Va Savoir

Rating:
Summary: Lost interest
Review: I'm writing this review just to put in my 2 cents--and maybe to save you .... I really can't tell you what this film was about because I lost interest in it along the way. Something about the leading actress who is really nervous--probably because she is afraid her ex-lover will show up in the theater one nite. And then there's the director and co-star who she is involved with. The reason I lost interest in this film is because: 1) I did not care for the characters--I found them flat and one-dimensional; and 2) I found the storyline to be very thin. Critics have compared this film to Eric Rohmer's films. I completely disasgree! "Va Savoir" doesn't compare to films like "Autumn Story," "Boyfriends and Girlfriends," or "Summer." Those films didn't have much of a storyline either, but at least I cared about the characters who I found interesting. From a moviegoer who is a big Rohmer, Truffaut, Woody Allen, Bergman fan--I cannot recommend "Va Savoir."

Rating:
Summary: An Intelligent But a Little Overrated French Film on Romance
Review: Jacques Rivette, respected film director from France and pioneer of the French New Wave that is usually represented by the name of Jean-Luc Godard, is loved by critics rather than general audience, and if you see "Va Savoir," you see the reason very clearly. In short, Rivette, who himself once was a film critic, is too intellectual. And this is not a compliment.

"Va Savoir" deals with a set of women and men, whose romantic relations keep on gradually changing according to their unstable motives. It is hardly possible (and meaningless, I'm afraid) to summerize the plot, because he is famous for not giving the complete script before shooting. The scenes are shot with improvization, his trademark, and consequently his film runs much longer than other directors'. (Just compare his style with Eric Rohmer, another New Wave director.) So, his films find ardent followers in a very small fraction of moviegoers, among whom professional critics play most prominent roles. In short, if you don't know him, or don't like him, it is not unnatural. Rivette is a love-or-hate director, so to speak, and frankly he is responsible for that.

Okay, if you are still reading this, "Va Savoir," comparatively audience-friendly among his works, is reputed to make you smile, and it is partly true. See French actress Camille slowly comes to be friendly to Sonia, who lives with Camille's former love Pierre. Camille's hostility to her is changed into understanding, and finally they conspire to take back the ring stolen from Sonia in a most unexpected way. Rivette's idea is here and there; for example, after the failed opening night, Camille and her husband Ugo come back to their hotel, and though they enter their rooms through diffenent doors, actually the rooms are connected through another door inside, and later we are to see them talking on bed together. Isn't it pretty, is it? In this way, the director Rivette always goes ahead of our expectation, and slyly twists and turns the complicated plot to make a surprising development of their situation. If you are accustomed to his method, you might be entertained to watch those characters' silly but lovable behaviors.

However, it cannot be denied that his style alienates many audiences. The film is too slow-paced for this kind of subject matter such as romance or comedy, and Rivette always mystifies his topics to evade audience's anticipation, like the concealed painting of "La Belle Noisease." He doesn't affirm anything. The critics may love it, finding the correspondece between his philosophy and the drama played within the film (a Pirandello play, which, of course, defied our concept of identity). The ending of the film shows us the characters dancing as if eternally, and in fact they dance in the film forever, changing partners again and again. Therefore, we might intellectually enjoy finding hidden meanings and the director's intentions. But, sorry to say this, but I just don't think that is why movies were invented almost 100 years ago. If other reviewers say that they need something different, something not so ponderously made, I feel their complaint is totally understandable.

Some critics showed their unexpected surprise, saying this is a fresh, cheerful film from a veteran like Rivette. They are right, but I must say it is grossly unfair that the director takes all the credit of the praise given to it. My belief is, without Jean Paul Belmondo, there was no Gadard; this time again the director is greatly helped by the first-rate actors, especially Jeanne Balibar (Camille) and Helene de Fougerolles (Do), who generate the lighthearted feelings of the film, "Va Savoir." After your patient sitting through the opening chapters that establish the characters relationships, the film will be a compeling film for you provided you are used to his time-consuming style. And you may talk about the film with your friends after seeing it if they show some taste for this kind of film.

Rating:
Summary: I agree.... so boring I had to turn it off...
Review: Now I've seen quite a good share of foreign films. Maybe it is my ignorance on theatrical names and topics in the film, but I could not follow any of it. The characters were very dry and distant. It has a very disappointing ending and the plot is just very slow moving.

Not very highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: Characters create un-Rivette-ing film.
Review: One could consider this film like a cinematic whole-wheat pancake. Your film comes topped with butter, syrup, and all the fruits you can think of (the characters of the film). When it is presented originally Va Savoir looks tantalizingly delicious, but after ten minutes of eating you realize that you finished and still hungry. You realize that this mound of goodness was nothing more than fluffy cooked dough that will ultimately make you fat, lazy, and sleepy. While it may give you a high at first, the darkness of the inevitable "sugar-low" is fast approaching and causing you to grab your stomach in disgust. Also, it was a flop. Perhaps that was a bit overboard, but I really wanted to explain this film in a way that was a bit more entertaining than the film itself. To put it bluntly, this film was like watching the grass grow in your back yard in anticipation of having to mow it again. It was slow, not very colorful, and a pain to sit through. When it finally gets too long, it hurts too much to do it again, but you know it must be done. That feeling is exactly how I felt about the film Va Savoir.

