Now to a very different type of film. In fact, dubbed as “a leading force of the French New Wave” on the DVD cover. Colour, full of colour. (Not surprising, since it was made in the 60s). I would describe it as a sort of experimental documentary. It mainly followed the main character Juliette as she resorted to working the streets to earn a living. Godard seems to often reference this subject, such as in his film Vivre sa Vie.
In contrast to Italian neorealism (though supposedly French New Wave stemmed form Italian neorealism?), this film was full of voice-overs (mostly whispered), which directed and described the action (such as “She is turning left but it is not significant”), as well as interacted with the character when they addressed the camera. Also, there were colourful (of course!) intertitles and headings about industrial society and class. The film was very political and philosophical and it was challenging to grasp what it was dealing with, but I believe that there is no right way and you can in fact interpret it different ways. It pondered society and its future, time and analysed language and thought. At one point, the voice-over considers “What is art? Form becoming style, but the style is the man. Therefore, art is the humanising of forms.”
It’s interesting how Godard is commenting on what is happening both inside and outside the film. There were lines from Brecht (“Actors should quote”) and references to someone looking like Chekhov’s daughter or Nanook’s sister (from Robert Flaherty’s documentary Nanook of the North). Also, the Vietnam war made up a lot of the context, with Juliette’s husband listening to a radio about the war and various photographs shown − it reminds me of Tout va bien. Juliette has an interesting discussion with her son about dreams, where he says he dreamt of two twins who turn out to be North and South Vietnam uniting (talk about an intelligent kid!). He then asks his, “What is language, mummy?”, to which she say, “The house man lives in”. This kind of limiting of language is often referred to in the film, as if saying that perhaps images (and thus, cinema) are more capable of describing because with words you have to choose and can’t say everything at once (this is explored in the scene Juliette visits her husband at the garage and the voice-over questions how to describe what is happening − to mention the leaves on the tree?). An interesting phrase which is repeated is “landscape is like a face” − and that really lends itself to many ideas and interpretations.
There was a lot of original camera work (something I can always count on Godard to deliver). For instance, the camera seemed to spend ages in front of characters, like it was almost exhausting and seemed slow and tedious, particularly when the character was soliloquising? with the camera about some philosophical notion. I really began to notice this when Juliette’s husband is sitting near a stranger in a café, waiting for her and the camera is focused on the stranger for what seems a minute or even longer. Then suddenly the husband says, “people never really talk in films” and pretty much dissects what it takes to have a conversation. There is a lot of self-referentiality, as well, and I like how near the beginning, when we see Juliette through the window walking outside, a man starts reading to Juliette’s daughter about a lady walking then “hatching eggs” (quite a coincidence with her street job). I also like how the camera did a 360-degree pan when Juliette was standing among some very modern-looking yet identical apartments (when she made the Chekhov and Nanook references). Also, there were many shots of cranes and construction work − I’m not sure if this is symbolic of a rebuilding of society or hinting at the constituents of life. While Juliette was in the café, a few times the camera cuts to just a CU shot of coffee with the froth almost gone or what looks like coke with bubbles, and we hear talks about the world, with the swirls in the cup almost like a mini cosmic galaxy.
Often when there was music playing, there was no natural atmospheric sound, something which was significant to me, seeing as though in my journalism studies we aim for realism by using diegetic sound − in this instance it gave the film an unreal quality. In addition, Godard inserts a still image of a cartoon strip, later having one of the characters echo this by saying society is like living in a comic strip. Also, I like the scene when we see the two men and what seems like one of them is just picking from a huge pile of books in front of them and reading random lines, which the other man is writing down. It reminds me of the reading from books in Une femme est une femme. In fact, the French are represented as quite well-read, inquisitive, philosophical individuals − no matter what situation they’re in (such as with a customer), they are reading books or pondering life. That’s another feature I find intriguing and although this wasn’t the best Godard film I’ve seen, I still find I’m very biased towards him due to the way he just approaches cinema so unlike any other director I’ve seen.
3.5/5
No comments:
Post a Comment