Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby Pass The Popcorn topic #746028

Subject: "RIP Jean-Luc Godard" Previous topic | Next topic
Sponge
Charter member
6674 posts
Tue Sep-13-22 03:34 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"RIP Jean-Luc Godard"
Tue Sep-13-22 03:39 PM by Sponge

          

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-62886470

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
A good read
Sep 13th 2022
1
one of every aspiring film nerds first crushes
Sep 13th 2022
2
"No one did more to make movies the art of youth than Jean-Luc Godard"
Sep 13th 2022
3
'96 interview
Sep 13th 2022
4

Sponge
Charter member
6674 posts
Tue Sep-13-22 04:06 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "A good read"
In response to Reply # 0


          

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/sep/13/jean-luc-godard-obituary

Jean-Luc Godard obituary
New Wave film-maker who changed the course of cinema with À Bout de Souffle

James S Williams
Tue 13 Sep 2022 09.02 EDT

The death of Jean-Luc Godard at the age of 91 marks the end of an era, not only of a certain modernist tradition of auteur cinema, but also of cinema as a primary vehicle for existential and historical truth. Marguerite Duras considered him the greatest catalyst in cinema, and no other film-maker grasped better, or exploited more, the potential of sound and image. His prodigious oeuvre and the staggering range of forms and formats in which he worked have redefined our understanding of cinema as an art form and cultural practice, transforming the way we look at ourselves and the world.

Godard came to prominence in the early 1960s as part of the French New Wave, the most important national film movement of the 20th century. These film-makers – many of them critics for the journal Cahiers du Cinéma – believed passionately that a film’s visual style is an authorial signature reflecting the director’s personal, creative vision. Inspired by American directors such as Howard Hawks, Nicholas Ray and Orson Welles, the Italian neorealist Roberto Rossellini and French film-poets such as Jean Vigo, Jean Cocteau and Jean Renoir, they attacked the studio-bound French “cinéma de qualité”, which they believed had become stagnant, relied on uninspired scriptwriters and established stars, and stifled personal creativity.

François Truffaut’s narrative-driven Les Quatre Cents Coups (The 400 Blows) had conquered Cannes in 1959, but it was Godard’s first feature, the formally inventive and effortlessly hip À Bout de Souffle (Breathless, 1960), starring the then unknown Jean-Paul Belmondo opposite Jean Seberg, that changed the course of cinema. The film was shot fast and cheaply like reportage in natural light, on the streets and in hotel rooms. It flouted continuity editing and employed jump-cut and to-camera techniques, along with obsessive close-ups, to create spontaneity (a film should have a beginning, middle and end, but not necessarily in that order, Godard quipped). It also played self-reflexively with genre (especially American gangster movies and film noir) and continuously referenced recent Hollywood films and figures such as Humphrey Bogart, as well as painting and poetry.

The entire soundtrack, with Godard’s impudently witty dialogues punctuated by slang, was later dubbed and mixed with Martial Solal’s fluid jazz score. This was a dynamic juxtaposition of high art and popular culture and an original way to capture contemporary reality. It was also a raw statement of artistic freedom, and it set Godard on course to become the most individual and influential film-maker of his generation, known for axioms such as “cinema is truth 24 times a second” and “it’s not a just image, it’s just an image”.

Godard was born in Paris into a privileged Franco-Swiss Protestant family, the second of four children. His French father, Paul, a physician, owned a private clinic. His Swiss mother, Odile, came from a pre-eminent banking family, the Monods. His background was thus politically conservative yet also culturally enlightened (his maternal grandfather, Julien-Pierre Monod, was a friend of the poet and essayist Paul Valéry). Educated first in Nyon, Switzerland, “Jeannot” was not an academic child although he possessed a talent for painting and was a fine athlete and swimmer. Godard was a troubled and often contrary young man, and as his parents grew more estranged he was sent to the Lycée Buffon in Paris. There, his growing kleptomania reached dangerous levels, leading to his theft of first editions of Valéry from his own grandfather. He was found out and essentially disowned by the Monod clan, leading to a period of semi-bohemian drifting. He studied ethnology briefly at the Sorbonne in 1949.