This is a devoutly character based film. To make a deeply rooted character based film to work, you must first have exciting characters that you know your audience is going to want to follow. Sadly, this was not the case in this film. From the opening scene (where the subtitles were not working on my DVD) all the way till the final moments of the film, we have to follow four of the dullest characters in cinematic history. Cammille is our pilot, following an emotion and feeling that is never quite developed in the story and therefore never quite developed in her. Her mannerisms and reactions to situations made me feel as if she was a bit on the loony side. Perhaps it was the way that Jeanne Balibar chose to play her, but there was nothing making me believe that Cammille was a very strong character. Her actions throughout the film prove that much, but what are her motives and reasonings? That is never explained or developed, yet there was three hours to do it. Strange. This goes the same for Sonia, who I also never really fully grasped onto. She seemed to be in love, but at the same time enjoying moments with Arthur. Her need to rearrange made me think that her and Cammille had similar personalities (loony), which is what made them become friends near the end. Yet, again, it was never explained. We, the audience, were forced to follow a lot of assumptions in this film, and whenever we felt that we fully understood and connected with a character, Rivette would pull us further away. It was as if he never really wanted us to fully understand them, but still accept them. That didn't brood well with me.

Couple this with random intermissions of the play that these performers are putting on for the Parisians only helps to confuse the audience. I couldn't tell if Cammille was actually acting in the play or just walking through the lines. Half the time it looked as if it bothered her to be there. There was no emotion or excitement when she was on stage prompting me to question whether she was this "infamous" actress that they claimed her to be. I have seen several foreign films in my lifetime, but this one takes the cake as possibly the longest passenger car to Dullsville. I had trouble understanding the play that was happening throughout the film, thus causing me to care less about the characters. The final thirty minutes of this movie are actually fun. The scenes where Pierre and Ugo decide to duel are hysterical. I actually watched this scene over again because I enjoyed it so much. The connections made at the end tied the film up nicely, but still left too many questions unanswered.

Overall, I was lost in this film. If you ever pick up this film and you see a blonde-hair, blue-eyes 26-year old wandering through the scenes, it is I just trying to understand this film. I can't figure it out, I can understand most Lynch, Gilliam, and others of the "jigsaw puzzle" genre, but this was just beyond my control. The characters seemed drab and never fully comfortable in their roles, and those that were jumped between emotions like playing leapfrog in kindergarten. The stories were connected well, but it didn't make any difference if the characters (the glue of the stories) didn't hold them together. In your eyes, and in your DVD player, you can see where this film just falls apart. If you are looking for a stronger emotional powerhouse film where characters work with their characters and push the envelope even further, I would check out Paul Thomas Anderson's Magnolia. This film reminded me of Magnolia except bad.

I don't suggest anyone wasting their three hours on this film, but who am I except a lost guy in this film.

Again, if found, please return!

Grade: * out of *****

Rating:
Summary: paced, but interesting
Review: The pace of this movie is steadfastly slow. The plot never really peeks in a bang manner. If you have the patience, though, it's an interesting movie to watch. The triangle relationships are humorous. Emotions never flare too high, but are displayed. All in all, a tempered film.

Rating:
Summary: A Very Rare Kind of Pleasure
Review: This film runs 154 minutes which is about the length of most epics. This however is not an epic and though an excellent story(once it gets going)it will tire and try the patience of even the most devoted Rivette loyalists. I like this film and am glad to have stayed the course with it but Rivette could have given us filmgoers a little more to look at(most shots are interiors of hotels or apartments) for those 2 1/2 hours. That said this film in every other way succeeds and on a very high level.
The story: In true new wave fashion the movie has no real starting point. The characters are at first met at some distance as we see them in their professional roles as actors. Slowly we see them in more relaxed settings and slowly we get to know them. The key word is slowly because for all the attention that must be paid the true payoffs don't start coming til approximately half way through the movie. It takes Rivette awhile (perhaps too long) to set up all the various situations/relationships but once set up the movies pace picks up. The lead actress plays a leading actress and how you feel about this movie will largely be determined by how you feel about her because everything pivots around her. The actress is not particualarly attractive and it takes awhile to begin to find her fascinating but she is that. In love with her director and in love with her ex her main emotion is indeciciveness. Not passion nor desire or anything excting just uncertainty. Interestingly however the other characters are equally indecisive. They are all indecisive in a different way and that makes this film farcical even though you rarely find yourself laughing at this human comedy. What is most memorable about the picture is how well eacg character is brought to us. Rivette is great with detail and nuance and you have to be with a picture like this. Every character has some aspect which will capture your interest and though the plot does not take you anywhere there is an arrival at the end. An arrival at a kind of understanding that allows for peoples complexities to coexist and that makes this film experience a very civilized one. Rivette makes insightful use of the theatre in Va Savoir. The theatre is the place we ask the big questions about love and identity but life is not written out for us ahead of time so life is the even more uncertain cinema-theatre we actors all occupy. Rivette finds both art and life are richest when in most intimate contact with one another. In the end you will feel enlivened by that spirit of understanding and glad to have given your time to this epic length look at intimacy.

