The ease of the drama is commendable and reminiscent of Rohmer, although, as with the director of Le genou de Claire, improvisation is not always achieved without revealing that it is “improvisation.” The actors’ lengthy decision-making process comes at a price. The “director’s submission to the actor’s performance,” , as Viota himself pointed out at the time, certainly strips the story of a monotonous narrative and formal rhythm, but it is not always effective enough to prevent one or two sequences from betraying extreme artificiality, such as the one where Ana tells her lover that he must leave in less than five minutes and the man, who is two decades older, seems two decades younger because of his tantrums.

The script, lacking in detail but with plenty of room for physical drama, works because each character is well defined: Eugenio is a fifty-something man worn down by routine and somewhat phlegmatic in his demeanor and attitude, while Ana is a fickle and unrepentant spirit who swings from conscious outbursts to spontaneous debauchery, even though the hangover from her drunkenness takes its toll on Pilar, the most vulnerable but beautiful member of the cast, eager for exactly what she will never get from her hardened lover, who cheats on her time and time again, although the last time he doesn’t return for two days, the dancer finally plucks up the courage to get rid of such a madman.

The circumstances of each character make sense, for example Eugenio’s decision to open a business when he is already separated from his wife. In that sense, I repeat, the script was well done. Of course, Viota’s self-reference is made by his character, Carlos Pérez’s widower, when he sets up the exhibition space and mentions that he has tried to invite Viota and others to a series of conferences LOL.