Godard was by now frequenting film clubs in Paris, in particular the Ciné-club du Quartier Latin, and declared he was going to be the Jean Cocteau of the new generation. He met first Jacques Rivette, Eric Rohmer and Claude Chabrol, and then, in September 1950, Truffaut, with whom he forged a close bond. He immediately regarded the cinema as his new home and family, with Henri Langlois, who curated inspirational screenings at the Cinémathèque Française, as a benign uncle. This is where, by his own admission, Godard learned about life. Such profound identification with the cinema, rather than pure arrogance, accounts for why he could later describe himself as “Jean-Luc Cinéma Godard”.

Under the pseudonym Hans Lucas, he began writing for La Gazette du Cinéma, founded by Rohmer and Rivette. These early articles matched the feverish, impulsive nature of his viewing habits and display his exceptional range of reference (filmic, literary, musical, critical), his fondness for wordplay and demand for aesthetic judgment. His first, highly polemical articles for Cahiers du Cinéma in 1952 championed Alfred Hitchcock and highlighted montage, thus setting him against the journal’s revered co-founder, André Bazin, who preached the “true continuity” of mise-en-scène. When the journal changed its outlook with Truffaut’s incendiary 1954 article, A Certain Tendency of French Cinema, which outlined the policy of auteurism, he refined his rhetorical critical style, producing articles that emphasised cinema as an intrinsically moral and democratic art.

After another bout of stealing in 1952, this time from the very coffers of Cahiers du Cinéma, Godard returned to Switzerland for a job at Télévision Suisse Romande, but his acquisitive hands again got the better of him and he was locked up. The threat of Swiss military service was now real, so his father had him transferred to a psychiatric hospital. His mother then landed him a job as a labourer on a dam under construction on the Dixence river, where he made his first film, a 20-minute 35mm documentary short entitled Opération Béton, with his own voiceover. On his return to Paris in 1956, he worked in the publicity department of 20th Century Fox. He also gained professional experience as an editor and writer of dialogues for the film producer Pierre Braunberger, who financed a string of playful shorts, including Une Histoire d’Eau (1958), which matched Godard’s sparkling literary script with images of recent floods provided by Truffaut.

Following the spectacular success of À Bout de Souffle, Godard retained his documentary cameraman Raoul Coutard and enlightened producer Georges de Beauregard but deliberately changed tack with Le Petit Soldat, featuring the Danish model Anna Karina, whom he married in 1961. So began the “Karina years”, one of the most productive periods of uninterrupted creativity in modern cinema. Filmed in 1960 in Geneva, Le Petit Soldat was a political thriller of agents and double-agents dealing with the Algerian war and depicted torture on both sides. Such ambivalence, typical of Godard, led to it being banned until 1963.

Karina’s radiant presence was captured in colour in the musical comedy pastiche, Une Femme Est une Femme (1961), then in Bande à Part (Band of Outsiders, 1964), a tender “suburban western” in which she dances the Madison with Claude Brasseur and Sami Frey. Vivre Sa Vie (1962), a cinéma-vérité study of prostitution, based on real sources, with Karina as the doomed Nana, also embraced scenes from Carl Theodor Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan of Arc, working-class chansons and a guest appearance by the linguistics philosopher Brice Parain, while drawing on the works of Edgar Allan Poe. It pushed the bounds of form by using live sound, denaturalised framing and a tracking camera as swinging pendulum. Godard pulled off this daring combination with a wondrous lightness of touch, although, as so often, the production had not been easy. He was sometimes moody, often remote, on set. Nothing was improvised, yet actors often found their lines rewritten just before a take.

After Les Carabiniers (1963), an uncompromising allegory about war (and his first flop), came the brooding, big-budget Le Mépris (1963), a potent mix of the classical and modern with its teasing use of Brigitte Bardot in a love triangle with Michel Piccoli and Jack Palance. Set in the deserted lots of the Cinecittà studios, where Fritz Lang (with Godard as assistant) is making a modern version of the Odyssey, it exudes Godard’s increasing pessimism that civilisation (including cinema) was nearing its end.

