wm@tekchips.UUCP (09/26/83)
I just got back from seeing "Pauline at the Beach". I should have known better 'cause I didn't like "Get out your hankercheifs" either. The reason for this note is because I would like to know what anyone saw in this movie. I thought the characters were shallow stereotypes with little or no motivation. There was no plot. The nudity was stilted and pretentious (and I'm usually a big fan of nudity, if you know what I mean, and I'm sure that you do :-) Worst of all, the cinematography was very poor. Someone must have worked on picking the worst lens length and angle for a shot, but that didn't matter much because they kept panning around the scene. If you liked it, do you wish you lived in a completely deterministic universe? Why did this movie get good reviews? Did I miss something? Wm Leler tektronix!tekchips!wm wm.Tektronix@Rand-relay
oscar@utcsrgv.UUCP (Oscar M. Nierstrasz) (09/28/83)
I sympathize partially with Mr Leler's comments. "Pauline at the Beach" is *not* a movie for everyone. It is low-key, talky and short on action. The advertising is misleading and pretends that this is a "racy" French sex-on-the-beach film. I knew what I was getting into, however, and I had a great time. Some gripes: "...'cause I didn't like "Get out your hankercheifs" either." Huh? I didn't like "Get out ..." myself. Do you lump Woody Allen and Francis Ford Coppola together just because they're both American? "I thought the characters were shallow stereotypes with little or no motivation." True, Pauline, her admirer and her admiree are shallow -- types, certainly, but not stereotypes. The humour and insight in the film was derived from the interaction of these types. The characters have *let* themselves become types by accepting a set of values as dogma without attention to how that fits in with the rest of the world. The blonde windsurfing puppy-dog who moons after Pauline, for example, is utterly blind to the fact that his behaviour is totally inappropriate for his goal of "conquering" Pauline. "There was no plot." Huh? Sure there was. Nobody got killed; there was no bank robbery; James Bond didn't save the world from the Microwave Babies. But there most emphatically was a plot. "The nudity was stilted and pretentious" What does this mean??? I recall only flashes of nudity, and I don't understand how it could be interpreted as "pretentious". If anything it was *unpretentious*, i.e. made no pretense at being more than it was -- that is, coincidental to the story. "Worst of all, the cinematography was very poor." I have to disagree here too. Rohmer is not one for flashy cinematography i.e. gratuitous camera motions, zooming, fading etc. etc. He prefers to use the camera almost as an objective bystander. Recall that Rohmer does not pass judgement on any of the characters in "Pauline". They pass judgement on each other, but he prefers to let us draw our own conclusions. The use of a "passive camera" is entirely consistent with this goal. I assume that "poor cinematography" is being equated with minimum flashiness. I won't be surprised if there are many more net.moviegoers who won't like "Pauline at the Beach". One has to acquire a taste for this sort of cinema, though I think Rohmer has done a fair job here of mixing social commentary and "entertainment" (i.e. farce). I don't hesitate in recommending this film, but be forewarned that it in no way approaches the claims made in the advertising blurbs. (Most notably, it is *not* "erotic"!) Oscar Nierstrasz @ utcsrgv!oscar
dollas@uiuccsb.UUCP (01/31/84)
#N:uiuccsb:10000043:000:1263
uiuccsb!dollas Jan 29 19:46:00 1984
OK, here is another shot at the (in)famous "Pauline at the Beach". The
plot is below average, the dialogue very monotonous (and REALLY average
in terms of content) and the whole production was not much better than a
carefully made home movie. If anybody out there has money to waste making
a movie I'll be glad to write a scenario of similar quality in ...an
evening.
Good points about the movie: the leading actress looked great (both with
-a few- and without clothes) and the character of Pauline was the only "real"
one in the movie. In fact, the leading actress played in "The Return of
Martin Guerre" and "Le Beau Marriage", and it is hard to believe that she
would act in this trashy story.
The rest of the note is a S P O I L E R .......
The only good thing about the movie was a chocolate that I won from
my girlfriend when I bet that the (whatshisface) ethnologist guy would
attempt to attack to Pauline.
...........end of S P O I L E R section.
Unless you want to see it out of sheer curiosity it does not worth seeing;
in that time you can see something of better quality, say TV (pun intended).
Apostolos Dollas
...!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiuccsb!dollasultra@cmcl2.UUCP (02/02/84)
#R:uiuccsb:10000043:cmcl2:2200003:000:302 cmcl2!ultra Feb 2 00:03:00 1984 *Great* movie. I guess you would have had to be in love with someone who did not love you, or would have to have had a crush at one point on some really cute teenage girl, in order to appreciate this movie. But Pauline at the Beach is as close to a home movie as nouvelle cuisine is to home cooking.