User reviews

A young woman, Blanche (Emmanuelle Chaulet), is working in the City Hall of the New Town of Cergy Pontoise, in the north west of Paris, on the banks of the river Oise. Alone, recently arrived in the Parisian Region, she befriended another young woman, a computer science student finishing its school, Lea (Sophie Renoir) with which she met her boyfriend Fabien (Eric Viellard), and an acquaintance of the couple, Alexandre (François-Eric Gendron).

The French title (l'ami de mon amie, the friend of her friend) is more explicit than the American or English one. (Boyfriends and Girlfriends): A reference to the saying 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' but distorted to 'the friend of my friend is my friend'. This title, an example of the irony of Eric Rohmer, the boyfriend of my friend could become my (boy)friend

This film belongs to the cycle Comedies and Proverbs, the former term being as important as the latter one in order to understand the meaning of the film. This cycle, filmed in the eighties followed the precedent older cycle, six Moral Tales. Where as the latter concentrated on middle aged married man tempted by another woman but who finally, in relief, returned to his wife, Rohmer in the series of Comedies and Proverbs, turns his attention towards younger female characters. But because it is comedy, the tone is also much lighter and ironic. Here he examines the sexual freedom, (which in fact he disapproves but never condemns overtly in his films), its consequences and how the younger generation is trying to live with a new set of rules.

One of these rules, never sleeps with the friend of her or his friend, as often, in earlier time with the traditional moral, is finally broken. But there is more than a tale of love and seduction. It is a study of characters and how love creates a web of relationship among this small group of young urban professionals. As the relationships between them evolve the spectator finally feels some sympathy for the protagonists, at first not very likable. Especially Blanche who is the center of the entire plot, if one can tell of real plot in Rohmer film. Alone self-pitying, infatuated with the irritating, pretentious, serial seducer Alexandre, she blossoms when stricken by real love. She is opposed to her friend yet rival, Lea, physically as well mentally. With dark hair and tall, Lea is freer sexually than the small light-haired Blanche awaiting the great love for two years. The quest of Blanche is the perfect true love, not just an adventure. Ironically, at first she blindly falls in love with the great local seducer Alexandre.

With discreet symbolism, Rohmer gives clues about the different players. Blanche (white in french), around whom the whole film revolves demands only a pure love. As Delphine in Summer (Le Rayon Vert), the precedent film of the same cycle, the very absence of love, this void, fills here with anguish. Its flat at Cergy Saint Christophe is decorated in minimalist white fashion, thus emphasizing the loneliness of its life. Blanche and Léa sport alternatively the same colors, green and blue, this swap of colors underlining the possible swap of boyfriends.

Rohmer, because of its interest in urbanization (the DVD version contains a documentary he made earlier on industrial aesthetics), sets the action of the film in the New Town of Cergy-Pontoise, described as a quiet, modern, ultra clean Utopia. In fact the spectator sees the town only through Blanche eyes, mainly the pedestrian streets around the center, the banks of the river Oise, the Ricardo Bofil buildings where she lives. But I don't think the Cergy depicted could be viewed, as often said, as a reflection of a superficiality of its young 'yuppies' characters. The purpose of Rohmer was to see the impact of modern architecture on love life. But the answer is in the film: It changes nothing. On the contrary it amplifies or underlines the love relationship between the different characters.

'L'ami de mon amie 'is an extremely enjoyable film, full of charm, thanks to the direction of Eric Rohmer and the talent of its young actresses, then in theirs early twenties, like the young women they play. The frozen moment of happiness at the end of the film, just before the credits contributes to its charm. But it is problematic: Have the protagonist found enduring love? Will their love relationship and in the same time, their friendship endure the strain of time? Nothing in fact is sure as irony is always present. But if ironic, Rohmer doesn't despise his characters. On contrary he shows a real tenderness and comprehension towards them, especially Blanche.

One of the lighter films of Rohmer, of course very talkative, it is characteristic of all its work, with good mannered young people in search of love while searching themselves. Because of the minimalist direction, it has not aged much since its shot in middle of the eighties. Yet, you can glimpse of the fashion of its period in the clothes of the players if you pay attention on certain details Nowadays, Cergy has aged and worn out a little. Never the modern utopia ironically depicted by Rohmer, it is still a well maintained active town.

