Original subtitles

That was My Night at Maud's, one of Eric Rohmer's Moral Tales,

which we'll discuss with Jean Douchet,

well known to cinephiles,

contributor to Cahiers du cinéma, film director and critic.

Also joining us is Jean-Louis Trintignant, whom you've just seen in the film,

and Pierre Cottrell,

who produced the film with Barbet Schroeder and a few others.

So he's the young producer of My Night at Maud's.

Before continuing, l must praise the incredible acting in the film.

Jean-Louis, it's been hailed as one of your best performances.

l'd like to ask Pierre Cottrell about the cast.

Was Rohmer set on getting the actors he had in mind?

Yes, he'd cast them several years earlier.

We had to wait three years for Jean-Louis to be free at Christmas,

because the film had to be shot during the Christmas season.

We often hear of power struggles between directors and actors,

and it would seem that Rohmer -- to use a word no actor likes --

" manipulates'' his actors.

ln any case, he obtains incredibly nuanced performances.

Do you feel you had a lot of creative input on the film,

or did you just obey Rohmer?

l trusted his direction.

lt's strange. l've been in a lot of films that use improvisation.

l enjoy it and feel comfortable with it.

ln Rohmer's screenplay, everything was carefully scripted.

Even the commas were significant.

ln the middle of a very elegant phrase

in an 18th-century style,

he'd written " E-r...E-r...E-r''

to show that the actor should hesitate

and say, " Er... er... er.''

That's what it meant in this very scripted dialogue.

When l saw that, l panicked.

l told Rohmer, " There's no way an actor can say that.''

He said, "Try it. Say it out loud.''

l did, and to my surprise, it worked perfectly.

There was no other way to say it.

The dialogue was tightly scripted but wonderfully easy to deliver.

Yes, we'll talk more about Rohmer's dialogue later.

He writes incredible dialogue,

but don't actors find it difficult to recite something so well written

because it's not everyday language?

No, because it's language that --

lf you're in character, it's absolutely natural,

because it's conversational.

lt's elegant and well-written, but at the same time conversational.

His dialogue is a pleasure to recite.

As you've noticed, Eric Rohmer is conspicuous by his absence.

We called and tried to persuade him to come,

but as you may know, he refuses to appear in public.

l wonder if Jean Douchet, who's known him a long time, could explain.

There's no need to explain.

l don't see that he needs to explain for refusing to appear in public.

But in Rohmer's films, and especially in the Six Moral Tales,

he constantly plays with the idea

not of living a double life

but of moral codes of conduct.

And this applies to Rohmer in his own life.

lt's a kind of game, a character, a role

in which he reveals himself while pretending to hide.

lt's in all his films, especially Trintignant's character in My Night at Maud's.

lt's a complex character:

He considers himself a Catholic and seeks to follow a moral code.

Rohmer uses " moral tales'' in an 18-century sense.

A moral code shows the way to live,

and the main character in each tale tries to follow a specific moral code.

ln My Night at Maud's, it's Catholicism,

and in La collectionneuse, it's dandyism.

Each character tries to follow his path, and each meets a female character

who embraces life with all its surprises and chances.

The film frequently mentions Pascal's concept of chance.

We realize that the character doesn't always follow his moral code

and feels guilty about it,

but in the end, his moral code wins out

at the end of a very twisted and indirect path.

That's the theme of this film, and of all Rohmer's films.

They play with this idea.

That's the real meaning of his Moral Tales.

We'll discuss that later, but you didn't answer my question.

l trust Rohmer will forgive me, since it has appeared in the press,

so l'll explain why Rohmer won't show his face.

He doesn't want his family to know he's a filmmaker.

Perhaps they consider it an inferior art form.

That's the real reason. l've revealed his secret.

Rohmer won't appear on television as a filmmaker,

but he doesn't hide when he appears in schools as a professor.

He used to teach and still holds the title of professor.

We'll discuss the film's content, but first l'd like to ask Pierre a few questions

that may be of interest to everyone.

You needn't reveal your secrets,

but how does a young producer without contacts --

though this is a subject for another talk --

go up against the big studios to produce a film like Rohmer's?

Rohmer's La collectionneuse had enjoyed modest success,

and he next wanted to make a film that wasn't commercial at all.

lt was Truffaut's idea to bring together some producers and directors

who respected and trusted Rohmer.

