Since “Pierrot le fou” i get bored whether he gets political or not
Do you mean you get bored with every film after Pierrot? I know what you mean…
“But once he starts making his charectors yap about Vietname or some other dated political ramblings…”
The U.S. Government starts a war with a nation for no other reason than to further imperialism… yeah, how outdated. That certainly never, ever, ever happened, or will happen again…
“What can I say, I really don’t give a damn about politics. I care about people. Love, hate, despair, joy…”
If you don’t care about politics you don’t care about people. It’s as simple as that. The political institutions we live under have as much an impact on our lives as anything else; it’s impossible to care about people without caring about the Government that controls them. Political apathy is apathy towards humanity; simple as that.
Oh! And I’d say Godard discussing the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands in wars and his discussion of a possible solution through political insurrection is, “caring about people.” La Chinoise shows a genuine movement; a genuine feeling within youth of all generations. The idea that they can change the world, and the dissolution when they realize they can’t; those emotions are as real as any in other film.
“The one exception is Pierrot le Fou, and that’s only because it was funny.”
If you don’t see humour in Godard’s other films you’re not looking. Numero Deux, and Notre Musique are as funny as any film he’s made, and as political. Godard’s wit is as sharp as any filmmakers.
Sometimes I find it amazing how little people actually “watch” what’s on screen. Godard cares about people; just because he doesn’t make films that manipulate you and force you to empathize with every single person on the simplest possible emotional level doesn’t mean his characters lack emotional depth. It just means you have to engage the film on a deeper level to see the characters for what they really are.
When Godard gets political, I get excited! I couldn’t imagine not being enthralled by something like Weekend or Tout va bien. Then again, I’m very much interested in politics anyway (especially radical politics).
Wow, I was going to say something but…Lord Quas pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Yes, I meant after “Pierrot le fou”. I love that film in fact.
Be careful, Mr. Hidden, Godard is GOD for sooooo many people. What you said is a blasphemy. I’m an atheist, by the way.
Godard isn’t God. He’s actually pretty uneven, but I just find it amazing how some people refuse to engage a film at all and then blame the film or filmmaker for it.
But yeah it’s really easy to just say, “Godard is boring, and the only reason some people don’t think that is because they have deified him.” I understand that, superjano. It’s certainly easier for someone to think that than to actually have their ideas challenged by someone with a nuanced opinion; if the latter is true you might actually have to (gasp!) think about your opinion on a filmmaker!
A sociocultural overview of the mid-60s to early 70s would be unimaginable without including Godard’s political films. Like him or not, he’s one for the ages.
@ superjano
I don’t really see the need to resort to sarcastic provocation. Both H. Jackson and Lord Quas gave reasonable, intelligent responses to the original argument. They spoke personally and passionately, without spite or name calling. If you just want a thread where you can trash a filmmaker without any kind of disagreement or discussion then maybe this isn’t the right place.
It’s fine that you’ve already made your mind up about Godard, but why even introduce it into the forum? Nothing anyone says can change your point of view, so why offer it up for debate?
Smarmily saying “Godard is GOD for soooooo many people” (which no one actually suggested), seems like an obvious attempt to discredit the two aforementioned posters and their arguments, reducing them to mere “fanboys”, as opposed to people with genuine opinions.
I don’t really understand your attack, Lights in the dusk. It’s a fact that many people think that critics have deified Godard. It’s not my single opinion. Yeah, i believe he is a genius and I love “A bout de souffle”, “Vivre sa vie”, “Pierrot le fou”….. But you should accept that i find other films boring like “La chinoise”. It’s MY opinion (not better or worse opinion, just MY opinion). Why do i find him boring now? I don’t know, maybe it’s because I don’t see the initial freshness( don’t know if that’s the correct word in english or just a bad translation from spanish).
And think: what is cinema but provocation? What is it without sarcasm, irony, humor?……just a religion. Come on! We ’re not in a church. Smile, be provocative, man…. ;-D
By the way, i do have interest in politics, and ideologically i think i agree with 90% of his political views
Godard isn’t the only person making (or at least, ‘who made’ – during a time when it wasn’t dated) political films. If you don’t like political films, and find them boring, then fine. Start a thread, explain why film shouldn’t address current political issues, explain your reasons, have an argument.
But what that has to do with Godard personally and his huge body of work, I really don’t know.
When Michael Bay makes action films I get bored. Well, yeah, but, so what…?
“I really don’t give a damn about politics. I care about people.”
How are people not a part of politics? Did Godard make a film based on the politics of muskrats or something?
Perhaps a more accurate title for this thread would be: When anyone gets political, I get bored …
“It’s a fact that many people think that critics have deified Godard.”
It’s also a fact that every filmmaker is deified by someone somewhere, so specifically referring to Godard as “god” (sarcastically or no) means there’s a hidden agenda in that subliminal undermining.
“If you don’t care about politics you don’t care about people.”
I agree with this. I haven’t seen any of Godard’s political films (nor have I been blown away with what I have seen), but while you may be bored with politics (bred from ignorance or apathy, either is understandable), you can’t remove the importance of politics on every single human life living in a modern state.
Furthermore, the less you care about politics, the more assuredly you will become a prisoner of decisions made by someone who cares even less for you (politicians rarely care for more than themselves).
Godard’s political period is similar to Bob Dylan’s saved period. For a while there, he got real didactic but he also produced some interesting work and though he has toned down his rhetoric, the period shaped the work you see today, which is (again true for both Dylan and Godard) as good as it has ever been.
While I agree with you, Den, on the Godard portion of your post, I’m pretty skeptical of it on the Dylan portion. The Dylan of the ‘new millenium’ isn’t exactly god-fearing. His 80s/saved period certainly had an enormous affect on his 90s output, but now? Eh, not so much. If anything, Dylan has come full circle. He’s actually recreating the things he did in the 70s (and a little bit of the 60s as well), but his audience now has the benefit (or curse) of that “post-post modernist” judgment of his work.