Eric Rohmer was more than one of the directors who formed the French New Wave. He also wrote a lot of surveys and articles about cinema, especially about his favorite director, F.W. Murnau, out who he wrote his dissertation. His first article that got published in the year 1948 was titled (directly translated:) "Film, art of space." In the year 1962 Eric Rohmer published his academic survey called: "The construction of space in Murnau's Faust." While reading about his surveys and articles, it's no surprise that space in Rohmer's films seems to be as important as the plot.

Eric Rohmer's career started with problems, and it wasn't going forward. But when he got off the ground, he proceeded more purposefully than anyone. When the new wave era ended in 1964, the directors of it started eventually finding their own path. Eric Rohmer started his series of six film, The Moral Tales and continued with Comedies & Proverbs in the 1980's. L'ami de mon amie (My Girlfriend's Boyfriend) is sixth and the last one in the series. It builds around the proverb: "My friends' friends are my friends." The comical situations emerge between two women who unintentionally swap boyfriends.

Two women suddenly meet while having lunch. One of the two women is Blanche, she is a skinny, uptight young woman, who is still searching for herself. The other is Lea, she's self-confident and a very feminine person. They both have something going on with men, so the main characters have their opponents; shy Fabien and a true player, Alexandre.

While trying to figure out the space of My Girlfriend's Boyfriend, I can't miss the futuristic city the characters live in. I got the feeling that Eric Rohmer isn't trying to tell a story of four specific people who live in France. To me he's telling about all the people living in these suburbs of Paris. The space of a futuristic city, the city full of postmodern architecture without any past. This theme of the milieu leads to rootlessness. The people of this city have no past, each of them like to analyze and talk about themselves. But none of them really know who they are.

My Girlfriend's Boyfriend offered these kind of things for me. In addition to its intelligent narrative, it is full of hilarious comical situations. Eric Rohmer builds four very interesting characters which will take you on board.

"My friends' boyfriends are my boyfriends."

This film is among the best of Rohmer's films. Why ? Because he observes our little snobberies, our small little lies, and in his detached way he loves humanity for them. It is set in Cergy which back in 1987 was a sort of new ' paradise ' just outside of Paris. Two young women who work and study there become friends, and one has a boyfriend and the other does not. There is a fourth in this, a supposed perfect young man who can seduce anyone. The four become entangled in a dance of love, both in retreat and in advance, and light though the subject maybe it has a profound knowledge of our illusions, and our ability of changing lovers that very often hurts no one. And the wonder of the scenario is that like the titles of two Shakespeare plays,' Much Ado About Nothing ' becomes ' All's Well That Ends Well. ' Those who accuse it as being superficial should realise that the surface is deceptive, and that obvious depths are often even more superficial, often becoming self dramatics (on the part of the directors) and the situations he or she creates, or simply portrays, to often imposed melodramatic formulas. Rohmer watches and catches the glance and the gesture that rings true and many do not have this gift. All four, Sophie Renoir, Emmanuelle Chaulet, Francois-Eric Gendron, and Eric Viellard are superb, especially Chaulet and Viellard, who have a chemistry together which is a joy to see. If the sceptics try to convince that Rohmer is shallow just remember that one of the masters of so-called extreme cinema, Quentin Tarantino, loves Rohmer's films. If I had to watch only one director it would be Rohmer. I0 of his best films on a desert island would be my ultimate choice.

" I want to be loved for who I'm, not who I pretend to be " .

When we pick up an Eric Rhomer's film, we are pretty sure how it is gonna be in terms of narration. Having said that, this one depicts the relationship crisis, love and how feelings keeps changing over the time through the four leads who gave very convincing and natural performances. It is slow but grows on you towards the end and gonna put a smile on your face. I liked Blanche's character, which is relatable to introverts and the rest who can't express their inner feelings to a person whom they admire/love as we just get stuck/freeze while we try to strike a conversation with the person we adore and does some random stuff is definitely crazy yet devastating feeling at the same moment. Here the leads have their own take on relations , as they come in and get out of it due to ambiguity but eventually they get what they yearned. Conversations between Blanche and Fabien has more impact than the rest of the movie. A good flick, liked it !!!

