criterionforum.org

A Woman is a Woman



With A Woman is a Woman (Une Femme est une femme), compulsively innovative director Jean-Luc Godard presents “a neorealist musical—that is, a contradiction in terms.â€

Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled

I saw this for the first time last night, and the only other Godard films I have seen to date are Alphaville, Contempt and Notre Musique (I'm working on it!). I wasn't awfully keen on it; the performances were solid, the film was a pleaure to look at -- a largely grayish palette interrupted by luminous primaries (usually from the actors' costumes). And it was funny, if a bit too cutesy and self-satisfied. The film's pacing is self-defeating, at under 90 mins, it still managed to drag at times, and Godard's use of sound effects and music is really uncomfortable in the first 25 minutes or so. I understand he does this "dropping-out" of different layers of the audio mix often. I wondered if A Woman is a Woman is perhaps his first go at it, though, as he seems overeager with it and only later in the film develops control over it. The Charles Aznavour song on the jukebox, "You've Let Youself Go", is a funny and sweet number which goes some way in approximating the tone of this film at its best moments, and plays over one of the better scenes as well. I was surprised that my girlfriend was really taken with the film, much more than I was. It seemed clear to me that this must be a less-important film from Godard, as I had heard so little about it compared to a lot of his other 60's films (nobody's bothered to post to this thread yet, which says something). Would anyone else care to share their observations on A Woman is a Woman...perhaps provide a greater context for it?

dekadetia wrote:Godard's use of sound effects and music is really uncomfortable in the first 25 minutes or so. I understand he does this "dropping-out" of different layers of the audio mix often. I wondered if A Woman is a Woman is perhaps his first go at it, though, as he seems overeager with it and only later in the film develops control over it.

There was discussion about this on the crashed forum. I've seen the films multiple times now and after the fourth or fifth viewing, the disconcerting use of music and sound effects you speak of reveals itself as possessing a remarkably coherent rhythmn and tone worthy of the best Hollywood musical comedies. So I recommend giving it another shot...or two...or three...

"Important" or not -- I find it extremely imaginative, enjoyable and engaging. Is it reasonable to ask for more?

;~}

The film's pacing is self-defeating, at under 90 mins, it still managed to drag at times

On the R2 Weekend disk there is an interesting discussion of that film and Godard in general from Mike Figgis. He is of the opinion that yes, Godard films do occasionally drag but it is worth putting up with because the audience knows that the pay off for this is that there will be another great scene along sooner or later.
On this point I couldn't agree with him more.

dekadetia wrote:... and Godard's use of sound effects and music is really uncomfortable in the first 25 minutes or so. I understand he does this "dropping-out" of different layers of the audio mix often. I wondered if A Woman is a Woman is perhaps his first go at it, though, as he seems overeager with it and only later in the film develops control over it.

Isn't it supposed to be exaggerated, awkward, and rather sloppy at the beginning of the film in order to make the use of sound distinct and thus draw the viewer's attention to the use of sound in film/musicals? When the film develops control towards the end, it's as if the film has made its point regarding technique and now is content to function a tad more sincerely.

dekadetia wrote:It seemed clear to me that this must be a less-important film from Godard, ... nobody's bothered to post to this thread yet, which says something.

By this reasoning other less-important films include Wild Strawberries, Umberto D., Throne of Blood, The Third Man, Notorious, Nanook of the North, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, Do the Right Thing, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, and The Seventh Seal.

There are great deal of threads for important films within the Criterion Collection which none of us post within. It's not because they are lesser films, but simply because these threads are mostly just used for DVD-related posts, and hardly ever for comments or analysis of the films themselves. No one really bothers to post detailed comments regarding filmmaking technique very often, instead just focusing upon fawning, glowing praise or rapid-fire spite and dismissal (that's not directed at you personally, dekadetia, since you're actually providing some comments, inquiring about something, and asking for feedback).

But yes, in general, A Woman is a Woman is considered less-important Godard. Then again, general consensus is overrated and just annoying as someone who deliberately attempts to be unique.

Thanks so much for the info and opinions, everyone. I'm sure I'll end up giving this a second look sooner or later. Its a tricky film, I guess, because its veneer is deceptively feather-light and superficial, yet per your comments, it bears repeated viewing for greater appreciation of its subtleties. It's not that I didn't appreciate the film's daring. Godard is to be watched for just that, to an extent, and it's certainly there in the other three I've seen. For whatever reason, though, I found myself more immediately appreciative of and engaged by them. Also -- shame on me for this, I guess -- but when Anna Karina said, "I want to be in a musical," I really wanted her to, too. The counterargument, of course, would be that she already is.

On another note, I was surprised, also, by the dynamic range of the audio mix -- I had to turn it up pretty damned high to keep all the dialogue audible (and some of it would still have been unintelligible if not for the subtitles), and at a reasonable dialogue level, the score swells and blast rocked my center channel like only the Scorpions had done before them. I read or heard once that Monty Python intended to do a Flying Circus episode wherein the audio levels would gradually decrease over the course of the episode, and viewers would gradually turn their volume higher and higher until the right moment, where the cast would all suddenly yell at once. This sort of play was happening with the dynamic range on this DVD, as if Godard was messing with your perception of not just movie musical score, but, in a way, of sound itself.

