criterionforum.org

hopefully repackaged with Night and Fog included!

I'll settle for the transfer being passable.

Yeah, at this point I'm kind of scared.

Anybody know if what they're screening at MOMA next week is this new restoration?

Is this one of their 1:30 screenings in Theater 3? If it is, it's most likely a print from their archive, nothing new. Once in a while, they'll mention it again, but one reason for the ongoing "Auteurist History" screenings is to show what's in their collection - including what needs to be restored. Rarely, if ever, does this include a brand-new print, they usually save those for special screenings like their restoration festival.

Yes 1:30 is exactly what it is.

I saw the restored version at Le Champo in Paris a couple weeks ago and it looks terrific - it certainly added to my appreciation of the film's visuals, having only seen it before on the Criterion DVD. The night sequences in particular are quite stunning - but daytime as well, tons of detail and depth, and an appropriate level of grain.

This film was interesting. I didn't really know what to make of it. I know it's supposed to be a masterpiece, one of the original films to come out of the French New Wave, but I wasn't really able to discern its message, interpret its themes, or extract its subtext as quickly and effectively as I usually do with films. It's also the only feature-length film I've seen by Resnais (I've seen "Night and Fog"), so it's not like I could immediately identify his style or utilize any prior understanding of his motifs. The opening sequence in itself was a bit puzzling for me. This one is definitely going to require a second viewing for me. Then maybe I'll be able to better make up my mind as to how I feel about this film.

AndrewBoone wrote:I wasn't really able to discern its message, interpret its themes, or extract its subtext as quickly and effectively as I usually do with films.

It's a thematically rich film, though I didn't get this with my first viewing either. Mainly, it examines how we process tragedy when removed from it, either by time or distance, and parallels this with the disintegration of a romantic relationship. Cameron's Titanic covers similar ground, only without anything approaching this film's depth or artistry. I'd recommend watching it again with the Cowie commentary--I remember that helped me appreciate the film a lot more.

Related, it also deals with the construction of identity, particularly in the wake of tragedy, and the acceptance that in constructing a new self one is essentially allowing the self that experienced the tragedy to die- it suggests the horror for even the survivors of something truly terrible, and the incredible pain of moving on from it- which, to me, is the relationship between the relationship material and the atrocity footage in the beginning.

matrixschmatrix wrote:Related, it also deals with the construction of identity, particularly in the wake of tragedy, and the acceptance that in constructing a new self one is essentially allowing the self that experienced the tragedy to die- it suggests the horror for even the survivors of something truly terrible, and the incredible pain of moving on from it- which, to me, is the relationship between the relationship material and the atrocity footage in the beginning.

Good response. Thanks. Yeah I definitely picked up on some identity themes, amongst others, but I just couldn't really explore them in my mind within the context of the film. I was able to find connections between the Hiroshima/war aspects of the film and the surface level of the plot (the relationship between the primary characters), but most of them were transient and thin to begin with, and I never really came up with anything really sound that permanently joined the two in my mind, and I don't think I will until I watch it again. Hopefully your ideas will help me do so. The process of surviving pain, whether it's the suffering and horror of war or the emotional devastation of being separated from someone with whom you've developed a strong emotional link, and then moving on. Sounds like a good perspective to me. I'll keep it in mind when I re-watch.

AndrewBoone wrote: but I wasn't really able to discern its message, interpret its themes, or extract its subtext as quickly and effectively as I usually do with films. ... This one is definitely going to require a second viewing for me.

And a third and a fourth viewing. And then once more with just the music. As Peter Cowie stated in the commentary. This is one of those films that's unimaginable to take in with a single viewing. Maybe a few people are able to do it that way, but not the rest of us.

Does Criterion still have the rights for this one?

Yes.

Good

U.S. Premiere of 4K restoration takes place during the New York Film Festival, followed by theatrical run at the Film Society beginning October 17

The AVClub's "Watch This" feature must have pretty strict limitations on length. There's no doubting Resnais was influenced by comics to some extent, and I'd love to see a more lengthy and in-depth analysis of how that influence may or may not show itself in Hiroshima, mon amour, but as written, that article really just barely begins to float the idea. It reads like the introduction to a much more expansive piece.

There's an excellent piece in the new Cinema Scope on Resnais' relationship with comics, though it doesn't go into too much depth on Hiroshima, mon amour, focusing mostly on the later films and various unrealized projects. It also reveals that Resnais storyboarded using action figures!

Kirkinson wrote:It reads like the introduction to a much more expansive piece.

Yes. But I seriously doubt more space would help him get out of the corner he painted himself into. Not with statements like:

Ignatiy Vishnevetsky wrote:The emotional depth it manages to create from the juxtaposition of these images suggests another word: graphic novel.

Such an impossibly broad statement. I could see where he's coming from if he was merely talking about shifts in depiction of time. But "emotional depth?" Maybe something like Red Colored Elegy.

Why is Resnais out of fashion at the moment? He appears to be perpetually placed on the second rung of great directors below the likes of Bresson and Godard, which is odd considering he made just as profound an impact on modern cinema as Godard did with Breathless. Is his "high modernism" a tad too chic for the postmodern zeitgeist to embrace? The "high modernism" of Resnais and Antonioni appears far more divisive these days than the reflexiveness and dialectics of Godard or the 'simplicity' of Bresson. Sure, Hiroshima, Mon Amour may be getting a revival, but the preferences of Criterion and Film Forum generally don't correspond to those of Manny Farber and media studies professors.

domino harvey wrote:IV gives an (unconvincing, I'd say) argument for this being a "comic book movie"

Unconvincing is an understatement. In terms of a real argument, he gives absolutely nothing in terms of how comics aesthetically shaped that particular film except in the broadest and thinnest, most generic terms.

rrenault wrote:Why is Resnais out of fashion at the moment?

Who do you think considers him out of fashion? Maybe they're judging him by his career as a whole, which seems to amount to one especially transcendent film accompanied by many good to excellent ones. Not that it would be a knock on him in any way.

What's the one especially transcendent film? Night and Fog?
Tout la memoire du monde?
Hiroshima mon amour?
Last Year at Marienbad?
Muriel?
Je t'aime je t'aime?
Providence?
Mon oncle d'Amérique?
Mélo?
Coeurs?
Wild Grass?

I think it's fair to say Resnais is out of fashion, though perhaps fruitless to speculate as to why. Happily, he remains a strong influence on some of the most exciting directors working today, from Piñeiro to Hong.