1 line
3.4 KiB
Plaintext
1 line
3.4 KiB
Plaintext
I saw this in the theater when it was released (getting truly rave reviews in New York newspapers) and was baffled by this extra-slow version of La Ronde or of one of Woody Allen's many comic movies (but with two quite physically unattractive lead characters).<br /><br />I put my lack of enthusiastic response down to my ignorance of Heidegger's philosophy, of the particular Pirandello play they used throughout, and of most of Goldoni. (I'd merely known of Heidegger's sympathy for the Nazis, read Six Characters in Search of an Author, and seen Mistress of the Inn with the marvelous Tovah Feldshuh).<br /><br />I thought that if I knew Heidegger's philosophy better (perhaps some dictum about an inverse proportionality between beauty and truth?), had read more of Pirandello (or at least the play of which we keep seeing excerpts) and had a more comprehensive knowledge of Goldoni - then I would understand the point of this movie. I though this was a movie that I would just have to say was "over my head" - the laughs must come from the clever juxtapositions between various things written by these three men and what I was seeing.<br /><br />But in the four years since I saw the movie in a theater, I've read no more from those three men. But I also came to the realization that most people I have encountered DON'T know much of Heidegger's philosophy, haven't read more than "Six Characters" by Pirandello, and few seem to have seen even a single play by Goldoni.<br /><br />And few of the people who express enjoyment of the movie on this site seem to do so based upon the relationship of these authors' texts to what is happening on the screen. So, perhaps there was something about this movie that even in my state of comparative ignorance, I simply missed. So I rented it again.<br /><br />I now doubt that I missed much - and think the movie simply fails on all levels.<br /><br />Romantic comedies really need appealing characters - this has only one -played by the lovely Helene de Fouguerolles. She's probably the least significant of the three female characters - and somehow fails to wind up with the man - in fact bizarrely, she is the one whom NONE of the men find worthwhile to pursue! This is true perversity.<br /><br />The lead female character is a sadly ugly woman of no discernible charm or grace, given no witty lines and only ugly behavior (fidelity to her boyfriend, chaste behavior, even the necessity to be pleasant to other human beings around one - mean nothing to this wretch and the fact that she's nervous/annoyed/irritated through most of the film is hugely unappealing).<br /><br />The second lead is more physically attractive but her attraction to the two men in her life is mystifying and her past is despicable (as is her desire to continue the to keep the ill-gotten gains from that past).<br /><br />The three men are idiots.<br /><br />The furnishings are nice - including the sets in the play within the play, the references to Goldoni, Pirandello and Heidegger obviously intrigued me when I first saw it, but the only reason to see this film is the appeal of the enthusiastic, vivacious, lovely, gracious Helene de Fougerolles - and it's not enough to watch this slow-moving unfunny dud.<br /><br />For those interested in the subject, watch almost any other about several couples - from La Ronde to Husbands and Wives, from Everybody Says I Love You to Libeled Lady. They're all vastly superior - with characters one might like and actors whose looks don't make you wince. |