[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YeWXAmpkUI

[Skuj]

Originally Posted by SpectralJulianIsNotDead

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YeWXAmpkUI

YEAH I fucking love that part of the film. It's so sweet and "non Hollywood" with the sound fading in and out and all.

Those who make fun of us Godard fans......wtf do they think we should watch instead? THAT would be fun to hear about!

[DanielCarlson]

I've bought this amazing boxset with 11 Godard movies, so finally I'll dig into some of his work. I started with Alphaville yesterday, and such a beautiful movie! I really liked it. I'll watch Le mépris next I think.

[Pookie]

Am I the only one who preferred the original version of Breathless with Richard Gere?

[atsonicpark]

Huh?

The original version didn't have Richard Gere in it, the remake did though. What are you talking about?

[Pookie]

Well whatever your opinion as to which was the original, I liked the one with Richard Gere's cock in it.

[atsonicpark]

...

[DanielCarlson]

Just watched Pierrot Le Fou, and wow, so great! Such a fantastic movie in every way. It's beautiful, it's crazy, it's funny... The music and the way it's used is great. Some of those scenes completely blew my mind.

So this far:

1. Pierrot Le Fou 5/5
2. Alphaville 5/5
3. Le Mépris 4/5
4. Prénom Carmen 3/5
5. Detective 2/5

So I like all of them except Detective.

[atsonicpark]

Top 51

1. Pierrot Le Fou
2. Oh, Woe Is Me
3. Slow Motion/Every Man For Himself
4. My Life to Live
5. Week End
6. Notre Musique
7. King Lear
8. Masculin/Féminin
9. Passion
10. De l'origine du XXIe Siècle Pour Moi
11. Historie(s) Du Cinema (complete series -- actually would probably be # 1 if there were more subtitles in the official release! As it is, only maybe 60% is subtitled..)
12. Keep Your Right Up
13. Hail Mary
14. Tout Va Bien
15. La Chinoise
16. Alphaville
17. Nouvelle Vague
18. 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her
19. In Praise of Love
20. First Name: Carmen
21. A Married Woman
22. A Woman is a Woman
23. Breathless
24. Numero Deux
25. Wind from the East
26. Liberte Et Patrie
27. For Ever Mozart
28. Little Soldier
29. Band of Outsiders
30. Comment Ca Va?
31. The Old Place
32. Germany Year 90 Nine Zero
33. Made in USA
34. Joy of Learning/Le Gai Saviour
35. One Pennebaker Movie
36. Contempt
37. Les Carabiniers
38. British Sounds
39. Ici et ailleurs
40. Vladimir and Rosa
41. Je Vous Salue, Sarajevo
42. Detective
43. JLG/JLG
44. Letter to Jane
45. Sympathy for the Devil
46. Soft and Hard
47. Meetin' WA
48. Comment Ca Va?
49. Struggles in Italy
50. Pravda
51. Letter to Freddy Buache Regarding a Short Work About the Town of Lausanne

Still have 35 more or so to go before I've seen em all.

[atsonicpark]

I am currently going through my entire Godard collection again, starting from his first film to his last and skipping the shorts and collabs, just focusing on his main films (i.e., the ones listed on wikipedia as "The Films of Jean-Luc Godard")...

What I find really interesting about Godard, having just finished reading the 700 page EVERYTHING IS CINEMA: THE WORKING LIFE OF JEAN LUC GODARD, is how successful he was -- I mean, he was a fucking CELEBRITY, the most well-known living Frenchman in the world at a certain point. Which is interesting, because a lot of his early films are pretty damn weird, even by today's standards. So, in 1960-ish? Geez... I think they just had a lot of themes that people could relate with at the time, but even so, the way he shot things is still pretty damn odd. Though I actually find his use of sound as the most jarring and bizarre element of his work, watch A WOMAN IS A WOMAN for example -- only his 3rd film and he already has abrupt musical elements that do more than act as simple background music. Also, I've noticed that he'll seemingly-randomly (though I doubt it's random at all) insert music in his early films to break up the flow... some of the music seems really out of place in Contempt, but then I thought about why it was included in this scene or that scene. It really makes you aware of its presence. The most bizarre use of music has to be in Week End, though. I can't even explain it, how it just APPEARS. It's very strange.

His films have a very freewheeling quality, very energetic, and I think -- to some people -- this appears "amateurish". I read a lot of IMDB posts saying Godard's films were poorly-shot, but I've yet to see a poorly-shot scene of his. I think they're just very NOTICEABLE, with the camera movements and all. They all seem very meticulously-shot, following characters around and around.

