Rohmer was a teacher of the classics before becoming a director. In that capacity, he also produced several educational films teaching students about classic works of literature. This film seems to be a holdover from that period of his life. While I understand his goal of not making his interpretation of the original French work, somehow he managed to do exactly that. Instead of being a brave, naive wannabe knight, Perceval is a rude, arrogant narcissist who forces himself on everyone he meets. He forces himself on a young damsel and then robs her of her ring and food. Not a great start for this supposedly brave hero. Then he tries to strong arm King Arthur because he wants to be the Red Knight. He's disrespectful to the man who will become his lord and master. But all is forgiven because he manages to kill Arthur's enemy. This guy is a total jerk. As I watched the film, I hated him more and more and wondered why I was wasting my time. It was also difficult to believe that this effeminate weakling is a courageous knight. Put a dress on him and you wouldn't be able to tell him from the damsels in the film. He's far too delicate to be a knight.
Rohmer said that he was only interested in taking what was written by de Troyes and putting it on screen. He did not want to make his interpretation of de Troyes' work because he wanted to emphasize the original language of the 12th Century to stimulate interest in the original work. Unfortunately, he forgot that any performance of a literary work not produced by the original author can only ever hope to be an interpretation. Nobody but de Troyes knows what he was trying to say with the story of Perceval. The actors' performances are their interpretations of the words on the page. The costumes and sets (or lack thereof) are the director's vision of how he wanted to portray these characters. It's impossible to get around this when you're making a film. Unfortunately, Rohmer's stated goal of trying to stimulate interest in the original literary work has failed miserably because what is shown on screen is so two-dimensional that it blocks any emotional involvement viewers might have to the story. If the characters are riding through a forest, what harm would it do to actually have real trees and birds on screen? In de Troyes' time, trees were very much the same as they are today. It's not ruining the integrity of the story to show this on screen. If Rohmer is trying to share his love of 12th Century literature with cinema viewers, why not make the story interesting engaging? Somehow he managed to make a tale of heroism and love into a boring, cheaply made high school production. The first rule of attracting new fans to a literary work is to make it entertaining enough to warrant further study. Rohmer failed horribly in this.
Rohmer said that he was only interested in taking what was written by de Troyes and putting it on screen. He did not want to make his interpretation of de Troyes' work because he wanted to emphasize the original language of the 12th Century to stimulate interest in the original work. Unfortunately, he forgot that any performance of a literary work not produced by the original author can only ever hope to be an interpretation. Nobody but de Troyes knows what he was trying to say with the story of Perceval. The actors' performances are their interpretations of the words on the page. The costumes and sets (or lack thereof) are the director's vision of how he wanted to portray these characters. It's impossible to get around this when you're making a film. Unfortunately, Rohmer's stated goal of trying to stimulate interest in the original literary work has failed miserably because what is shown on screen is so two-dimensional that it blocks any emotional involvement viewers might have to the story. If the characters are riding through a forest, what harm would it do to actually have real trees and birds on screen? In de Troyes' time, trees were very much the same as they are today. It's not ruining the integrity of the story to show this on screen. If Rohmer is trying to share his love of 12th Century literature with cinema viewers, why not make the story interesting engaging? Somehow he managed to make a tale of heroism and love into a boring, cheaply made high school production. The first rule of attracting new fans to a literary work is to make it entertaining enough to warrant further study. Rohmer failed horribly in this.