I love Rohmer's films. Even more those in the cycle Comedies and Proverbs. They're dissertations about love, friendship and the fine line between the two. In Rohmer's world, love and what leads to it is comparable to an algebraic formula: A is to C what B is to A. Again in this one, a lot of interesting dialog, in which every line incites us to reflect. Like this one: "Maybe it's because I didn't love her anymore that I went back with her". In fact, dialog and interaction between the characters are the only thing that matter in this movie. Everything else his not important. And as for characters, there is just a few, so you get to know them. You know what they want and how they react when they get it.

Out of 100, I gave it 76. That's good for **½ out of ****. Seen at home, in Toronto, on November 26th, 2004.

A young woman, Blanche (the lovely Emmanuelle Chaulet), works in the City Hall of a trendy New Town near Paris (somewhat to his discredit, Rohmer's films always occurs in middle class and upper middle class milieus, never in working class neighborhoods or in the immigrants building projects). Having recently arrived there, Blanche lives quite a lonely life, until she becomes friends with another young woman, Lea (Sophie Renoir), through which she met her boyfriend Fabien (Eric Viellard), and an acquaintance of the couple, Alexandre (François-Eric Gendron). Basically, the movie follows the time honored plot of exchange of relationships. A is with B, and C with D, but then A will start a liaison with D, which will make C jealous, and would start going with B in revenge and so forth. The title in French is a pun: the boyfriend of my friend would (could) become my boyfriend. Rohmer is known to be a political conservative, but here he is hardly a moralist, since he examines the sexual freedom of today's youth without condemning it. The movie is slow and talky, but these characters are believable and appealing (if somewhat shallow and a bit better looking than ordinary).

Rohmer remains in every film extremely honest. Both with us and with his characters. Rohmer doesn't judge, even if he proposes moral stories from the start, but lets us look in the mirror. His characters are exactly what we are. Of course, the central themes in almost all his films are friendship (Four Adventures of Reinette and Mirabelle) but especially sexuality, eroticism, love. And here, we have no negative or positive characters. All the characters, whether female or male, are hesitant (Blanche), inconstant (Lea), confused and bewildered (Fabien) or downright complex (completing the complex with superior arrogance) like Alexandre.

Rohmer always becomes uncomfortable because without being violent (on the contrary) he confronts us with paradoxical situations that even we don't know how we could handle if we were in their shoes. And even if Boyfriends and Girlfriends doesn't rise to the level of subtlety as A Night at Maud's or The Collector they remain in the same often sarcastic but gentle, wry but friendly tone where the dramas are small (even theatrical). It's fascinating the constancy with which Rohmer gives the actors (but especially the actresses) in the cinematic performance that declamatory role as if reciting from their own diary, the almost ridiculous intonation with which they make off-color statements trying to sound profound, the discrepancy between their own dreams and their own (in)actions, the laughable decisions that bring them to the brink of catastrophe.

However, the catastrophe never happens. The somewhat immoral, mundane solutions never let the characters break away from reality. Rohmer forces them to come back down to earth and us to accept that life is exactly like in his films and not the other way around.

I'm surprised at the 7.5 rating for "Boyfriends and Girlfriends." Of the 6-7 Rohmer films I've seen this is undoubtedly the worst. It is true that the characters come alive in the last part of the film but it's too little too late. For its standard assumptions and stale premises have already taken their toll on it. (however, kudos to the cinematography and evocation of place)

Of the five main characters, Alexandre is the least fabricated. Although meant to be rather detestable, he possesses the most individual identity. He has a smaller role, but his is the most interesting, the least wobbly, and the most real--and for these reasons, emerges as the most likable. True, one isn't expected to like--or dislike Rohmer characters, and yet they're often interesting and certainly worth hearing and comprehending--and some do have real dimensions. And in this, perhaps his most realistic endeavor, shouldn't we expect even more actual character?

The three females roles are the most scripted. I know they're supposed to be represent flat yuppie types but this approach is more patronizing than honest. Lea and especially Blanche, promise far more in the first scenes than they are subsequently allowed to give. Why reign them in? Why immediately tie them down to men, to romance, to the endless prattle about love, match-making, and daydreams? Can they be given just a few ounces of self-direction? I mean, Blanche, at 24, has a career job, but why bother to even tell us that---she bounces from one man to another, and her cloying uncertainties and confessional style belie her screen presence. As does her falling for Alexandre, which is even more incomprehensible to the viewer than it is to Lea and Fabien. It's as if Rohmer's Blanche "falls" in love, but Blanche's Blanche would never "fall" in love. And yet that's about her only shown capacity--apart from wind surfing--in this, her central role.

