I watched this and my overwhelming feeling was empathy for Wally, to have to listen to Andre carry on with the typical post-1960s new york artist cum intellectual philosophic-esquire talk, with its search for authenticity, interest in Eastern religions, Nazi Germany analogies, and critique of industrial advanced society. If we think of Andre's character as one in a play, he is a cookie cut version of that time and context. This does not necessarily make the film or characters superficial. I actually think and/or wonder if Malle's intent isn't to get us to realize the absurdity, possible falsity and seeming truth of any conversation, i.e. to see the "hyperreality" of these characters and the conversation. I think the whole film is actually an exercise in nothingness. What is really said that is true or real? Yet it isn't NOT true or real either. I'm basing some of my guessing on some of Malle's more obscure work, including his documentaries ranging from France to India to Glencoe, Minnesota. He definitely has a philosophical side, which if I'd hazard a guess is heavily influenced by phenomenological philosophy. At least that's reflected in his film-making style.
Review of My Dinner with Andre
