The question I ask above is I think necessary. Thanks to the BFI bringing out six of his films in an essential boxset some at least in the UK can question this as well. Why were his books read when his films remained practically unknown here ? Is the written word easier than the image ? Certainly in this complex film, ' L'homme qui Ment ' it is much less sexually provocative than some of his others, so why in 1968 was it not noticed ? Set in a country at war a man played well by Jean-Louis Trintignant has either betrayed his best friend to the enemy or he has not. He goes back to the ( betrayed ? ) man's town and finds the women closest to the man, all seemingly quite happy in a heterosexual man's fantasy of lesbian desire. No more spoilers. The images are startling and only a genius, as Robbe-Grillet was, could have created them. Certain scenes remind the viewer that he wrote ' Last Year at Marienbad ' for Alain Resnais, and the soundtrack is composed of metallic sounds ( war ? ) and normal sounds of bells interspersed with gunshots, and the film is extraordinary on the sound level alone. There is also a Gothic feel with forests, and a castle with endless corridors and all this adds to the total atmosphere. I have watched this film several times and it still remains a mystery, where lies could be the truth and the so-called truth lies. So why not a 10 ? Personally I believe his written word is better than his cinema. For me the repetition in his written fictions are more exciting to visualise in my mind than seeing repetitive images on a screen. But Robbe-Grillet was one of the finest creators in the arts, and that is why his cinema should not have been ignored ( or banned ) in the UK for so long a time.
