Gang of Four is my first Rivette, so I cannot comment on how classically structured it is as opposed to experimental, because I have yet to see Rivette's experimental work, yet I read from a Chicago critic, Chicago being the city wherein I discovered Rivette, that this is an ideal introduction to his work because it is more of a compilation of the themes that are typically abound in his films, such as theater, conspiracy, sexual frustration, female camaraderie, and things of that nature.
I was not thrilled and yearning for more, but I was interested in what Rivette tries to do enough to want to see some of his other films, even La Belle Noiseuse, a four-and-a-half- hour film with only two people in one room. What I liked about Gang of Four was how the four main characters, the girls in the acting class who share a small house together, have a way of turning everything into a dramatization of things as their alternative to such a packed in environment that is squeezed progressively tighter by the mysterious man and the ambiguously existent conspiracy he speaks of.
The reason I don't have much else to say is because Rivette's direction seems too static somehow, but there is intrigue in his style and in his stories. I found the film interesting and dull at the same time. Perhaps it's my fault and I was expecting a different sort of film-making than what the movie was made of.