Une Femme Mariée (1964), an exemplary collaboration with the actor Macha Méril, revealed Godard as an acute observer of the pernicious effects of the new consumer society, while Alphaville (1965), starring a luminous Karina and shot at night in Paris in high contrast black and white with alternating positive and negative images, was a dystopian sci-fi vision of a loveless, computerised society of glass and concrete. This was also the new, dehumanising face of the fifth republic. Pierrot le Fou (1965), shot in bright primary colours and filters, reflected the volatile state of Godard’s marriage, which would soon end in divorce. It began with the director Sam Fuller defining cinema as “love, hate, action, violence and death, in one word, emotions”; it ended with the suicide of Ferdinand (Belmondo) by dynamite with a quote from Rimbaud.

Godard seemed unstoppable. With his mercurial intelligence and humour, his restless energy and curiosity, he proceeded by trial and error, criss-crossing different artistic fields and plugging into new intellectual and cultural currents with astonishing ease. Each film was conceived as a pseudo-scientific inquiry and as part of an evolving, all-encompassing project. What made Godard so special was his extraordinary sensitivity to beauty, form and gesture. He had a unique ability to alight on an object and, through framing, dramatise its material existence and plasticity. The multiple textures and ellipses of his work achieved with his regular editor, Agnès Guillemot, produced sudden flashes of often breathtaking simplicity and grace, and his ingenious use of signs, texts, and photomontages illustrated his exceptional skills as a graphic artist. He continually experimented with mutating credit sequences and intertitles and even designed his own trailers.

In 1965, the poet Louis Aragon hailed Godard’s ground-breaking collage technique in a famous encomium, “What is art, Jean-Luc Godard?”, and Truffaut himself now agreed there was a before and after Godard. In fact, Godard had become a cultural star and media phenomenon, in public dialogue with film-makers and writers such as Lang, Michelangelo Antonioni and JMG Le Clézio. With his persona of reserved intellectual in trademark black glasses, his mischievous smile and laconic provocations, he played the media as much it played him.

His influence abroad was immense, in particular on the new generation of European film-makers such as Bernardo Bertolucci, or Martin Scorsese, Brian de Palma and Robert Altman in America. Some on the left still regarded him as a disengaged dilettante flirting anarchically with big ideas. However, his next film in black-and-white, Masculin Féminin (1966), starring Jean-Pierre Léaud, encapsulated perfectly “the children of Marx and Coca-Cola”, the Americanisation of French life, and the new era of Vietnam.

The masterpieces kept coming. Deux ou Trois Choses Que Je Sais d’Elle, filmed back to back in 1966 with the cartoon-style faux-policier Made in USA and using the same crew, was his first fully realised fiction-essay. Featuring a serene Marina Vlady as a housewife moonlighting as a sex worker (“elle”), it decoded the Gaullist ideology of urbanisation in the new housing complexes being constructed in the Paris region (also “elle”). Godard was searching for – and finding – new, formal “complexes” uniting subject and object, capturing, for instance, the workings of the cosmos in a cup of swirling coffee.

La Chinoise and Week-end (both 1967) starred Anne Wiazemsky, a young student and granddaughter of the writer François Mauriac. Godard married Wiazemsky in July 1967. La Chinoise, with its revolutionary pop-art rhythms and anti-realist, degree-zero style, was a brilliant study of a Maoist cell in training, influenced by Brecht and Althusser and highly prescient of real events just around the corner. Week-end portrayed French society in a state of abject breakdown with apocalyptic scenes of destruction and cannibalism. It also systematically tore apart the very grammar of film and included the longest tracking shot yet filmed. The final caption read: “End of Cinema.”

In early 1968 Godard played an active role in the successful protests against the dismissal of Langlois from the Cinémathèque Française by the culture minister, André Malraux, to whom, just two years before, he had published a fierce open letter condemning the banning of Rivette’s film, La Religieuse. He was also instrumental in shutting down the Cannes film festival, and worked collectively during the events of that year on a series of anonymous one-reel ciné-tracts, one of which, known as Le Rouge (a collaboration with the artist Gérard Fromanger), recorded red paint bleeding across a representation of the French flag.

