You won't be disappointed!

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

If you are looking for action, erotic or otherwise, this is not a film you will enjoy.It is a simple pleasure of color and emotion.The plot is simple: A rich woman (Stéphane Audran - Babette's Feast, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie) takes a liking to a poor young girl (Jacqueline Sassard). A man (Jean-Louis Trintignant - Z, Red) enters the picture, and friction results. That's it.But, don't let the simplicity fool you. There is an elegant dance among the characters as emotional games are played. It is the dance amid the beauty of St. Tropez that is the pleasure.

'Les Biches', whilst not my favourite Chabrol film ranks among his best. On one level it has sumptuous cinematography on a par with 'Le boucher', another excellent score, courtesy of Pierre Jansen and some very stylish direction. All Chabrol's actors play their parts beautifully although Audran undoubtedly has the best material.But what marks this film out and what many cannot appear to perceive is that it is not a meditation on class or a portrait of a 'menage a trois'. It does touch on those subjects, as do many of Chabrol's films, but this film is essentially about identity and it's destruction or absorption by another. Stephanie Audran's character is, put simply a VAMPIRE. This is humorously and beautifully established early in the picture when she first meets Sassard's character 'Why' on a bridge in Paris amid a Gothic mist and with Audran looking drained and evidently needing a new victim. Many have commented on Jean-Louis Trintignant's acting, arguing that it is bland or inexpert, failing to realise that as part of the plot he had to be 'consumed' by Audran and had to appear ineffectual. Compare Audran's extraordinarily vital, near superhuman character in 'Les Biches' to her purposefully meek character in 'La Rupture' and one can begin to see what a subtle and intelligent actress she is.On first viewing 'Les Biches' some years ago I was mystified and like other reviewers irritated by the two scroungers Robegue and Riais. After further viewing it appears they are purposefully antagonistic and their apparently parasitic relationship points to them being Audran's familiars.The raison d'etre of the film are the final sequences in which 'Why' ultimately escapes the fate of Paul and destroys Frederique by becoming her. So 'Les Biches' is essentially a nuanced and very stylised commentary on identity and it's struggle to coexist within a relationship.

I don't like labeling movies with one word but I just didn't find any other words to say on this one. I watched many other Chabrol films, which I don't admire but liked and found some interesting things in them. But this one disappointed me beyond my imagination. I have to begin somewhere so let me begin with the story. Was it another criticism about bourgeoisie and telling us that the artist must be on his/her own instead of being a slave to bourgeoisie? Or was it about finding an identity in lesbian affair, there is no nudity, which was a quite a topic for '60's? Was it about commitment, passion, jealousy or the mortal love? I have to confess none of these convinced me at all. Second of all, the acting was ridiculous and the mood of the film was cold as ice. Maybe Chabrol thought that the climax could get warmer in Saint Tropez but it didn't help as well. (If you are looking for beautiful scenes of Southern France I will recommend To Catch A Thief instead with a brilliant story and directing from Hitchcock )Their acting didn't give the feeling of love, in fact any feeling at all. I patiently watched to get something from it, but the film ends with a huge nothing. I don't recommend this film to anyone, for me it is a loss of time.

Chabrol had a habit in the 60's of casting his wife in lead roles; these are often the most forgettable of his films. Stephane Audran was used for her object-like beauty (her cheekbones are really striking)but there isn't much behind the mask. Here, playing Frederique, a bisexual rich woman in glamorous decors out of Vogue or Madame Figaro, she gets to swan around in chic clothes and give jokey line readings. To the cook: "Vi-o-let-ta, je te pre-sen-te Ma-de-moisel-le Whyyyy-eee!" Thankfully, there is a story to be told, and Chabrol does that competently enough, although there is far too much time given to those two stalwarts Attal and Zardi, here playing gay musicians sponging off Frederique. Jacqueline Sassard plays Why with no discernible interest or ability; she's got a luscious, pouting mouth but no presence on the screen. Jean-Louis Trintignant, the boy toy, is as earnest as a Boy Scout, which is all the part calls for. This is not a serious study of polyamory, or alternative sexuality or anything else. It's chic, expensive and dead.