Rating:
Summary: VA GARBAGZE IS MORE LIKE IT
Review: THIS MOVIE HAS ALL THE EXCITEMENT OF A FRONTAL LOBOTOMY.FRENCH NEW WAVE IS JUST ANOTHER TERM FOR UTTER GARBAGE. THIS MOVIE CAN BE USED TO HELP CURE SLEEP APNIA.

Rating:
Summary: A smart comic gem
Review: Va Savoir (Who Knows?) the newest film by Jacques Rivette, one of the pioneers of the French New Wave, opened this year's New York Film Festival to great effect. A delightfully small comedy that follows the lives of six people in modern day Paris, this is the sort of film that is laden with subtleties of character and action that might be missed if it were viewed amidst a quagmire of several other films.

The film begins on a stage as, Camille, an actress (Jeanne Balibar) talks to an empty crowd about her anxieties. She feels afraid of the world, and lacks will to go on. Soon, we find that the reason is her disenchantment with her current lover/director, Ugo. We find that she has returned to Paris, her home, for the first time in three years, and has left behind an ex named Pierre (who is still humorously working on the same thesis three years later). Pierre is currently married to Sonia, a dance instructor, that is being courted by Arthur, the half-brother of Do, a student whom happens to be helping Ugo search for a lost manuscript. There is a great deal of interplay in the film between the characters before we discover their relationships to each other, and that is the film's most tedious aspect. There is a willing suspension of disbelief required to accept that these relationships all flow into each other the way that they do, and the film takes its time in establishing them.

Once it does establish who is who, however, the film absolutely takes off. The film is a comedy, but rarely relies on outright gags for laughs. The majority of the humor lies in the shifting motivations of the characters. For example, in one early scene, Camille, who feels embarrassed for the way her partner Ugo acted during the previous night's dinner, goes to apologize to her hostess, Sonia. Sonia, however, due to her own marital difficulties, naturally assumes that Camille has come to apologize for the behavior of her husband, Pierre. When Camille begins to apologize, Sonia starts making excuses for Pierre's actions (which actually left Camille once again enamored with him). Camille decides to alter her strategy here though, so she can better make a play at Pierre. The subtleties of the contradictions in their actions are what we derive our pleasure from. This might sound terribly convoluted, but on screen it plays out simply and humorously.

As the characters continue to flip-flop the object of their affection, nearly every scene takes on such lightly comic dimensions. Never do we feel that their decisions don't make sense, though, as Rivette has composed a script that allows us to always justify and understand each character's impetus. By essentially limiting his cast to six members, he allows us, over the film's two and a half hour running time, to grow to know each of them intimately. During the run of the play, each of the characters comes to watch the play. We see a key scene from the production as each of them is affected by it differently, and viewing the play causes each to, once again, alter the way they see the other characters. In Rivette's film, art doesn't imitate life, but rather inspires it. The film's take on art, like its take on relationships, is more mature and realistic than we see in most films. Much to my delight, in Va Savoir, the characters actually think before they act, which is much rarer than one would suspect in films.

Rating:
Summary: uninspired drek
Review: well since there are varied types of reviews on this film here i figured id chime in. this film is incredibly boring, completely uninteresting, the main character does nothing but whine, and when you finally find out what about you want to smack the crap out of her for dragging you into her incredibly mundane over-yet-underdramatized world. none of the characters are vaguely interesting and it runs slower than a snails pace. i generally love french cinema but i saw this one... i think im staying away from anything french for awhile. thank god for jeunet and caro, and films such as the dreamlife of angels. stay away from this. anyone giving this film any decent kind of review has a great deal of pretension about them. absolutely unredeeming crap.

Rating:
Summary: My favorite movie of 2001
Review: When I saw "Va Savoir" in theaters, I loved it so much that I stayed in my seat for the next showing (with the film's lethargic 154-min running time, that's around 5 hours or so) and I enjoyed every second of it. I just love the characters in this film. The way they talk, the dialogue, the situations and places they find themselves in, all of it magical. I do not understand people saying the film is enjoyable, but not heavy or a "major Rivette", which I wholeheartedly disagree with (I find this to be Rivette's best work since "La Belle Noiseuse"). I have seen the film around 6 or 7 times and have yet to tire of it. For anyone looking for a charming, intelligent, hugely entertaining, and romantic movie...this is it. Highly recommended.