Jean-Luc Godard’s subversive foray into commercial filmmaking is a star-studded Cinemascope epic. Contempt (Le mépris) stars Michel Piccoli as a screenwriter torn between the demands of a proud European director (played by legendary director Fritz Lang), a crude and arrogant American producer (Jack Palance), and his disillusioned wife, Camille (Brigitte Bardot) as he attempts to doctor the script for a new film version of The Odyssey. —The Criterion Collection
The lynchpin of the French New Wave, Jean-Luc Godard was arguably the most influential filmmaker of the postwar era. Beginning with his groundbreaking 1959 feature debut A Bout de Souffle, Godard revolutionized the motion picture form, freeing the medium from the shackles of its long-accepted cinematic language by rewriting the rules of narrative, continuity, sound, and camera work. Later in his career, he also challenged the common means of feature production, distribution, and exhibition, all in an effort to subvert the conventions of the Hollywood formula to create a new kind of film.
Godard was born in Paris on December 3, 1930, the second of four children. After receiving his primary education in Nyon, Switzerland – during World War II, he became a naturalized Swiss citizen – he studied ethnology at the Sorbonne, but spent the vast majority of his days at the Cine-Club du Quartier Latin, where he first met fellow film fanatics Francois Truffaut and Jacques Rivette. In May… read more
Jean-Luc Godard’s “Contempt/Le mepris” (1963) is the first part of his religious trilogy, followed by “Hail, Mary” (1985) and “Woe Is Me” (1993). While “Contempt” examines the psychological mechanism of relations between humans and gods of pagan “design” – the human humans (the people with psychology of god-worshippers) and the human gods (people with psychology of unconscious identification with gods), “Hail, Mary” analyzes the psychological roots of the Christian cult of Saint Mary, and “Woe is Me” – the return of pagan gods into post-Christian modernity in a form of technological constructions, tools and toys dominating people’s life in Western democracies. In his analysis of religious psychology Godard separates people from religious (in a narrow sense) practices and metaphorizes these practices on personal and social relations between people in order to make their religious essence more articulate and vivid for the perception of the viewers. Religious psychology is not necessary creates loyalty to despotic dogmas (many atheists are very religious by psychology). In “Contempt” Godard shows how religious feelings show itself in private relations between Paul (Michel Piccoli), a modest writer of detective stories but educated and with an exceptional existentially spiritual taste person, and his wife Camille (Brigitte Bardot), a monumental beauty, and in social relations between Paul (identifying with Homer and Odyssey) and the mighty Hollywood producer Jeremiah Prokosch (the new incarnation of Poseidon/Neptune), played by Jack Polance in the only intellectually serious performance of his whole career. The both “gods” – Camille and Prokosch, are depicted with tender and subtle caricaturishness, while Paul’s destiny Godard generalizes as that of us all, the humanity. Godard deconstructs the relations between humans and gods as known in history - as metaphoric constructions of markedly sociomorphic relations between human beings as such (personified by Paul) and the human gods (personified by Camille and Prokosch). On the level of the plot the film describes the disagreements between Paul (the author of screenplay), Fritz Lang (the director) who plays himself, and Prokosch (the producer) – all trying together to make a film based on Homer’s Odyssey. But Godard’s scholarly intentions in the film are not limited to symbolizing a certain type of relations between human beings into relations between humans and gods. The second important scientific contribution of Godard in “Contempt” is his classification of the types of bonds human beings are prone to establish between themselves and our historical past, and themselves and any work of art they perceive and react on. Here Prokosch personifies the type of perception of the past which is based on our projection into the historical past of our self-aggrandizement (our megalomaniacal need). For him Ancient Greece is a kind of Olympus in comparison with today’s life. This is, essentially, a conservative position based on authoritarian/totalitarian behavioral habits including the proneness for religious or secular cult of ancestors. The second position is represented by Lang who tends to “objectively” study the human past without the need for any identification with it. This position is that of liberal scholars – it’s the accumulation of a kind of an archival knowledge about the past without any worshipful or critical emotions. The third position is represented by Paul who sees in people of the previous epochs our existential brothers. He learns from the past and from the art and understood that people who lived before us made their own attempts to resolve their problems with gods as idealized models (theologized, from Olympus, or living on the Olympus of the tops of the social hierarchy), as we today trying to with the human gods of our times. Existential identification with our ancient ancestors is simultaneously brotherly and critical. The same three positions – projection of self-aggrandizement (or its negative reflection – the dismissal: “I love-I hate” approach), “objective” position of “neutral/truthful” representation, and existential identification Godard discerns in our relations with works of art. “Contempt” occupies not only a unique place in history of cinema and Western culture in general, but a distinguished place of an exemplary work of art. Victor Enyutin Please, visit: www.actingoutpolitics.com to read an essay about the film (with analysis of stills from it) – “Psychology of Human Obsession with Super-human (Human Need for Association with Gods as a Result of Problems in Relations between People)”.
Finally a Godard film that I can claim to love, and not just admire from a distance. I love how manipulative and yet distancing the grand score is (precisely because it takes the manipulation to an extreme with those crescendos). Also, even though it's almost counter-intuitive, the winding nature of conversations is truer to life than we may accept at first.
I like the film despite myself, there was little to no subtly in the story or technique, but it in no way harmed the film. Coutard was blessed with beautiful locations to shoot (I want to go to that villa), and he along with Godard took full advantage of the wide-angle lens, pushing a distortion of how life looked to the characters. There were dialogues that were too self-aware and stagy, but again they worked.
The score is beautiful, but it seems to be almost in a timer to play every 5 minutes, whereas in Godard's other films it rarely plays (if the film in question even has a score). Does anyone know if this was done for a particular reason?
This week we highlight a unique film journal, a couple of recent Q&As and a review of a new book on Andrei Tarkovsky’s Stalker.
Also: Posters for this year’s Directors’ Fortnight and Critics’ Week, “Great Directors” in San Francisco, Picasso in London and more.
"Admirers of Michel Piccoli know better than to ignore any film, however slight, that is anchored and calmed by his presence," wrote Anthony
The shocking reveal of an alternate score to Godard’s Contempt, one for the Italian release, done by the prolific Piero Piccioni.
On The Evolution Of CinemaScope: Or, of you're going to be a stickler about names of formats and such, "The 2.35:1 Or So Aspect Ratio." Above
"Following her 2003 debut The Forest for the Trees, 32-year-old German writer-director Maren Ade's trenchant, funny, and sensitive Everyone
One of the greatest mysteries of Jean-Luc Godard’s Made in USA (1966) is just what the mystery is. Ex-journalist Anna Karina slinks around in
Again the issue is – a couple. The faces are different (Michel Piccoli, Brigitte Bardot), but the couple that is disappearing before our eyes are Jean-Luc Godard and Ana Karina. Long scenes preview… read review
I’m not equipped to write a full review but I must express my contempt for this film. I’ve attempted to watch it on three or more occasions and cannot get past the hour mark. The film’s pacing is so… read review
In short, a contemplative, contemporary and curious look at…contempt.
Jean-luc Godard is fascinating. I am drawn to his audacity. To deliberately go against whatever…in the medium of film… read review
Honestly, in a movie this drawn-out, I don’t care how important the message is. It was okay for the first ~45 minutes, and yes, the casa malaparte is amazing, brigitte is beautiful, the music is catchy… read review