criterionforum.org

To my knowledge, there is currently no date announced for a DVD of Godard's latest film. Does anybody know who will be releasing it in R2 (and better still, has a date been announced?)? And is Wellspring handling the R1 release? I look very forward to this release when it occurs. Thanks to all who respond.

Dylan

Dylan, I saw this film yesterday and it had the Wellspring logo at the beginning, so that bodes well for a Wellspring R1 release.
I hope whatever company takes it on does a good job of it. It's a beautifully photographed film and also one that would benefit from supplemental materials.
I'd love to be able to write more about the film, but I'm still absorbing it. I found it as challenging as Godard's In Praise of Love, perhaps more so.
One of thing I really enjoyed about it was seeing my favorite living poet, Mahmoud Darwish (or Darwich in the French transliteration) make his "acting" debut, playing himself.

Does anyone know if there's definitive word on Notre Musique's aspect ratio as chosen by Wellspring? My impression was that the film is 1.37:1, but it has been shown theatrically at 1.85:1. Godard even had a short article in Cahiers du Cinema talking about the challenges a wide aspect ratio poses for the meaning of his film. I recall a similar fate for In Praise of Love.

The DVD of "In Praise of Love" is matted down to 1.85, but I felt that the compositions looked gorgeous. I'm sure Godard shot it knowing that it would be shown in some territories in 1.85 (it simply looks too good in 1.85 to be considered studio meddling). I'm sure it's the same situation with "Notre Musique."

The stills provided by Wellspring are about 1.37, which I'm certain is how I saw the film.

Regarding the presentation at Melbourne, which was apparently matted...

Paul Jeffery, Senses of Cinema wrote:I'll not dream of being so presumptuous as to review this film. All I will say is that we all come from Godard. Whether filmmakers, critics or audiences, we owe him everything and it is a debt that can never be repaid. However, one thing we could at least try to do is project his film in the correct aspect ratio. I did talk with someone who claimed it was framed that way deliberately, citing as evidence the two explicit references in the dialogue to people having their heads cut off – but I'm not convinced.

I for one can't imagine the "Hell" section remaining intelligible at 1.85.

The stills provided by Wellspring are about 1.37

Yah, but most of the stills on Wellspring's site -- even for 29 Palms -- are about 1.33:1. Still, you may be right about the Godard.

It was projected at 1.37:1 when I saw it recently.

Same here, I think...

Dylan wrote:The DVD of "In Praise of Love" is matted down to 1.85, but I felt that the compositions looked gorgeous. I'm sure Godard shot it knowing that it would be shown in some territories in 1.85 (it simply looks too good in 1.85 to be considered studio meddling). I'm sure it's the same situation with "Notre Musique."

The UK DVD of In Praise Of Love is full-frame, so Wellspring's 1.85 must count as some kind of "studio meddling". Godard's article in Cahiers du Cinema is very explicit that a 1.85 projection of Notre Musique is simply wrong.

So, I haven't seen anything by Godard from the last 30 years. What can I expect from "Notre Musique"? Does anyone recommend it?

jorencain wrote:So, I haven't seen anything by Godard from the last 30 years. What can I expect from "Notre Musique"? Does anyone recommend it?

I thought it was excellent. It's definitely more in the category of essay-film than strict narrative, but it's certainly got a lot to say outside the realm of theory, semiotics, etc. For one thing is it completely gorgeous, both visually and aurally. It is intelligent, but it is also emotionally affecting, not detached. At 80 minutes long, I think it is well worth your time.

Oedipax wrote:

jorencain wrote:So, I haven't seen anything by Godard from the last 30 years. What can I expect from "Notre Musique"? Does anyone recommend it?

I thought it was excellent. It's definitely more in the category of essay-film than strict narrative, but it's certainly got a lot to say outside the realm of theory, semiotics, etc. For one thing is it completely gorgeous, both visually and aurally. It is intelligent, but it is also emotionally affecting, not detached. At 80 minutes long, I think it is well worth your time.

Absolutely. Close to my favourite film of 2004.

Absolutely. Close to my favourite film of 2004

Same here. I don't think I've been as affected by a film in a very long time. It was extremely meditative, poetic, and thought-provoking. Plus the music was amazing. It may be hard to follow but I felt the ideas were what was important. Plus the images were simply beutiful. I truly hope this is release in the correct aspect ratio due to that fact that the composition was superb and I can't image it being shown in 1.85: 1 and looking as good.

I saw Notre Musique a couple of weeks ago, and I really need to see it again. Crudely put, my initial rating was '3 of 5 stars', but on subsequent viewings that could change to anything from 2 to 5 stars. There was simply too much to absorb in one viewing, and only after I see the film a couple of more times can I decide whether I think it was a brilliant assmblage of thoughts and images, or just a pretentious mess. I'm leaning to the former for now. Hell, it's worth seeing just for the images and music if nothing else.

Just got to see the film on the Optimum DVD and was very impressed (especially as I'm still struggling with Eloge D'Amour!). I liked the way that Hell was represented through the media, perhaps showing the sea of images from which we come as well of course as the representation of violence both real and fictional with which people are burdened, which I think fits in well with the Israel/Palestine issue of the past being a weapon with which to claim right over land, and also into the idea of the next generation with no firsthand knowledge of a conflict being handed images of conflict and hate as a legacy for continued fighting. It was difficult to make out some of the films but I noticed footage from Night and Fog and I think the some of the bombing scenes came from Hearts and Minds. There was also some footage of the charge from Kagemusha and what seems to be a clip from Mother Joan of the Angels in there.