They allowed him to make this film free of commercial pressures.

lt was fairly difficult to bring together eight coproducers.

They all invested equal amounts in the film.

Actually, it was the actors who decided the film would get made.

The ending on the beach was shot three months before the rest of the film,

before any contracts had even been signed.

Rohmer himself edited the scene and showed it to the actors.

- So they'd continue on the film. - Right.

l think Jean-Louis was surprised by the crew

on Belle île who shot the scene.

Yes, it was fairly improvised. The crew was three people.

Since that's not enough to cover all the posts when filming,

we used whoever was there, like my great-nephew.

lt was shot near the small house l had on Belle île.

My great-nephew was there on vacation, so he became the sound engineer.

But it didn't look amateurish.

All the rest was filmed professionally,

with a real sound engineer,

but shooting began in a totally amateurish way.

That's a nice story.

So you were busy on other projects at the time.

As Cottrell said, they had to wait a long time for you.

So those few days on Belle île convinced you to do the film?

No, l was already convinced.

lf l hesitated, it wasn't because l was booked solid for three years,

but because of certain moral scruples.

l didn't feel very close to the character.

l felt l lacked certain things,

but Rohmer's unyielding stubbornness finally convinced me.

Did the character in the script seem too gloomy?

The script was wonderful, but l --

Catholicism isn't a particular concern of mine,

and that made me say no.

lt would be dishonest. l had no right.

But Rohmer convinced me that it would lend greater ambiguity to the film

if l took the role,

precisely because l wasn't Catholic.

ls Rohmer deeply concerned with religion?

ls it present in all his films?

lt's certainly present in this one.

But no, it's not in others.

What are his major concerns, especially in the Moral Tales?

We talked about --

What's the basic theme of Rohmer's Moral Tales?

The Moral Tales are this:

A man loves a woman,

but before going to her,

he'll meet and be tempted by another woman, only to end up with the first.

That's the general framework of the six films.

lt seems very immoral for a " moral tale.''

Frustration intervenes --

" Moral'' here doesn't mean " morality.''

lt's a code of conduct that varies for each individual.

Rohmer's characters choose their own moral code.

Each has a personal moral code that they follow.

lt's an 18th-century sense of the word.

But Rohmer's concerns are many.

First: a strong drive for authenticity.

Pierre alluded to this earlier:

He waited for Christmas to shoot.

The setting was Clermont-Ferrand in the context of the Michelin factory.

lt's mentioned clearly in the film.

lt involved engineers, etc. and it had to be true to life.

When mass is shown, it's a real mass.

lt's a mass being said for believers, not for the camera.

The streets of Clermont are shown exactly as they are.

All perfectly described in the script.

You've worked with him enough to know we don't shoot in a street

unless it adjoins the street shot in the previous scene.

Rohmer's always like that.

He strives for authenticity in terms of settings and characters,

as well as the story he's telling.

l'd like to add to that.

For Rohmer, music should never be used unless there's a reason.

Films always have music

that a composer has written separately to underscore the film.

ln Rohmer's films, no sound exists unless it is made by something in the film.

For example, if music's heard, it's playing on an onscreen radio.

No music is brought in from outside.

Yes, everything has to reflect reality.

lt's almost an obsession.

Another thing Rohmer is concerned with is depicting today's society

from his point of view, which is an extremely rigorous one,

even haughty, to be honest.

But Six Moral Tales creates a sort of panorama

of different aspects of contemporary French society.

He's often accused of only portraying the bourgeois,

but his defense is that that's the only life he knows.

Nonetheless, the way he portrays life in Clermont is extremely realistic.

lt's a view of provincial life rarely seen in French films,

where it's usually much more of a caricature than a true portrait.

Here it's really a provincial environment

among fairly intellectual people.

And one thing about the provinces -- where Rohmer lived --

is that intellectual discourse is deeper because people have more time.

A long discussion about Pascal over dinner is realistic.

Not for everyone, of course, but for a specific social class,

whereas it wouldn't be realistic in Paris.

Was that a difficult scene for you?

- Yes, very. - You were in a café with --

lt was filmed in long takes.

He shot an entire magazine without cutting.

A magazine holds 1 ,000 feet of film, which is 12 minutes of shooting time.

For a static shot, that's very --