Well, after a whole lot of squirming around in my seat, and phasing in and out of sub-title concentration, I'm still glad I saw the rarely screened Godard film. I've spent all morning digging through other peoples thoughts on the movie, and mostly I get the impression that most critics refuse to say anything bad about a Godard film. As groovy as the film is to look at, one shouldn't have to struggle so much to understand a plot. I don't mind meandering lazily through the lives of characters, in fact, it's what I expect of Godard--this was more like running and screaming through a blacked-out labrynth. The following paragraph is the most succinct explanation of the film I could find from NY Times writer, A.O. Scott:
"...There is, for one thing, a pouting and lovely Marianne Faithfull singing an a capella version of “As Tears Go By.” There are skinny young men smoking and arguing. There are the bright Pop colors of modernity juxtaposed with the weathered, handsome ordinariness of Old France, all of it beautifully photographed by Raoul Coutard. There are political speeches delivered via squawk box.
And of course there is a maddening, liberating indifference to conventions of narrative coherence, psychological verisimilitude or emotional accessibility..." Read the full article here. If you're feeling adventurous, tonight is the last night to catch it at the Nuart.
No comments:
Post a Comment