I found the Purgatory sequence very powerful, especially in its use of the Mostar bridge as a symbol of connection between people and therefore necessarily the first thing that needs to be destroyed in conflict (which seems to develop on a similar bridge sequence in Eloge D'Amour). Perhaps it was chosen as Purgatory because the actual conflict in Sarajevo is over, but the scars and the memories are left to mull over by those remaining - how could it happen or be allowed to happen, how do people go on? A couple of days later I had a strange sense of deja vu after the image/counterimage discussion by Godard in the film as I was watching the Edward Said: The Last Interview DVD (out from ICA Projects in UK) in which Said made almost exactly the same point in a different context.

The Heaven sequence also made me think of a happier version of Weekend almost. Peaceful but a controlled peace. It made me think of something like the wall being built in Israel - it will allow security but like any gated community at the cost of communication with those on the other side. Which perhaps might make it a new hell for the girl whose attempt to bring people together by information led to her death (since information can be as dangerous as a bomb in some circumstances). She will be safe but without words in this new Heaven where ignorance is bliss.

I think I'm going to need to take another look at the film to understand it better, but I thought I would post up my first impressions.

Sorry, I'm never any good at discerning... is this shot on digital?

If so: wow. Especially for the nocturnal on location scenes.

His DP is (however an inappropriate term for such a film) a rock star.

The "past/color" part at the Bretangne (i.e. the second part of the film) was shot on digital video - the "Present/b&w" was shot on film. JLG talked about it a lot (published in book - form) and actually wanted to film the "Past" on IMAX…due to the lack of money he went just the opposite, which was/is video. Asked why he shot the past in color and the present in b&w he answers that he just wanted to do it "different" to what everybody else would have done i.e. "Past" in b & w and present in color…. A great film by the way - that must be seen on the big screen! I know that many cinephiles only have seen the "late" JLG on video or even worth, online and that there is some kind of impression that this more essayistic work is made for small screens - i think its the opposite! Soooo bad that i missed two screenings of the Histoire(s) on the big screen with an audiance…one of the great misstakes of my life.

You're thinking of Elog de l'amour. Notre Musique was film, except for the beginning.

Fuck - completly off i was…sorry! Just flipped through everything and there were so many Eloge references that i forgot about the topic - Eloge de l'amour of course…

I love this film, one of my favorites from Godard.

I'm trying to decide which to buy between the R1 and R2 versions, can anyone tell me which has the better picture quality?

Or if someone only has the R2 version would they mind posting or pming me with a couple of screenshots?

Thanks.

oh thanks a bunch, it looks about close to the R1 DVD, maybe slightly better with a larger resolution.

I hope you don't care I reused some of your screenshots for a comparison.

I saw this for the first time just now and my expectations couldn't have been more subverted. This is actually only my second post-'60s Godard and my first of his essays. From the way most speak of the film I was expecting a visually bland purely intellectual experience that was just Godard hashing out half baked philosophies with a jewish girl. Wrong on all accounts. I can't get to everything and I didn't understand anything, but I think that's appropriate. After all Godard does say, paraphrasing, "If you've understood me than I have not been clear," That and the line about libraries and revolutionaries struck me the most and I feel are the most important.
Backing up a second, the most immediately striking thing to me was just how beautiful and complete the visuals were. Even people who hate this movie should admit the cinematography is fantastic and the editing (especially in the first kingdom) amazing. The second thing to catch me off guard was how much of the experience was emotional. By the end of the second Kingdom I was in tears. This is the rare movie to be as fully an emotional trip as it is a thoughtful one. Both head and heart were working overtime.
The intellectual part of things was in total unlike anything I've seen from the man before. I'm so used to seeing him tackle things as a fanatic without caring to understand what exactly he's saying that I still can't believe that he managed to look at as many sides of the situation as possible with a fair and even hand. Amazing, amazing. The aspect of this that amused me the most was the turning of Dante into a bildungsroman. Birth and infancy hell, life purgatory, and death paradise. I particularly find that humourous, considering claims of Godard's antisemitism, as that is a very Jewish way of looking at things.
The antisemitism is particularly important to me here first because of the subject matter and second because I, myself, am Jewish. Luckily for me I see, at least as far as Godard goes in this movie, more of an anti-Zionism than antisemitism present. That's a very important distinction and one that I think should is often forgotten. I myself have a great deal of conflict on zionism with it being an ever present question of moral justice in my life. The unjudging paradise portion of the film goes a long way to forging my respect for Godard and the film.

knives wrote: From the way most speak of the film I was expecting a visually bland purely intellectual experience that was just Godard hashing out half baked philosophies

That pretty much sums up every mainstream criticism of his latter day films. Which shows of course how worthless nearly all of those critics are. If you enjoyed this one the odds are great that you'll enjoy most of his other latter day stuff. 'Visually bland' and 'half baked' are certainly not applicable to any of them. At least the ones that have made their way over here.

Though perhaps the latter day film closest to being half-baked is his short film contribution to Aria.

He's never really seemed comfortable in the short format though. I'll try to see Forever Mozart next, but will probably just finish off the Lionsgate box as my next post-60s thing.