Eric Rohmer is dead.

[baby doll]

Here's a little something to ruin your day. (http://www.theauteurs.com/notebook/posts/1390)

[Raiders]

Well poo.

[number8]

Glum.

[Spinal]

90 years on the planet. 50 films. Nicely done, Mr. Rohmer.

[dreamdead]

Super sadness. This thread will hold some reviews of his films at some point, when I see those films that baby doll has said I should.

[Boner M]

Drat. I got a UK boxset of a random selection of his films for X-mas, should watch one tonight.

[Qrazy]

Drat. I got a UK boxset of a random selection of his films for X-mas, should watch one tonight.

Man of the West (Mann, 1958) ***½

Kudos. How does this stack up against your other Mann viewings?

[Boner M]

Man of the West (Mann, 1958) ***½

Kudos. How does this stack up against your other Mann viewings?
Border Incident ***
The Furies **1/2
Winchester '73 ***1/2

MotW is probably my favorite.

PS: Sorry Eric.

[Spaceman Spiff]

:sad:

[MadMan]

Well I'll have to watch one of his films in his honor, then, as I've never seen any of his work.

[Qrazy]

Border Incident ***
The Furies **1/2
Winchester '73 ***1/2

MotW is probably my favorite.

PS: Sorry Eric.

Nice, did you see my brief thoughts in the race thread? MotW is my favorite as well.

And yeah bummer about Rohmer. I haven't loved any of his films yet but I respect the guy.

[Llopin]

This sucks. I see Rohmer doesn't gather the attention he deserves around these parts. I still believe he is the sole filmmaker which managed to both teach me about life, human relations, the world as it is, and entertain me, in a cheap, non-ambitious way, when I was a young turd. I've seen almost everything he's directed and at least a handful of his flicks could be considered masterworks (or near-masterpieces). BASIC teenage education for me.

Life in its purest state. Reality as it surrounds the being.

Rest in peace.

[MadMan]

Whoa, its Llopin. Yo.

[Morris Schæffer]

I've seen only My Night at Maude, recommended by Llopin for a swap, and really liked it.

[baby doll]

Well I'll have to watch one of his films in his honor, then, as I've never seen any of his work.Ma nuit chez Maud is his official masterpiece, but I prefer Perceval le Gallois, L'Anglaise et le duc, Le Genou de Claire, Triple Agent, Les Amours d'Astrée et de Céladon, and Conte d'automne.

[Pathétique]

I just happened to have Pauline at the Beach at the top of my Netflix queue on the day Rohmer died. And I just happened to watch it today, my birthday. I also just happened to have loved it.

The intricacies of the film delight me. I am trying to figure out what it is that makes Pauline the central character. I definitely feel that she is the central character, or at least the character that I sympathize and relate to the most. She doesn't seem to get much more screentime than the other characters and Rohmer seems equally fair in representing each character's motivations. Yet he names the film after Pauline. Does everyone see her as the central character? Would they if the film weren't named after her? Is it because the film begins with a conflict of Pauline's and ends with a sort of resolution of it? (Do the other characters have unresolved conflicts?) Is it because we view Pauline as the most innocent, and we associate innocence with voyeurism, and we naturally relate to voyeurs as we inevitably are one as we view the movie?

[MadMan]

Ma nuit chez Maud is his official masterpiece, but I prefer Perceval le Gallois, L'Anglaise et le duc, Le Genou de Claire, Triple Agent, Les Amours d'Astrée et de Céladon, and Conte d'automne.Thanks for the recommendations. I've really heard nothing but good things about Ma nuit chez Maud.

[baby doll]

Thanks for the recommendations. I've really heard nothing but good things about Ma nuit chez Maud.Just to make everyone jealous, I saw it and Le Beau mariage in 35mm at the Cinémathèque Busan last winter.

[dreamdead]

Watched the first Rohmer since his death *sigh* with The Lady and the Duke. Typically solid, if not revelatory. This period piece didn't quite feel as fully developed as the Marquis of O, even if both have exquisite painterly designs in terms of their take on cinematography. Here the use of perspective-based backgrounds is uncanny, in that it's disorienting to feel as though that much detail has been recreated, but somehow the mood doesn't actually alienate so much as add another layer, heightening the experience. However, while the whole film moves fluidly and offers a solid critique of the witch-hunting that plagued the French revolution, it's not quite as layered philosophically as other of his films, which prevents the film from possessing a multiplicity of readings.