Lea and Adrienne are even more annoying. Love seems to be their single occupation. They are shallow, cattish, malicious, gossipy, and vacuous. Since there are three women for two men in this incestuous world, one has to be get lost--and the least pretty does, making an early exit. Indeed, Adrienne is given no redeeming qualities--and Lea has very few, the storybook ending bailing her out a wee bit. So, instead of being Rohmer's usual naive or not so naive leggy sirens, they get to be small-minded--it's either Alexandre or Fabien-- bitchy dolts.

The French film L'ami de mon amie (1987) was written and directed by Éric Rohmer. It was shown with two English titles: Boyfriends and Girlfriends and My Girlfriend's Boyfriend.

The film has five protagonists: Emmanuelle Chaulet as Blanche, Anne-Laure Meury as Adrienne, Eric Viellard as Fabien, François-Eric Gendron as Alexandre, and Sophie Renoir as Lea. (Yes--she's related to the painter and all of the cinematic Renoir family.)

Blanche has moved to a new apartment in Cergy-Pontoise, a trendy new town near Paris. It's there that she meets Lea, who introduces her to Alexandre. Blanche is attracted to Alexandre, but he already has a girlfriend--Adrienne.

It takes a while for the friends to sort themselves out. While the sorting is taking place, they talk and talk--Rohmer's speciality.

And, of course, Rohmer had an eye for attractive actors. All of the women are beautiful, both of the men are handsome, and everyone desires someone else's lover.

This movie is the final installment of in Rohmer's Comedies and Proverbs series. The film has a solid IMDB rating of 7.5. I enjoyed it, and rated it 8.

P. S. In 1988, Sophie Renoir was nominated for the César Award for Most Promising Actress for her part in this movie.

I am not a particular fan of Eric Rohmer's films. I generally find them very talking and slow--although I know most critics adore his films. This being said, I have enjoyed a few of his films-- particularly his later movies. And, I really enjoyed "Boyfriends and Girlfriends". However, I did not like it at first--it grew on me as I watched. Because of that, I really recommend you stick with this one.

The film begins with Blanche and Lea meeting for the first time. They soon become friends and begin spending their lunch hours together. Lea is the more vivacious of the two and she has a boyfriend, Fabien. As for Blanche, who is more the subject of this film, she's rather lonely and has no love life. But, over time, as Lea and Fabien become more and more distant, Blanche finds herself attracted to Fabien. Lea couldn't care less--as she is now falling for Alexandre--a man Blanche had been interested in dating. What's next? See the film.

As I mentioned above, this is a talky and rather slow film--at least for a while. However, the film all comes together very, very well-- and the ending is simply smashing. Well worth seeing.

I must not be an Eric Rohmer fan. This is the second of his movies I've seen, after A Summer's Tale, which I disliked although I'm a big fan of Melvil Poupaud. Both movies are trite and tedious.

Boyfriends & Girlfriends is a boring movie with boring, shallow people talking nonstop about themselves, which, from what I've read, is Rohmer's specialty. When I ask myself, Why would he be interested in people like that? I have no answer. Maybe he identifies with them. Maybe he finds them fascinating.

I love movies in which nothing much happens except character development, but there has to be something interesting about the characters. The most interesting thing in this movie is an unnaturally clear, turquoise-colored, antiseptic lake that a couple go windsurfing on. I've never seen a lake like that in my life. These shallow people live in a sterile, artificial city that looks like a brand new shopping mall (and it's a real place, not made up for the movie), so maybe the lake is artificial too, like a gigantic swimming pool on a golf course.

Everything about this movie screams emptiness and artificiality, so at least it is consistent. Maybe vacant people in a vacant city symbolize something important to Rohmer and his fans, but they just bore me. I'm very interested in lots of things, but spending almost two hours watching petulant, spoiled, shallow people irritate and bore each other isn't one of them.

I'm giving it a star for consistency, which alone is enough to lift it a little way off the bottom of the barrel.

