criterionforum.org

Week End is essential, though I think every Godard has something to offer so I'm far from impartial on this question.

malcolm1980 wrote:Are Contempt and Week End good blind buys

Godard has been wildly hit and miss for me? For every film that I absolutely love from him (Breathless, Band of Outsiders and A Woman is a Woman), there's one where I simply don't get or feel very mixed about (Alphaville, Pierrot Le Fou and La Petite Soldat).

Any thoughts?

Given your track record, I strongly DON'T recommend "Week End" -- but do think you might find "Contempt" very interesting.

While given your track record, he might be right, I can't help but recommend Weekend regardless. I think its one of his best, if not his best. However, its probably the biggest love-it-or-hate-it Godard film of that period, so if you don't mind Godard taking his social critiques to the angriest, his Marxist politics to the most radical, and his complete break with the conventionalism of film to the farthest he had done with any of his films of that period, and don't mind him slipping into moments of absurdity and humor similar to those of Bunuel, even Monty Python, while doing so, I don't think you'll have a problem with the movie. If you do, I still recommend it, but you might want to get to something else you'll want to see before hand instead of making it your next purchase.

Contempt is also one of his best, and arguably his best, and it feels more up your alley. It's not nearly as playful as the three you like, but its great none the less. I'd recommend it totally.

It seems however that My Life to Live is the one you should see next if you haven't. The movie is worth a blind buy, but whether any of the DVD releases of it are is the big question.

malcolm1980 wrote:Are Contempt and Week End good blind buys

Godard has been wildly hit and miss for me? For every film that I absolutely love from him (Breathless, Band of Outsiders and A Woman is a Woman), there's one where I simply don't get or feel very mixed about (Alphaville, Pierrot Le Fou and La Petite Soldat).

I too felt Alphaville was a bit lacking, same goes with Le Petit Soldat... although I did really enjoy Pierrot, but that was after watching most of his films.

It seems like you appreciate more of his lighter/comedic treats, so I suggest you should check out Masculin Feminin next. It's almost Rohmerian or Truffautian in its look at the social rituals of youth culture, and he still manages to stay politically objective. Not to mention it's pretty funny.

As for Weekend or Contempt, they are films you should surely watch, but you may have to watch again, maybe after exploring some of his 70s or 80s works (like Tout va Bien, Numero Deux, or Prenom: Carmen) so yes, worth buying). And after watching Contempt, you may want to take another look at Pierrot le fou... maybe in the theaters if it's coming your way.

Contempt is definatly a film you much watch over again. In my first viewing I was bored out of my skull. The same damn piece of Delarue (which I would suaully love) and the whole scene in the apartment was absolutly boring. Then on my second viewing, I realized "How could I have hated this film?"

Everything is perfect from Fritz Lang's view of cinemascope, to Jack Palance screaming about the death of cinema, to the Lumiere quote in the screening room.

Definatly agree with justleblanc on Masculin Feminine. The politics may be a bit dated (that sort of appeals to me though), but the films are still as fun as ever. Chantal Goya is just adorable too. Can't help but use that word, but she is.

I saw Meetin' WA, and was upset at the stupid cuts and music cues, I just wanted to watch the damn interview, and I rented Notre Musique once, and passed out. I love Tout va Bien, but that's due to what Gorin did to the film, Latter to Jane, the more Godardian movie is just plain boring. Just tedious over-analyzing.

I feel guilty for not appreciating his later films though, but from what I've seen, they're awful. Any films close to his great films of the 60's?

I would put Nouvelle Vague up with his 60's films, but on the whole it's been slim Godardian pickins' of late.

The 60's are over.

The Elegant Dandy Fop wrote:I rented Notre Musique once, and passed out.

From its rapturous beauty, I assume? But seriously, try it again. Maybe you were tired. Godard's films reward a good night's sleep and a viewer who is thoroughly willing to engage with the film. It's 80 minutes long, and contains some of the most gorgeous images and passages of music this side of The New World (and Nouvelle Vague, which is certainly one of his finest late period films, as David pointed out).

The Elegant Dandy Fop wrote:I feel guilty for not appreciating his later films though, but from what I've seen, they're awful. Any films close to his great films of the 60's?

I'm perhaps not the best person to answer this because in many ways I actually prefer his later films to his 60s output. They are in a very different mode, still quintessentially Godardian of course, but slower, somehow simultaneously more fragmented at the same time they are very contemplative. There is a painterly approach to composition with the stunning use of the 1.37:1 aspect ratio, and although certainly the classic 60s films used a lot of natural light, here it truly becomes a character in itself. I think Godard has only improved with age, an accomplishment that's as staggering as it is inspirational. Of course much of the world hasn't really noticed.

Of the late films, I rate all of the following highly: Passion, Prénom Carmen, Je vous salue, Marie (perhaps Godard's most beautiful film next to Nouvelle Vague - which is next on this list), JLG/JLG - autoportrait de décembre, L'Origine du XXIème siècle (extremely underrated, although most Godard fans I know who have seen it love it), Éloge de l'amour, and Notre Musique.