And, I maintain that one of Godard’s best films is Detective. I suppose the only way someone could hate such a film is if they hated Fassbinder as well … and that’s just not on.
2 or 3 things about her is the greatest political film ever made, it is as sensorial as daring in the ideology, a lot of beauty there.
There are certainly valid criticisms to be made of some political cinema, but i think the OP was a bit too flippant in this case. Expand upon the "I care about people. Love, hate, despair, joy… " point and you may have something.
@Superjano
You are your own greatest detractor from the validity of your opinions when you say “Why do i find him boring now? I don’t know, maybe it’s because I don’t see the initial freshness.” If you want your opinions to be discussed respectfully you should know why you have them. I don’t think you need to watch every single Godard film, but it would help if you watched a couple of the ones you dislike and carefully explained what it is that makes them boring to you.
If people gave more of a damn about politics, and cared less about “people,” the world would be a better place.
If people gave more of a damn about politics and less about people, the world would be a constant inescapable war zone.
I don’t mind politics in a film, but only when it’s presented in a way that shows you the conflict and allows you to come to your own conclusions. When the politics are preached right at you in a manipulative way, I find it obnoxious even when I agree with the politics. For example, I liked the politics in The Battle of Algiers but hated it in The Kids Are Alright.
Yeah, I think there are two issues here. Political cinema in general versus Godard’s political cinema. It makes no sense to criticize Godard because one is bored by his politics when one is bored by politics in general. However, from what I’ve seen of Godard (I guess not much when taking into account his entire body of work), I dislike his intellectualizing, not because I dislike intellectualizing in general, but because with Godard it seems rather simplistic. So, I hated Alphaville because of the empty pseudo philosophizing, was bored by La Chinoise, and irritated by the cliched anti-bourgeois quality of the beginning of Pierrot Le Fou (although I ended up really liking the film). So, I personally like Godard when he keeps his pseudo-intellectual, didactic tendencies away. And I do like some Godard films (Contempt and Pierrot Le Fou are under my favs). I’ve mostly seen Godard’s early films so those are the ones I’m speaking about. Perhaps he refined his ideas in later films.
The world is constant inescapable war zone. Ignoring that fact to focus of “people” doesn’t make it not so.
People are getting the wrong impression on my views here. But that’s understandable as I didn’t express them the right way.
What I should have said was, I don’t give a damn about politics in films. But even that isn’t true. I don’t hate politics in films all the time, but when theres a film where the charectors just start talking to the camera out of nowhere, as if they cease to become actual charectors and somehow become the directors avatar and he just starts blairing out his views through them, then I get annoyed, frustrated and, yes, bored.
I hate when his films stray from the narrative to talk about politics that are, to me, yes, dated. I’m just sitting there talking to the screen “Yes, Monsieur Godard, I realize the Vietname war is something that makes you angry, I get it, now get back to the story!”
I guess what I’m trying to say it I like the Godard films where you get the feeling he actually gives a crap whether you, the viewer, is entertained or not with the film. I found 2 or 3 Things about Her painfully boring, one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. I would go into why I feel that way, but it would just get shot down by various people.
And as for all the people bashing my “I don’t give a damn about politics I care about people” comment…
To me politics is not people. Politics is nations. Governments. And yes I know those two things are people. But to me they are seperated.
Why is story more important that the Vietnam war?
regarding Dylan I think he maintained a great deal of the unashamed sincerity of his religious songs (before them he could be quite jaded). I don’t know that he could have written Feel My Love or a few others without that sincerity.
Our reactions to Godard are always so cliched. “I like him when he’s telling stories…I hate him when he’s being political/didactic.” That would probably be the same popular critique for any director. Our reactions to Godard are generally as superficial as we accuse him of being when he gets polemical.
“If people gave more of a damn about politics and less about people, the world would be a constant inescapable war zone.”
It isn’t? Oh, the constant conflict and insurrection in the middle east, Central Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and most of Africa had me confused… and the fact that someplace in the world has been in almost constant conflict for about sixty years. I guess as long as there isn’t a war on the shores of the U.S. it’s okay if the rest of the world burns… This is essentially what Godard’s political films in the sixties (and beyond) are about. The children of Marx and Coca-Cola indeed.
His works are anything but simplistic (well… for the most part… I’m not defending Alphaville ). He challenges the very foundation of his own ideas, even as he promotes them; he makes fun of the bourgeoisie even though he never seems to make a film about anyone else (there’s incredible irony in that… that Godard constantly points to). Maybe it’s didactic, but I would say Godard questions Marxism as much as he pushes it (which is pretty much the opposite of didactic). I mean La Chinoise is all about the disillusionment in Marxism, and even Maoism; even the death of youth in that very didacticism some criticize Godard for.
2 or 3 Things I Know About Her is one of the best films I have ever seen because I found it painlessly interesting. I would go into why I feel that way, but I would just get shot down by various people. I’m such a victim.
Sorry but politics is inherently about people. People make up a nation (people also make up a government), and politics fundamentally affects one’s living environment and thus how they go about living and eating and spending their free time etcetera. I will now not prove my assertions cause people will just bring me down and I am a hero.
Hidden Behind the Screen
Anyone else feel this way? When he focuses the film on human emotion, I’m fine. But once he starts making his charectors yap about Vietname or some other dated political ramblings that I sometimes think HE doesn’t even know where he’s going with, I get very frustrated, annoyed, and bored. What can I say, I really don’t give a damn about politics. I care about people. Love, hate, despair, joy…
The one exception is Pierrot le Fou, and that’s only because it was funny.