Maybe I've OD'd on Rohmer, just having looked at this film, "Full Moon over Paris" and "The Aviator's Wife" (all on DVD)in a single week. The tone of this picture is light for Rohmer, but his heroine is just as indecisive about how to get her man as his others are about which man to choose. A nice comedy.

This is an entertaining Rohmer movie, with some good ideas and interesting dialogue. However I couldn't believe how bad the actress in the lead role was. It even beats Arielle Dombasle's laughable performance in "Pauline à la plage". In "L'ami de mon amie", it's as if Emmanuelle Chaulet herself is clueless about the character, throughout the movie. Her name in the movie is Blanche, as in "oie blanche" in French, which means a girl or young woman with a prudish upbringing who is candid and a bit foolish.

Unfortunately, in all her scenes Emmanuelle Chaulet is fidgetting, wincing, twiddling her hair or shaking her head any moment, and for no reason. She has no sense of timing or delivery, her body language is either inappropriate, or over the top. In one scene at the café, she can't even utter one, simple line such as "les affaires cult...culturelles" (her job department), without stuttering. Then she giggles like a schoolgirl, when she's supposed to be a serious, grown civil servant. She can't even kiss a (good-looking) partner: her intimate scene in the woods with Éric Viellard is cringe worthy. Utter amateurism. I don't know what went through Rohmer's head, maybe he was having a laugh, maybe he didn't have a choice. Anyway it's no wonder why her career as an actress failed to take off after that. She didn't even have the appeal of prior Rohmer heroines such as those played by Haydée Politoff, Françoise Fabian or Amanda Langlet, for instance. By contrast with her, Sophie Renoir (Léa), Eric Viellard (Fabien) and F-E Gendron (Alexandre) raise the level by giving a much more watchable and relaxed performance.

I like Rohmer's playing with color symmetry and permutation in the actors' outfits, like the blue top/white skirt matching Léa's white top/blue skirt at the evening party, to emphasise the contrasting traits and moods of the characters. The conclusion, a sensible outcome, is satisfying both for the characters and the viewer.

I am not a fan of Eric Rohmer. The pace of most of his films is very slow, they are full of dialogue, and often I react to his characters with a distinct desire to slap them in the face and shout "get a life!".

However, this one is different, it is a real gem. Yes, the pace is slow, yes the film is loaded with dialogue, but these characters are believable. We see relationships develop, new ones arriving on the scene and old ones being broken up. The drama is the drama of real life, the characters are ordinary (perhaps a bit better looking than ordinary) young people living in a Parisian suburb, there are no extraordinary things happening to them, just ordinary things. While Rohmer's story is realistic, it is still pleasantly realistic. It is just as romantically heart-warming as, say, While You Were Sleeping, but it does not have to force us to suspend our disbelief.

One piece of advice many people will fail to appreciate: if you are a non-French speaker, try to see this in a dubbed version, not a subtitled one! The dynamics and meaning of the dialogue in this film is much more important than the original sound, not to mention that subtitles could hardly keep up with this amount of dialogue.

In the united states it's boyfriends and girlfriends.

In europe, it's the friend of my friend. Blanche and lea meet at a cafe, and become fast friends. Lots of talk of relationships. Lea has a boyfriend fabien, but admits she is not head over heels in love. So she breaks up with him! So much talk of love, true love, casual sex. Long term committment, how two people never seem to want the same thing at the same time. And how should you treat your friend's ex lover? Is it okay to date them? Funny scene right at the end where the two girls have a whole discussion over a man. Lea thinks they are talking about her man, but blanche is actually talking about her man! That's probably the best scene in the entire film. Written and directed by éric rohmer. Oscar nomination for my night at maud's. It's pretty good, but it's a lot of talking!

Rohmer used 4 or even 5 character affair, dip with the scent of peculiar triangles.

Unlike other French New Waves directors, who vernally succeed. Rohmer dug his bravura technique at the late year, and also inherited the mature, non-jocular, less-mechanical (or too dry to be mechanical) style.

He tried using these 5 individuals with the most simple, direct, lucid cinematography, which included minimalism settings capered with his iconic use of color, and no fancy editing which made the picture quite bland, deconstruct the story of love.

The color is beguiling, the Emmanuelle Chaulet is simply divine. The pace is slow, but the romance is overt. I'm just not such deep in love as the film did, need to be rewatched when people fall in Descarts' unrequited love.