I've written an article about Jean-Luc Godard that focuses on four of his 60's films, including this one. http://www.tinymixtapes.com/features/jean-luc-godard-retrospective
Please let me know what you think!
Thanks,
Shannon Gramas
trés bien ;)
keep up the good work
I agree, nice work.
i'm interested in your review of 'breathless' and your take on jean seberg's character. i wonder if you've seen 'Bonjour Tristesse' with her. 'breathless' was meant to pick up where that classic left off... i think your confusion about seberg in 'breathless' may be helped by viewing the otto preminger classic.
just fyi.
I am going to buy the Criterion edition of "Contempt" with my Xmas money. I recently saw "Two or Three Things. . ." after buying Colin McCabe's stinkingly boring biography of Godard, and it was really the first Godard I ever saw except for "La Chinoise" (1967), which I also saw recently and had been dying for years to see since it is Godard's most Althusserian Maoist film except for the obscure "Struggles in Italy," which he made about three years later with Gorin, and which almost no one has seen to this day. (The reason I saw "LC" first is because I'm the last Althusserian Maoist in existence.) Anyway, I saved your article to my Favorites and I can't wait to read it.
shareHow does it feel to be the last of your kind? ;)
Thanks for the reply -- let me know what you think of the article!
Great Article.
I get that he does want to critiqued because he was a critic first. However, I think he does have a tiny punch of sarcasm/satire in his films though so maybe there is alittle entertaining involved. The whole thing with Godard is he made films and he made them his way. That's that. I think that sometimes he wanted some of his films to be thought provoking (Alphaville) and it just ends up being confusing hogwash to the modern audience and that's why alot of people say Godard is "boring." However, when it comes to the political themes, I don't think he is 100% serious because I find he's just making fun- with that satirical humor he has. He is poking fun and providing some philosophical/psychological thinking to the audience. That's what makes Godard entertaining to me.
Hey, thanks for the response! I think that if I were writing that article today I would have changed the part about his films not being entertaining... Obviously there are many people who greatly enjoy Godard's work and derive great pleasure from it. I suppose what I was getting at is that his films have never been simplistically entertaining-- they don't pander to what the audience thinks it wants, in other words.
sharevery nice thought-provoking article,
although your stubborn misspelling of Jean-Paule BelmOndo name kept itching my eyes :)
as for Godard movies, they are disturbing in their intentional coldness and stylized detachment, but I don't know if in the end a viewer gets an emotional satisfaction through intellectual reflection. I suspect most viewers are left with a sense of uneasiness and some with intense dislike. The excessive use of tricks and style is not a virtue by itself. Used as a means to an end it can lead to something deep and powerful, like a Greek tragedy, which constantly pops up in 'Contempt'
or it can be just what it is often,- style for style's sake, with no soul, just like what Tarantino does.
Thanks for the reply. I'm mortified that you have found so many typos in that piece! It's been a while now since it was posted, but I will ask the editor if he can fix some things.
I completely agree that an excessively overwrought style can sometimes come off as masturbatory, a la Tarantino and certain other directors (Wes Anderson springs to mind). Although I have to say that when it comes to Godard I often do find myself getting an "emotional satisfaction through intellectual reflection," as you put it. I can still remember seeing "2 or 3 Things I Know About Her" for the first time and coming away reeling from the unique efforts involved in following Godard's towering layers of abstraction. It was like I was almost drunk... I don't know exactly what you'd call it, but "emotional satisfaction" sounds about right.
I read reviews of famous critiques on Contempt. But your is the best.
share