Also, at a risk of swerving the thread off-topic a bit, the audio reminded me of some business that was going on in the Tout va Bien thread a while ago -- one individual was certain that there was an audio problem with the disc -- again, I haven't seen it myself to give an opinion one way or the other, but it seemed to me that some moments in A Woman is a Woman made a pretty convincing argument for the audio on Tout va Bien being accurate... and apparently Criterion felt that it was accurate, or there would have been a reissue by now.

Godard's use of audio, often overlooked, is another case of his refusal to become complacent or predictable with any aspect of his filmmaking (And, of course, he means also to discourage viewers from becoming complacent or passive themselves). Over-lapping dialogue, dialogue drowned out by background noise, unforeseen bursts of music; one begins to notice these types of techniques after seeing a handful of Godard films. (It'll be interesting to hear exactly how shrill the gunshots are mixed over the chapter titles in Criterion's eventual release of Masculin-Feminin!)

As for A Woman Is A Woman, I wouldn't worry too much about not liking it. I encourage you to just truck on forward and go back to it after watching a lot of his others. Of the 20 or so Godard films I've seen Woman is among the bottom five or so for me. Sure, some may find all Godard work tedious to at least some degree. But whatever Figgis says, I find Godard's best work is a pleasure from start to finish. (Besides, who'd listen to a guy who rarely watches a movie more than once?!)

My Life to Live or Band of Outsiders is what I'd recommend next for you. And we'll see how the R1 Week-End looks in late august hopefully

I saw Hail Mary again recently and I think that film has some of Godard's most stunning work with sound. One scene in particular early on shows Marie playing in a basketball game with the opening prelude to Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier playing in the background. Instead of dropping out the music during dialogue, Godard inverts this and drops out all the diegetic sound except for when someone speaks, leaving the rest with just the beautiful piano music. When Marie takes a shot at the hoop, he drops the sound of the game out until it passes through the basket, then brings it in again, and it gives the shot this incredibly effective, weightless quality, almost magical. All this happens very quickly, and unlike earlier films where the starting and stopping of music tended to break the illusion, Godard's work with the soundtrack here feels entirely organic to the film and natural, despite being very unusual for films.

dekadetia wrote:On another note, I was surprised, also, by the dynamic range of the audio mix -- I had to turn it up pretty damned high to keep all the dialogue audible (and some of it would still have been unintelligible if not for the subtitles), and at a reasonable dialogue level, the score swells and blast rocked my center channel like only the Scorpions had done before them. I read or heard once that Monty Python intended to do a Flying Circus episode wherein the audio levels would gradually decrease over the course of the episode, and viewers would gradually turn their volume higher and higher until the right moment, where the cast would all suddenly yell at once. This sort of play was happening with the dynamic range on this DVD, as if Godard was messing with your perception of not just movie musical score, but, in a way, of sound itself.

This is a Godard I would love to see in a theater. Now for two worthless, or at least off topic, comments:

The Scorpions 2004 album, Unbreakable, is shockingly good. Wall to wall pop anthems with only one ballad.

I had a friend who worked in radio and one of his first jobs was night shift at an easy listening station. The guy who showed him the ropes said that he would gradually turn the volume down and then boost it back to normal, just to fuck with insomniac grannies and shit.

Do any fluent French speakers understand the pun at the very end of this film? I know that the subtitles completley mis-interpret it.

Do any fluent French speakers understand the pun at the very end of this film? I know that the subtitles completley mis-interpret it.

IIRC it's:

HE: Tu es infame.
SHE: Non, je ne suis pas infame, je suis une femme.

My literal translation (and I'm not a fluent French speaker):

HE: You are infamous.
SHE: No, I am not infamous, I am a woman.

I figure "infame" in context might have a better translation than literally "infamous," but basically the play on words is that she is not infame (something bad), she is une femme (a woman).

Part of the pun, I've always assumed, is that "infame" sounds like "un femme" rather than "une femme" - so it sounds like an elementary grammatical slip has been made (using a masculine article for a feminine noun), and thus the exchange has the air of an everyday, automatic correction.

I don't know what to really say about this film. I do prefer to see Anna Karina in black and white. She is illuminating and beautiful in Band of Outsiders. The only real aspect of the film I liked the most was Godard's use of color/lighting. I believe the whole idea of the love plot in this film just seemed so at reach and distant it turned me off of it. Stylistically wonderful and fascinating because of Godard's flipping of cinematic ideals such as the use of sound or music and narration make it worth a watch.

Floyd wrote:I don't know what to really say about this film. I do prefer to see Anna Karina in black and white. She is illuminating and beautiful in Band of Outsiders. The only real aspect of the film I liked the most was Godard's use of color/lighting. I believe the whole idea of the love plot in this film just seemed so at reach and distant it turned me off of it. Stylistically wonderful and fascinating because of Godard's flipping of cinematic ideals such as the use of sound or music and narration make it worth a watch.

