski_67 » Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:52 am

Michael Kerpan wrote:If one really really REALLY dislikes the male characters in later Rohmer -- might one be even more allergic to those in the earlier films?
Well, in 5 of the 6 moral tales (except Jean-Louis in Maud's), the male leads (or co-leads) were either selfish womanizer or jerks. It's kind of interesting that Rohmer left the playing field wild open and the audience are not sure whether the protagnists would live a happier life with the seducers. Frédéric seems to have better chemistry with Chloé than with Hélène; Adrien and Haydee could have made a great couple; although Jean-Louis married Françoise, it's not hard to imagine that he could be a very happy man if he married the lovely Maud. These unaddressed mysteries made these films more morally complex and more fascinating to enjoy by the audience.

User avatar
ellipsis7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin

#140 Post by ellipsis7 » Sat Sep 16, 2006 5:22 pm

Review in Sight and Sound refers to 'new and improved' subtitles... I had noticed this watching... Are contemporaneously colloquial but depart from the french precise language construction, as conceived by rohmer... no big deal but worth noticing...

User avatar
Matango
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Hong Kong

#141 Post by Matango » Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:29 am

SO what hapened to all the posts here about the ignored slipcase replacement requests from Criterion and the disappearance of posts. Oh, right, I get it....moved to another thread. I wish they'd tell us when that happens...I missed a bunch of later answers.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

#142 Post by colinr0380 » Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:59 am

ellipsis7 wrote:Review in Sight and Sound refers to 'new and improved' subtitles... I had noticed this watching... Are contemporaneously colloquial but depart from the french precise language construction, as conceived by rohmer... no big deal but worth noticing...
It was an interesting article. I still haven't gotten to the book yet- I wonder if the novel uses 'affair of the heart' rather than 'love affair' or 'pretext' rather than 'excuse' in My Night At Maud's?

User avatar
ellipsis7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin

#143 Post by ellipsis7 » Tue Sep 19, 2006 12:21 pm

There's another translation, this made by English Showalter, in the script of MY NIGHT AT MAUD'S in the Rutgers Films in Print series... Uses 'affairs of the heart'...

fliggil
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: NYC

#144 Post by fliggil » Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:36 pm

does anyone know what piece is playing at the music recital about 20 minutes into My Night At Maud's?

portnoy
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:03 am

#145 Post by portnoy » Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:59 pm

kieslowski_67 wrote:
Michael Kerpan wrote:If one really really REALLY dislikes the male characters in later Rohmer -- might one be even more allergic to those in the earlier films?
Well, in 5 of the 6 moral tales (except Jean-Louis in Maud's), the male leads (or co-leads) were either selfish womanizer or jerks. It's kind of interesting that Rohmer left the playing field wild open and the audience are not sure whether the protagnists would live a happier life with the seducers. Frédéric seems to have better chemistry with Chloé than with Hélène; Adrien and Haydee could have made a great couple; although Jean-Louis married Françoise, it's not hard to imagine that he could be a very happy man if he married the lovely Maud. These unaddressed mysteries made these films more morally complex and more fascinating to enjoy by the audience.
In terms of the difficulty with the male protagonists, it's something I've had to deal with as well - I love La Collectionneuse and really liked Love in the Afternoon, but I just couldn't get past Brialy in Claire's Knee - he's such an unapologetic shit that I couldn't wait until I was through with him.

User avatar
GringoTex
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:57 am

#146 Post by GringoTex » Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:45 am

kieslowski_67 wrote:These unaddressed mysteries made these films more morally complex and more fascinating to enjoy by the audience.
Are they really mysteries? Being moral doesn't mean making yourself happy. It means doing the "right" thing despite your personal satisfaction. I see very little that's wide open in these films. Rohmer paints a very clear portrait of what's right and what's wrong in each case.

User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

#147 Post by justeleblanc » Fri Nov 03, 2006 4:42 pm

portnoy wrote:In terms of the difficulty with the male protagonists, it's something I've had to deal with as well - I love La Collectionneuse and really liked Love in the Afternoon, but I just couldn't get past Brialy in Claire's Knee - he's such an unapologetic shit that I couldn't wait until I was through with him.
Agreed. He reminded me of people I hated, but in a bad way. I felt he was always performing, always ingenuine, and always getting what he wants. There are moments when this immature jerk gets what he deserves, but they are in such small doses that both times I watched this film I was unable to fully enjoy it. I wonder if this was Rohmer's intention or Brialy's short-comings.

artfilmfan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:11 pm

#148 Post by artfilmfan » Fri Nov 03, 2006 11:27 pm

Question: Does anyone else ever think that the male characters in Hong Sang-soo's films behave a lot like many of those in Rohmer's films?

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

#149 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sat Nov 04, 2006 12:42 am

artfilmfan wrote:Question: Does anyone else ever think that the male characters in Hong Sang-soo's films behave a lot like many of those in Rohmer's films?
Yes and no. The male characters in Hong can be equally big jerks -- but I find them generally far more believable (and human). The most annoying Rohmer males strike me mostly as over-talkative puppets. Perhaps it is a good thing that Hong's male characters tend to be far less articulate.

French completist
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:16 pm
Location: Le Cateau, France

#150 Post by French completist » Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:29 pm

Does anybody know what exactly was the role of Rohmer in La Cambrure?

Post Reply