What pisses me off about Godard
Did the film debates thread go anywhere? Hopefully something like this can belong there. The thread title and the assumptions about Godard’s intentions will make this a very inflammatory thread that will most likely end up with Rumplesink and Dmitri squaring off without a moderator.
I dont know what to respond to first, how easily dismissive this is of one of the world’s finest filmmakers
or how easily dismissive this is of one of the world’s finest musical acts.
It’s hardly worth responding to either.
Godard is a one of a kind filmmaker. Deeply insightful about the issues he tackles and groundbreaking in the techniques he used.
Vivre Sa Vie, if a film was ever gonna make me cry it was this one. That ending almost got me there, but I toughed it out.
Everything Godard does to manipulate the medium has a point and purpose, even if the point is that cinema does not need a point or purpose.
That being said, I massively prefer Truffaut to Godard.
“…all exercises in Godard masturbating himself with how he can manipulate the medium.”
I think you may be missing the point. While he did genre bend and manipulate, it was to an end other than ejaculation. That is a remarkably simple-minded analysis.
Can you tell us how he should make a film? Or how Zappa should have made music?
How we watch films informs how we see the world. When we have a dominant way of experiencing cinema, the Hollywood structure, we start to see this as simply the “correct” way a film should be made, rather than one particular way. This has implications in the real world, as we view life in simplistic terms of good and bad, the purpose of life being to achieve goals, generally simplifying everything we experience. This way of seeing the world is so pervasive, it’s often not seen as one possible way of thinking, but the only way.
Godard’s purpose is to disrupt the ingrained film structure, and thus shift our minds out of our easy understandings. When we believe there’s one “correct” way to look at films or the world, it’s no surprise we don’t like his films.
I guess it’s a valid criticism to say he doesn’t give us an viewpoint of his own, and just messes us around and leaves us in limbo. But staying in limbo isn’t so bad.
As for Zappa, I just don’t know what to tell you aside from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Va7mpfquuY
So Zappa does take himself seriously every once in a while, cool.
Watch any interview with Zappa on Youtube. He ALWAYS took himself seriously, even when he was joking.
If taking yrself seriously is a big part of being an artist than Q Tarantino must be the biggest artist around
An excellent rebuttal to any points raised, Jason!
Den, first you have to be an artist. QT is a bag of shit.
If Godard is “masturbating himself with how he can manipulate the medium,” what’s Quentin Tarantino doing? Fucking himself with a two-headed dildo?
Yeah, that’s the ticket.
“Den, first you have to be an artist. QT is a bag of shit”
glad to see we agree on something
So, in which film is he most reserved? Or in which film is closest to Weekend, in that its just balls out?
I’ll list the movies that I have:
Vivre Sa Vie
Masulin Feminin
2 or 3 things…
A Woman is a Woman
Le petit soldat
alphaville
pierrot le fou
made in usa
la chinoise
passion
detective
helas pour moi
elodge de l’amour
1) “Watch any interview with Zappa on Youtube. He ALWAYS took himself seriously, even when he was joking.”
Hey, I can relate to that. I consider myself to be joking, even when I’m serious, and serious, even when I’m joking. I really like coming to reality like that.
2) I LOVE IT. A thread that is specifically for Godard debate (which is topic #1 here) that is almost immediately derailed by Tarantino debate (which is topic #1 here). Mad props, guys!
3) I’m going to Avatar throw a Avatar monkey wrench in here and Avatar mention AVATAR.
—PolarisDiB
Is Passion any good? I saw it in a film book one time-150 masterpieces of international cinema…
Godard stinks.
Now somebody prove me wrong.
“It’s hardly worth responding to either.”
I don’t know, I may look to the next few “What pisses me off about…” threads so I know which filmmakers I should start seriously getting into. If they piss off Jason, they must be doing something right!!!
We should have a project like…Cinema 21: What Pisses Me Off About…
That would be fun…
“We should have a project like…Cinema 21: What Pisses Me Off About…”
It would probably be the same filmmakers from the regular Cinema 21 threads since they all pretty much don’t make films with “dominating” performances and deep narratives like the Coens and PTA. All those guys will piss somebody here off eventually with their “pretentiousness.”
Awww, don’t go there Mike. ;)
Haha. Which part, mentioning the Coens, PTA, or using the dreaded P word? My last post was loaded with places I probably shouldn’t go. :)
Robley: See my post above.
“Is Passion any good? I saw it in a film book one time-150 masterpieces of international cinema…”
I once read a list of the top 100 movie lists of all time, and I didn’t see that list on it. I wouldn’t trust that list. I only ever read lists that have been approved by well-known listophiles, so you can be sure I know my lists.
I’m working on a book at the moment, “1,001 Lists You Must Get Your Opinions From Before You Die”.
Mike: It’ll dock me a number of points but, the Coens. ;)
Haven’t seen enough PTA and the P-word is thrown around too much for me to care at this point.
Fraser: I don’t need a lecture about Hollywood conventions. I don’t even dislike Godard.
Mike: I was completely joking. I never even said a single negative thing about any Cinema 21 filmmaker and I love Weerasethakul and Denis. I don’t know what your problem is.
Oh, well unless someone is really offended about my sarcasm it probably won’t go anywhere. The Coens haven’t really created as much heat on the site as the two filmmakers who shall not be named (in this post). I never got around to seeing A Serious Man so I wasn’t motivated to read any of the threads about it and bash them.
Everyones seen enough PTA :) I’m just kidding, he’s not so bad but I just wanted to make that joke.
Fraser, thanks, but when I have 20 movies from the same director, and I was pissed about the first three that I saw, I am just trying to find a jumping off point.
Get back to us, when you finish your book.
Mike: Yes, I believe I know to whom you’re referring. Just a defensive reaction, they’re among my ‘babies’. ;)
No, it’s fine if you’re joking. Sorry I killed it. o_o
dope fiend willy
I liken him to Frank Zappa- all of the talent in the world, and he just screws around with it.
I bought the huge Godard box set from the UK, and I also got a set of 3 of his films from the 60s. I previously had owned Breathless and Weekend.
Godard is very talented, and very smart. He is better than Truffaut in every way, Jules and Jim was Truffaut trying to be Godard.
I was trying to take Godard in chronological order, with the two sets that I just got, but every film so far-A Woman is a Woman, Vivre sa Vie, Le Mepris; are all exercises in Godard masturbating himself with how he can manipulate the medium. A hint to Godard, anybody can turn music on and off in a movie, it doesn’t make you a genius just because you are the only one who would be willing to damage their picture by doing so.
Does he ever make movies where he isn’t trying to wow us with what he can do with film, and just make a movie?