Full Moon in Paris (1984) from Tuna
|Full Moon In Paris (1984) is a very bad translation of a very good French film title, "Les nuits de la pleine lune," or "The nights of the Full Moon." I understand that the film was shot in Paris, and that they kept the full moon part, but the original title actually referred to the film, and made sense.|
|Let me explain. Pascale Ogier plays a recent industrial arts graduate, working as an intern in a design firm in Paris, and living with her boyfriend in suburbia. While redecorating her Paris apartment, supposedly to sub-let it, she decides that she wants to keep the apartment and spend some nights in the city. Her boyfriend is a stick-in-the-mud, and is pushing for marriage. She is still party age, and wants to experience more of life. Her best friend in Paris is a married man who would love to seduce her, and tries in vain throughout the film. After three months of this double life, she brings home a young musician to her apartment. She wakes up next to him, and feels trapped in her own apartment.||
|She gets up, flashes the three Bs for the
camera, and leaves to go to the other home. While waiting
for the first train, she stops in a cafe and ends up
confessing to a stranger. He explains that some people
are affected by a full moon, and that tonight is
"The Night of the Full Moon," which explains
why she was wilder than normal and couldn't sleep. He is
also affected by the full moon. Note that the term lunacy
derives from a similar theory.
When Ogier gets back to her apartment in the burbs, she is in for some surprises. But then, if the ending wasn't somewhat tragic, it wouldn't be a French romantic comedy, would it?
Maltin loves this Eric Rohmer film, citing snappy dialogue and a charming performance from Ogier. Indeed, she won best actress at the Venice film festival. The first time I saw this, I was captivated by Ogier. This time, Maltin's "snappy dialogue" really got in the way of my enjoyment. The film is way too talky. That being said, it is well made and well acted. I will give it a C+
Tuna nailed my exact problem with all of Rohmer's movies. I have always struggled with his movies. They bore the hell out of me. While the dialogue is intelligent and subtle, there is simply too much of it, like those old English drawing-room plays where the characters just sit in one room and talk about matters sacred and profane.
I guess I'm simply too dumb to understand why Rohmer is regarded as a great film auteur, because I just don't "get" his movies. He must be too subtle for my blunt mind to grasp.
Return to the Movie House home page