Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

caspian1978 Not one of Rohmer's best works, Rendezvous in Paris lacks the passion, the seduction as well as the lust that is found in most of his films. Set in 3 Acts, the story has a mixture of pre-Seinfeld coincidences that interlock the three stories together. Since the connections are not profound or at least comical, the audience is doomed to lose interest in not only the story line but also the characters involved. Most of the characters on screen are only present for around twenty minutes, this does not give the audience enough time to connect or care about the circumstances that they are involved in. The only saving grace the movie has is its moral (or lack of one) involving glimpses of relationships and the need, or want or fear of adultery. In Act 1, we witness when adultery goes wrong. Act 2, the fear of getting caught, and finally we see the need and interest in committing adultery. Other than that, the story lacks much of what is needed for a successful movie. Which includes, filming permits. A great drinking game while watching this movie is to drink every time you see someone in the background look at the camera. This was not only obvious throughout the story, it reminded you that you were watching a movie.

valadas Eric Rohmer usually explores with exceptional psychological talent what is in the minds and hearts of ordinary people in what concerns love relations. In his movie people reflect and talk thoroughly about what they feel (or suppose they feel) in what regards those relations and live apparently superficial events although very meaningful and sometimes unexpected and surprising. In this movie the first two stories are about love and infidelity treated in a humorous way without prejudice of their psychological depth. Human beings are like that and they not always realize what they really feel. The third story is of love and infatuation, of illusion and disillusion when you think that because you love someone, automatically the loved one also loves you which seldom is true. The city of Paris atmosphere where the three stories take place is particularly favourable to such sentiments and situations for its romantic urban environment. We have then here the usual Rohmer's characters: authentic human beings somewhat doubtful about their feelings and thoughts (though they sometimes suppose they are certain about that) who now and then have to face situations for which they were not prepared. Not very dramatic but not superficial anyway.

raskimono What is love? and can you explain it. Using three meetings at different locations , Rohmer creates a parable on the intricate and surprising nature of love. The first story about a rendezvous at seven is the best. Insidious in its nature, it plants the seeds of doubt that blossom into the tale of two women and two men, each seeking and expecting divergent results. Filled with coincidences, all three tales are, it presents the surprises we don't see coming.The second story which is kind of dull or more demanding depending on taste, follows a couple meeting up in many public locations. The female character is afraid to meet in private despite the urgings of her male lover and when she does make the leap, the consequences will forever change the relationship.The goat of the pack is the final vignette, a story titled after a Picasso painting that features prominently in story. Again the obvious is pushed aside for the unexpected and there is a certain breezy, plush ending to the proceedings that seems to jar with what has become.A comedy in three parts, there is a chorus group that is interspersed and opens each story. Cherubic in nature, the songs present certain adages on the nature of love and life.A mixture of his moral tales with his comedies and proverb series, it is the lesser of each but sub-par Rohmer is still superior to most filmmakers. His low frills style of film making which a previous reviewer called cheap tells him how little he knows about the edict of the French New wave, the only die-hard adherent remained Rohmer, his rules, a quantifier closer to the Dogma'95 tradition of cinema. It is cinema of the heart at its finest.

kickstand This little film (actually 3 separate films) looks as if it was shot as a college film school thesis. The characters all seem to be students, academics, and artists, exactly the kind of people who populate such films! The characters don't seem to be experiencing any romantic epiphanies, either, but rather the filmmaker seems to be exploring the kind of questions of how-do-you-fall-in-love-and-who-with that are so ... collegiate.I found it mildly diverting; my wife found it a good cure for her insomnia.As a travelogue, it provides a great tour of the parks of Paris, and glimpses of the Metro and city streets.