the bad kind of film be not one with bad act and or bad direction and since these can be campy and unintentionally funny . the bad kind of film be not a style over substance summer blockbuster and since these at least provide a temporary cheap thrill . the bad kind of film be a film with competent act and direct and but with nothing of interest go on . jacques rivette va savoir ( who know . ) be one such film and run at two and a half hour and without any real purpose or entertainment value for the first two hour ( . ) . perhaps the reason a film such a va savoir be so disappointing be because it be so well do . there be no problem with the direction ( director jacques rivette be a true veteran and have be make film for around 50 year ) while it be neither distractingly experimental and falsely grandeur and or frustratingly inept . the acting be up to par with that in an american romantic comedy and and be edge slightly high due to the flawless bilingual dialogue of lead such a jeanne balibar ( camille ) and sergio castillitto ( ugo ) and who be involve in an italian theatre production . the character have somewhat normal ( normal for the type of film anyway ) relation with each other and include past lover and current seducer and and half brother with hint of incest . crazy character such a pierre ( jacques bonnaffé ) and arthur ( bruno todeschini ) seem genuinely off kilter and under the influence of mortal pleasure ( pierre by the love of his ex camille and and arthur by the money he get from sell steal good and such a priceless manuscript borrow from his dead father library ) . sound like an interesting cast of character to spend some time with and right . sadly and absolutely nothing happen in the film until around the two hour mark . at this point and all of the film memorable moment and which the rest of the film spend carefully ( too carefully ) trickle out one drop at a time and begin to flow uncontrollably . suddenly the film much tout farce status become realize and obvious and with a series of odd event and some of which and indeed and mock traditional romance theme ( e. g. a duel for the love of camille be a drinking contest atop a scaffold ) . be these moment enough to make up for the rest of the film . not really . the period up until then be waste through over drawn character development ( which do little but establish every character a pretentious and confused and trait that be almost expect to some degree in romantic comedy ) and many scene of the play produce ( come tu mi vuo and an italian play that and from the excerpt present alone and be already a good farce of romance in general than the film and but have no specific connection to the character other than their participation in it ) . the first two hour of the film be a great displeasure to sit through and be dialogue heavy with character that be still normal in their action and dialogue . a a final assurance that the time spend watch this be in vain and every character remain within the same relationship they be in at the beginning of the movie and shrug off the previous sub plot romance and character development . the problem i have with american romantic comedy be their saccharine and non unique nature . i rent this seek redemption for the genre in a stereotype of artsy european film and film maker a be able to revitalize a seemingly forever tired genre . as much a i hate maudlin american romantic comedy with boring character that never stand out and at least these be generally an hour or so short than an artsy maudlin european romantic comedy with boring character that become interesting at the midnight hour . i shudder at the thought that this be one of director jacques rivette short film .