Some of the films I've left out, like Keep Your Right Up!, Détective, and Hélas pour moi, have wonderful sequences and are essential for the confirmed Godard nut, but are not for me as successful as the others. A few, like King Lear and For Ever Mozart I didn't really enjoy at all. And then there are some gaps in my own viewing, of course, most notably Allemagne 90 neuf zéro and the complete Histoire(s) du cinéma.

The key to appreciating Godard in general is to watch a number of his films and begin making connections, to watch the way his ideas and techniques develop or shift radically across many years of filmmaking. All this presupposes there are elements of his filmmaking that you enjoy regardless of whether you feel a particular film of his is successful or not - it's tough if you go in expecting out and out masterpieces. Of course, I would argue many of these films are certainly that, but it won't be readily apparent on the first viewing and, as I said, particularly when you haven't built up a body of knowledge of his work to better understand what's going on in a given work.

Oedipax wrote:L'Origine du XXIème siècle (extremely underrated, although most Godard fans I know who have seen it love it)

I saw it for the first time last week and am quite certain it will be one of the most beautiful and the most upsetting things I will see all year.

-Toilet Dcuk

The Elegant Dandy Fop wrote:I feel guilty for not appreciating his later films though, but from what I've seen, they're awful. Any films close to his great films of the 60's?

Prenom: Carmen comes to mind as his most 60s of his later works. Still, don't expect Pierrot or Breathless.

And I wouldn't get too frustrated with a lot of later Godard. It's worth your time to track down Numero Deux on either VHS or a bootleg DVD. You shouldn't need to pay more than 20 bucks for it and the quality of the bootlegs are fine (as long as you get english subtitles). I would say it's a perfect introduction to the form of most of his later works. There's a lot to appreciate, but knowing how to watch those films is often hard to figure out.

Detective gets such a tough rap but I think it's absolutely one of his best late period films

domino harvey wrote:Detective gets such a tough rap but I think it's absolutely one of his best late period films

And I might be the only person who sees this, but King Lear really is a masterpiece.

Well, I wouldn't go that far, but it's a film that only could have been made by J-L G.

Both Detective and King Lear feature Julie Delpy, BTW.

David Ehrenstein wrote:Well, I wouldn't go that far, but it's a film that only could have been made by J-L G.

I think my love for it comes from it being the first of his later films that I figured out on my own and that I truly appreciated.

Norman Mailer takes a swipe at Godard over King Lear.

Oedipax wrote:Norman Mailer takes a swipe at Godard over King Lear.

I'm just assuming Mailer has never met Dubya.

Anytime I read a story about Godard screwing someone over, I just sort of chuckle to myself and go "Oh Godard." If anything, every new instance just adds to my love of the man.

Have you read "Hollywood" by Bukowski about the filming of Barfly? There's a thinly disguised portrait of Godard in that book which... Well I think that was the only time Godard met his match.

I just watched two of Luc Moullet's films, The Smugglers, and A Girl is a Gun, and I'm wondering if Godard's LES CARABINIERS is an homage to Moullet to some degree. Does anyone have any thoughts on that?

Luc Moullet didn't make his first feature film until 1966, so it's doubtful.

for what it's worth though, Godard did praise Moullet's Brigitte and Brigitte as a "revolutionary film."

Sortini wrote:Have you read "Hollywood" by Bukowski about the filming of Barfly? There's a thinly disguised portrait of Godard in that book which... Well I think that was the only time Godard met his match.

How so? I haven't read it, so I'm intrigued.

I believe Bukowski refers to him as Jon-Luc Modard.

This link says that Bukowski wrote the subtitles for SAUVE QUI PEUT (LA VIE)… ???

Aber Godard fragte Bukowski, ob er die englischen Untertitel für einen Film von ihm schreiben könnte, was Bukowski 1979 für den Film „Sauve Quit Peut/La Vie“ tat, der 1980 herauskam. Durch diese Zusammenarbeit allerdings stieg Godard nicht in Bukowskis Achtung, im Gegenteil (Das wars, S. 90).

edit: to keep those shitty internet links as save as possible - this quote is supposed to be from this book (page 9)

No, according to the MacCabe bio, Godard used elements from two of Bukowski's short stories in the film. For the full hilarious recollection of the rights-purchasing, seek out the bio.

I know this bookand the reference of the two short stories - however, what makes you give a straight "No"?

However, i have no need for world wide web weisenheimers…

From Hollywood:

Charles Bukowski wrote:"Listen" said Jon-Luc, "what I want to ask you to do is to write the English dialogue for the sub-titles of my new movie. Also, I have a scene I want to use from one of your stories, where the man gets a blow job under the desk and just goes about his business, answer the telephone and all that crap. Is it a deal?"