Quote:
Originally Posted by neo_reloaded
But I disagree with you in regards to his films being interesting because of how they relate to his private life. We only care about Godard because of his films - we can't then say we enjoy his films because of what they say about him as an individual.
I think Pierrot does have interesting things to say about society and relationships at large, and that is why I enjoy it (besides the visceral cinema qualities it has that make it entertaining at a more surface level). Just knowing what it meant in relation to Godard's life would not be enough to make me like it if it didn't speak personally to me.
|
I totally disagree but it's good, I respect your perspective. At least we are talking about Godard constructively and I enjoy this and hopefully people can also learn a little from our discussion.
I have always found Godard to be a mysterious interesting, intellectual individual and how he interjects himself to his film and his approach to film-making. Probably one of the few filmmakers that where the outside influences of the director has made me so passionate about his films.
For me, Godard's outside influences and how he gradually changes with each film during the '60s is remarkably fascinating and I'm sure even for his friends and other filmmakers, to see what kind of films he would produce, knowing his personal state, especially during the late '60's and early '70's.
He has always perplexed people including his friends, fellow filmmakers to the point that he has contempt for the medium. Was it his disdain towards pop culture, was it his disdain for things that are bourgeois? Or was it because we started to see a Godard who was influenced by Maoist ideology?
For me, enjoying his films have always been about the man directing the film and trying to figure out why he did things this way and that way. I enjoy his films, also because I have great respect for Raoul Coutard. Like watching a Wong Kar Wai film and wanting to immerse yourself in what Peter Doyle is going to bring visually, the same I feel about Coutard's work with Godard (and other directors).
Let's take a look at "À bout de souffle" (Breathless). We learn about a man who angered his producer because of his unorthodox shooting schedules, his approach to getting his talent prepared without a script.
And Francois Truffaut who wrote the story for the film had some interesting words to say about Godard. Truffaut said, “The miracle of Breathless is that it was made at a time in the life of a man in which normally he would not want to make a film”.
Truffaut continues, "One doesn’t make a film when one is sad and destitute. Making a film means that you’re living in a hotel or an apartment, that you are disengaged from material worries, and that you make your film without any distraction from your present thoughts ".
Truffaut concludes, “In the case of Breathless, the man who made it was almost a pauper. Therein lies the miracle. It is rare that being so unhappy and so alone, one can still make a film”.
In "Pierrot le fou", I was entertained by the film because of its characters, its storyline but also to see his inspirations and what he was passionate about included in the film. From his passion to literature, his thoughts on modern culture, everything you have read about Jean-Luc Godard is represented in the film.
Was Godard being didactic or anti-didactic? Challenging the audience and possibly giving the viewer his perspective of the world. Like others who have followed Godard, does his central focus on similar themes in every film make him a director ahead of his time or a director that is misunderstood. For me, his films are more than just films, it's fascinating to me of how a man can put so much of himself into a film and could give a rats ass of how his producers or viewers felt. (Granted Marco Ferreri is more of the extreme as he creates films for the people he hates - Another man that is fascinating to learn about and why he makes the films that he does).
I still have yet so many films I want to see from Godard and see how the man and along with his films have changed from the 70's, the 80's and to the present.
I'm not blind to say that every film by Godard is a masterpiece. In fact, "Made in the U.S.A." is probably a film that I didn't care all that much for in terms of storyline. But in terms of seeing how the personal moments in his life are injected into the storyline, it made me respect the film even more.
Anyway...I am not a Godard-ite. I enjoy his films tremendously but I will not be content until I see at least more than half of the movies he has directed and not just his films from the '60s.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
flag icon to the right of the quick search at the top-middle.
[hide this message]
)
Linear Mode
