I need some assistance with these assignment. rohmer’s films Thank you in advance for the help! Rohmer ventures into a mature and truly cinematic treatment of major moral issues through the lives of very ordinary middle-class men and women. Monaco notes that the first two films in the series, La Boulangère de Monceau and La Carrière de Suzanne are shorter, of poorer technical quality than the last four, and should be regarded as “little more than introductions to the themes of the last four films” (1976, p. 296). The focus of attention for this innovation in cinema history is, therefore, the series of four films Le Genou de Claire, La Collectionneuse, Ma Nuit chez Maud, and L’Amour, l,après-midi.
Each film presents a set of relationships, centering on one male protagonist, and largely depicting the scenarios from that point of view. The women and the other men in the films are all acquaintances of the protagonist, and they provide conversation partners with which the protagonist debates major moral issues, mainly to do with human love relationships and the choices which we have to make in love and in life. There is plenty of opportunities, however, and increasingly so as the film series develops, to perceive things briefly from the point of view of the female characters. Their vivacity and the men’s relative inability to negotiate a successful love relationship with them leaves the viewer to question the dominant angle of the films and wonder if perhaps the men have missed something, or misunderstood something vital, which the women have known all along. When viewed from a post-feminist perspective the films are somewhat dated, but they do cast light on the period in the late sixties and early seventies when men and women were beginning to renegociate the social arrangements of dating, fidelity, and marriage and so this makes them historically as well as cinematically interesting.
The lessons that the men are painfully trying to verbalize in the films are not necessarily the lessons that the films leave behind, as Rohmer is keen to point out: “My characters’ discourse is not necessarily my film’s discourse.” (Rohmer, “Letter.” 1971, p. . 1). .He goes on to make the point that in his film he does not say, but he shows.  .This means that the actions and the words of the characters in the film are only parts of this spectacle, and everything must be taken as a whole, in order to interpret what the filmmaker is showing the viewer. This requires a certain effort on the part of the viewer, to disentangle contrasting, or even contradictory elements in the films, and work out what the overall message is. A good example of this is found in the film Ma Nuit chez Maud, where “the protagonist views himself from an angle which is distinctly different from ours.