I also like how Godard seems to just pick up elements and throw them in without any explanation. This inspires me a lot in my work and is something I do frequently.. pick up things as I go along and just throw it in somehow because I find it interesting. Look at A MARRIED WOMAN -- the small segment where the black and white footage is completely negative. Where did that come from? How did that happen? It's one scene I'll always think about, though, so it works.

Godard, I think, proved that you can do anything, because.. yeah.. everything is cinema. A movie can be just quotes, can be just references, can be just editing trickery.. and still be an interesting film, with no plot at all. However, I think Godard's films, at least his early ones, do have a lot of heart. There's a lot of focus on the more monotone aspects of his work, the more... robotic.. aspects. But I dunno. Even a lot of his later works are pretty damn emotive -- Slow Motion and Hail Mary come to mind.

This guy is, technically, a brilliant director, and he's not afraid of being abstract, not afraid of being disliked, not interested at all in adhering to the studio system. A lot of directors can say that, but a lot of those directors never achieved any fame. Most directors regress, instead of progress, they might make some interesting, even experimental, early works (Sam Raimi, Peter Jackson, etc etc etc) but then get increasingly "normal" throughout their careers. Godard started out pretty damn out there.. and then his later stuff is even MORE out there.

But I do like his later work a lot better. It's more meditative, beautiful, stationary. Contemplative. Like a great painting. It doesn't have the urgency and energy of his early works, but he already made those films. You know? Why would people want him to return to that? I think the thing is, I like darker, moodier, grimmer, bleaker films, and that may be one of the main reasons I like his late works better -- but it's not like any of his early works were happy-go-lucky. Even a film like A WOMAN IS A WOMAN has a lot of quiet darkness underneath it all.

My favorite thing about Godard is that all of his films really make me think, once they're said and done. Once they're over, I feel like I have so much to think about, to contemplate, and I can't say that for most directors... most directors, I will watch their movie, it's over and I'm like "That was nice." and that's the end of it. I feel completely inspired and invigorated and I feel like I've actually learned something after watching a Godard film. And yet, still, after watching so many of my movies, I can't completely wrap my head around everything that he does. I've never seen anything like it.

[chairman of the bored]

Great,thoughtful post asp. Here's something that's been bugging me about Godard lately; particularly his intellectuality.

I sat down to watch Made in U.S.A with my girlfriend and it was her first Godard and my first time seeing it. I kind of sat there trying to explain to her that Godard is usually much better than this and it's nearly impossible to appreciate this film without a bunch of information from outside of the film, i.e., Godard and Karina's relationship, his increasingly political concentration, his gradual development of style/aesthetic...why he's so damn important.

So my beef is this: yes his films are incredible deep and at their best, entertaining, but can they be enjoyed on their own? Without any outside information or previous experience? Is this a weakness?

Every Kubrick is self-contained and can be loved and appreciated of it's own accord. With a Godard film however, I feel one has to have much more knowledge about the outside circumstances of his films to enjoy them. (Which eventually exponentially increases what a viewer can get out of his films.)

So yeah. Godard rules, but this worries me sometimes.

[atsonicpark]

I dunno, because I saw Week End and Pierrot Le Fou and Breathless before I really knew anything about Godard. Knowing stuff about Godard made it more interesting, but I still could enjoy the film for its own merits.

I'd say MADE IN USA and 2 or 3 THINGS are the only films of his that really benefit -- perhaps require -- knowledge of the things going on outside of the film itself. Both are pretty.. disasterous trainwrecks of filmmaking. But still really interesting...

[Rob Instigator]

this one

 

[Dr. Eugene Felikson]

oops, wrong thread.

[wellcharge]

i just found the ultimate book, full script and all kinds of cool stuff

 

[atsonicpark]

fuck!

[atsonicpark]

wellcharg,e is that book available to purchase, for a reasonable price, in america?

Final Godard, "Film: Socialisme" in theatres on May 19th, and selected for 2010 Cannes Festival.

[atsonicpark]

HAAHA!!!

I found the ESSENTIAL DIRECTORS COLLECTION: GODARD at Big Lots, new and sealed, for $5! You know much that thing goes for new? Like $80! Used, it goes for $45 ish, open. Haha. I already have all the movies too, I just had a feeling it was valuable.

[atsonicpark]

Watched Le Petit Soldat for the first time in a long time last night, what a great film...

[a-p a. niemi]

Originally Posted by atsonicpark

Watched Le Petit Soldat for the first time in a long time last night, what a great film...

Yeah, it's one of my favorites!
I really like to think it as a brother for La Battaglia di Algeri.