Yup. Kind of my take. After viewing a wider extent of his films I find myself in a position of "forgiving" this film if only because it's playfullness is a playfulness "before the revolution", the revolusiton being when he took on that stupid Maoism (sorry, but what the fuck is all that about?)when his films took on a political overtone if somewhat playfully so. There's an innocense to this film, dealing with the foibles of relationship, and only so political as sexual politics. And I have to agree with you: after Band of Outsider, this film is a bit of a let down as far as A Karina is concerned-- and yes, I'm one of those slovenly bastards who pines and expects a worthy leading lady.

Band of Outsiders was the first Godard/Karina film I saw, and to date maybe one of my 2 or three favorite films ever. It's also when I fell in love with Anna Karina, and that hasn't stopped.

This week, I had a pretty shitty and stressful week. I decided I wanted to go out and buy a DVD and laugh and smile a lot. I'd only seen this once before but remembered liking it so I bought it last night and watched.

I kept my roomate up till 2 am laughing, or maybe it was the random loud bursts of song and music that kept him awake and made him glare at me over coffee this am.

At any rate, as I was saying I fell in love with Karina in Band of Outsiders but I really find it odd that some people find her to be a let down in this. I found her to be just as stunning and playful as could be. I think it's an incredibly strong role for her, and as far as her Godard roles probably the role that was made most for her.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. There are people out there who think that Anna Karina isn't attractive in this film (or in color)? That she isn't a "worthy leading lady?" I'm amazed--who is a worthy leading lady then? I can't think of anyone more beautiful. In fact, I'm so jealous of Godard that sometimes I get mad at his films. (That said, after seeing the film blown up at Film Forum, I will say that Anna Karina has some of the ugliest teeth I've ever seen--a minor flaw, all things considered).
But, on a similar topic, and perhaps a more controversial one: Jean Seberg: what the fuck? Not ugly, per se (though the short hair is awful), but I don't understand the reverence for her. Men and women hipsters the world over seem to be worship her in this film specifically. I'm planning on seeing at least 5 Seberg-Breathless costumes for Halloween. Godard's made a career out of casting beautiful women (something he has in common with Rohmer), and Seberg is, for him, the bottom of the barrel. What's the appeal?

As for A Woman Is A Woman: The plot is basically irrelevant, but it's beautifully shot and edited, stylistically inventive (the use of music is fantastic, and so is the music itself), it's playful and funny (perhaps Godard's most purely entertaining film, whatever that means). I could watch it 100 times (maybe I have).

montgomery wrote:As for A Woman Is A Woman: The plot is basically irrelevant, but it's beautifully shot and edited, stylistically inventive (the use of music is fantastic, and so is the music itself), it's playful and funny (perhaps Godard's most purely entertaining film, whatever that means). I could watch it 100 times (maybe I have).

Agreed. The scenes with the book titles are great!

I don't understand the dissing of either Anna K or the film itself. I thought it was a hoot in the theater -- and it was just as delightful on DVD. One of my favorite Godard films -- but then I'm one of those who loathe the generally-acclaimed "Week End". ;~}

justeleblanc wrote:Agreed. The scenes with the book titles are great!

The book titles are fantastic.

I never thought i would laugh so hard at "sardine."

Montgomery, you know that John Simon doesn't like Karina, right?
Anyway, I've always liked Un Femme est une femme better than Band of Outsiders. It seems like Karina's best role in Godard.

Anyway, I've always liked Un Femme est une femme better than Band of Outsiders. It seems like Karina's best role in Godard.[/quote]

Well, she's at her sexiest in A WOMAN IS A WOMAN, but her best role? I'm going to lean to MY LIFE TO LIVE.

AMB wrote:Montgomery, you know that John Simon doesn't like Karina, right?

John Simon on Karina in A Woman Is a Woman:

More offensive is the way Godard wants the entire audience to masturbate over his beloved Karina, on top of whom his camera wallows almost incessantly. Even here he is not honest: whereas various other women are shown more or less nude, Karina is, after every kind of suggestive teasing, not allowed to reveal any flesh at all. She does, however, reveal consummate lack of talent, butchery of the French language, sticky narcissism, and a rather trivially pretty face.

So there!

tavernier wrote:John Simon on Karina in A Woman Is a Woman:

More offensive is the way Godard wants the entire audience to masturbate over his beloved Karina, on top of whom his camera wallows almost incessantly. Even here he is not honest: whereas various other women are shown more or less nude, Karina is, after every kind of suggestive teasing, not allowed to reveal any flesh at all. She does, however, reveal consummate lack of talent, butchery of the French language, sticky narcissism, and a rather trivially pretty face.

So John Simon is gay?

If it's the same John Simon who's famous for saying, "Gays in the theater! My God, I can't wait until AIDS kills them all!" then probably not.