I think this was really a movie about faith. About a kind of faith that has nothing to do with religion or god. A faith in something simple, like love. That love could be enough for us, even in a world without God. That even faith in love, true love, could be a kind of trial, could call for an immense commitment and sacrifice. That even faith in love could require miracles. I think that's the message of the movie.
In plot, this is similar to Rohmer's "Le Rayon Vert" (1986). The heroine roams around, looking for signs and trying to feel comfortable in different locales, and then the deus ex machina arrives at the end. I get tired of both heroines, as they are so focused on finding happiness through men. This film is maybe the only film ever that makes Shakespeare's play seem interesting, without even showing the bear.
Throughout I wanted to reach through the screen and either slap Felicie upside the head or help her find a second brain cell so she would have two to rub together. Then, tears flow at the play and my heart goes out to her and the improbable but perfectly logically ending arrives and I feel a tear myself.
A very nice piece--nice overlay with the Shakespeare bit and the woman encased in the glass coffin. Very subtle and effective use of metaphor and delicate narrative cues. If you can withstand the typical saccharine Rohmer ending, a pleasant and worthwhile film. Good show.
From what I've read, this seems to be a bit of a weaker Rohmer film. And from watching it, I have to say that I agree somewhat. It's certainly a bit melodramatic and ho-hum a lot of the way through. But Rohmer does a nice job of capturing some of the minutiae of life and complicated relationships. For that I give him a thumbs up.
You either love Rohmer or hate Rohmer; Nothing to do with subtitles, we use them for NCIS since written words add meaning; Nothing to do with philosophy, especially not JANSENISM, this is pure romance, French Romance. I remember when Rohmer passed, the very real sadness we will not see a new Rohmer film ever again…
The "naturalness" of the banal in which Romer specialized, and the banality with which the artistic is drawn, may present vices that limit the range of its possibilities, corroborated by the reiteration of his fictions. In addition, the Shakespeare's theatrical extract is spurious. However the ending, specifically jansenist, of an everyday expectable Grace, is absolutely celebratory and convivial.