Boyfriends and Girlfriends

Eric Rohmer was more than one of the directors who formed the French New Wave. He also wrote a lot of surveys and articles about cinema, especially about his favorite director, F.W. Murnau, out who he wrote his dissertation. His first article that got published in the year 1948 was titled (directly translated:) "Film, art of space." In the year 1962 Eric Rohmer published his academic survey called: "The construction of space in Murnau's Faust." While reading about his surveys and articles, it's no surprise that space in Rohmer's films seems to be as important as the plot.

Eric Rohmer's career started with problems, and it wasn't going forward. But when he got off the ground, he proceeded more purposefully than anyone. When the new wave era ended in 1964, the directors of it started eventually finding their own path. Eric Rohmer started his series of six film, The Moral Tales and continued with Comedies & Proverbs in the 1980's. L'ami de mon amie (My Girlfriend's Boyfriend) is sixth and the last one in the series. It builds around the proverb: "My friends' friends are my friends." The comical situations emerge between two women who unintentionally swap boyfriends.

Two women suddenly meet while having lunch. One of the two women is Blanche, she is a skinny, uptight young woman, who is still searching for herself. The other is Lea, she's self-confident and a very feminine person. They both have something going on with men, so the main characters have their opponents; shy Fabien and a true player, Alexandre.

While trying to figure out the space of My Girlfriend's Boyfriend, I can't miss the futuristic city the characters live in. I got the feeling that Eric Rohmer isn't trying to tell a story of four specific people who live in France. To me he's telling about all the people living in these suburbs of Paris. The space of a futuristic city, the city full of postmodern architecture without any past. This theme of the milieu leads to rootlessness. The people of this city have no past, each of them like to analyze and talk about themselves. But none of them really know who they are.

My Girlfriend's Boyfriend offered these kind of things for me. In addition to its intelligent narrative, it is full of hilarious comical situations. Eric Rohmer builds four very interesting characters which will take you on board.

"My friends' boyfriends are my boyfriends."

The French film L'ami de mon amie (1987) was written and directed by Éric Rohmer. It was shown with two English titles: Boyfriends and Girlfriends and My Girlfriend's Boyfriend.

The film has five protagonists: Emmanuelle Chaulet as Blanche, Anne-Laure Meury as Adrienne, Eric Viellard as Fabien, François-Eric Gendron as Alexandre, and Sophie Renoir as Lea. (Yes--she's related to the painter and all of the cinematic Renoir family.)

Blanche has moved to a new apartment in Cergy-Pontoise, a trendy new town near Paris. It's there that she meets Lea, who introduces her to Alexandre. Blanche is attracted to Alexandre, but he already has a girlfriend--Adrienne.

It takes a while for the friends to sort themselves out. While the sorting is taking place, they talk and talk--Rohmer's speciality.

And, of course, Rohmer had an eye for attractive actors. All of the women are beautiful, both of the men are handsome, and everyone desires someone else's lover.

This movie is the final installment of in Rohmer's Comedies and Proverbs series. The film has a solid IMDB rating of 7.5. I enjoyed it, and rated it 8.

P. S. In 1988, Sophie Renoir was nominated for the César Award for Most Promising Actress for her part in this movie.

This is an entertaining Rohmer movie, with some good ideas and interesting dialogue. However I couldn't believe how bad the actress in the lead role was. It even beats Arielle Dombasle's laughable performance in "Pauline à la plage". In "L'ami de mon amie", it's as if Emmanuelle Chaulet herself is clueless about the character, throughout the movie. Her name in the movie is Blanche, as in "oie blanche" in French, which means a girl or young woman with a prudish upbringing who is candid and a bit foolish.

Unfortunately, in all her scenes Emmanuelle Chaulet is fidgetting, wincing, twiddling her hair or shaking her head any moment, and for no reason. She has no sense of timing or delivery, her body language is either inappropriate, or over the top. In one scene at the café, she can't even utter one, simple line such as "les affaires cult...culturelles" (her job department), without stuttering. Then she giggles like a schoolgirl, when she's supposed to be a serious, grown civil servant. She can't even kiss a (good-looking) partner: her intimate scene in the woods with Éric Viellard is cringe worthy. Utter amateurism. I don't know what went through Rohmer's head, maybe he was having a laugh, maybe he didn't have a choice. Anyway it's no wonder why her career as an actress failed to take off after that. She didn't even have the appeal of prior Rohmer heroines such as those played by Haydée Politoff, Françoise Fabian or Amanda Langlet, for instance. By contrast with her, Sophie Renoir (Léa), Eric Viellard (Fabien) and F-E Gendron (Alexandre) raise the level by giving a much more watchable and relaxed performance.

I like Rohmer's playing with color symmetry and permutation in the actors' outfits, like the blue top/white skirt matching Léa's white top/blue skirt at the evening party, to emphasise the contrasting traits and moods of the characters. The conclusion, a sensible outcome, is satisfying both for the characters and the viewer.

I love Rohmer's films. Even more those in the cycle Comedies and Proverbs. They're dissertations about love, friendship and the fine line between the two. In Rohmer's world, love and what leads to it is comparable to an algebraic formula: A is to C what B is to A. Again in this one, a lot of interesting dialog, in which every line incites us to reflect. Like this one: "Maybe it's because I didn't love her anymore that I went back with her". In fact, dialog and interaction between the characters are the only thing that matter in this movie. Everything else his not important. And as for characters, there is just a few, so you get to know them. You know what they want and how they react when they get it.

Out of 100, I gave it 76. That's good for **½ out of ****. Seen at home, in Toronto, on November 26th, 2004.

This film is among the best of Rohmer's films. Why ? Because he observes our little snobberies, our small little lies, and in his detached way he loves humanity for them. It is set in Cergy which back in 1987 was a sort of new ' paradise ' just outside of Paris. Two young women who work and study there become friends, and one has a boyfriend and the other does not. There is a fourth in this, a supposed perfect young man who can seduce anyone. The four become entangled in a dance of love, both in retreat and in advance, and light though the subject maybe it has a profound knowledge of our illusions, and our ability of changing lovers that very often hurts no one. And the wonder of the scenario is that like the titles of two Shakespeare plays,' Much Ado About Nothing ' becomes ' All's Well That Ends Well. ' Those who accuse it as being superficial should realise that the surface is deceptive, and that obvious depths are often even more superficial, often becoming self dramatics (on the part of the directors) and the situations he or she creates, or simply portrays, to often imposed melodramatic formulas. Rohmer watches and catches the glance and the gesture that rings true and many do not have this gift. All four, Sophie Renoir, Emmanuelle Chaulet, Francois-Eric Gendron, and Eric Viellard are superb, especially Chaulet and Viellard, who have a chemistry together which is a joy to see. If the sceptics try to convince that Rohmer is shallow just remember that one of the masters of so-called extreme cinema, Quentin Tarantino, loves Rohmer's films. If I had to watch only one director it would be Rohmer. I0 of his best films on a desert island would be my ultimate choice.