He then rushed to London to shoot the Rolling Stones in rehearsal, and Wiazemsky as an urban guerrilla, in One Plus One, a film over which he later came to blows – quite literally – with the producer Iain Quarrier at the National Film Theatre. He was briefly a globetrotter of revolutionary cinema, making trips to American campuses, Cuba and Canada, although One AM (One American Movie), which included interviews with the Black Panthers in Oakland, was never completed.

One of the slogans of May 1968 stated: “Art is dead, Godard can do nothing.” In fact, for the first time Godard was feeling out of step with the new generation and unsure about his artistic identity. It seemed the only option now left to him, as a self-declared Maoist, was to disown his bourgeois status as auteur and start over completely. With the militant student Jean-Pierre Gorin, he formed a small film collective, the Dziga Vertov Group, which attempted not simply to make political cinema, but to make films politically. The result was five extremely didactic films for European television, including Vent d’Est (1969), co-scripted by the student leader Daniel Cohn-Bendit, who also starred. Ironically, funding was ensured by the viability of Godard’s name, yet none of the films was broadcast. The sadomasochistic pranks acted out with Gorin in Vladimir et Rosa (1971), which mimicked the trial of the Chicago Eight, seem in retrospect more like escapist fantasies, though Gorin spoke later of his time with Godard as like a love affair.

Tout Va Bien (1972) was their attempt to reach the mainstream by employing politically engaged stars such as Jane Fonda as a journalist and Yves Montand as her husband, a former New Wave film-maker. This torturous film about class struggle in the fall-out of 68 caught the general mood of mourning for a lost historical and revolutionary moment. The accompanying short, Letter to Jane, a verbal assault on Fonda as a false revolutionary, was an act of viciousness on Godard’s part. Like a fanatical convert, Godard was squeezing himself dry in an alien political logic and working against his natural tendency to ambiguity and paradox – the very qualities that made his work so compulsive.

Godard had reached an artistic impasse and the group disbanded. In addition, the political tensions between Godard and Truffaut that surfaced during May led to an ugly and permanent falling out. After Godard’s attack on him for the “lies” of his 1973 film, La Nuit Américaine (Day for Night), Truffaut penned a long letter accusing Godard of being a duplicitous dandy and bully. This was the final nail in the coffin for the New Wave. Yet by now Godard – whose relationship with Wiazemsky had ended; they divorced in 1979 – had met a new partner, Anne-Marie Miéville, a pro-Palestinian French-Swiss gauchiste like himself who helped look after him following a near-fatal road accident in June 1971 that left him in a coma for a week. This experience changed Godard and allowed him to reassess his life. With Miéville he formed a small collective workshop called Sonimage – romantically conceived as a combination of her sound and his image – which they took to Grenoble to develop together.

This was the start of a new period of intellectual and emotional partnership on equal terms unlike anything Godard had experienced before. The two embarked on a series of pioneering experiments in film and video, including the essay Ici et Ailleurs (1974), born out of the ashes of a failed project with Gorin for the PLO, which provoked charges of antisemitism for juxtaposing the faces of Hitler and Golda Meir (Godard regarded himself as an anti-Zionist); Numéro Deux (1975), a rigorous deconstruction of sexuality and gender within the family; and two major television series about modern communications and human relations that constitute some of the most sustained theoretical analyses of the medium ever produced.

The couple moved in the late 1970s to Rolle, a small town between Geneva and Lausanne, to achieve their ideal of artisanal autonomy and harmony between life and work. This would bear fruit in such work as Soft and Hard: Soft Talk on a Hard Subject Between Two Friends (1985), one of several innovative videos commissioned by Colin MacCabe at the British Film Institute, in which they filmed themselves in their domestic routine discussing creative projects and questions of art, cinema and communication.

Sauve Qui Peut (la Vie) (Slow Motion, 1980), co-scripted and co-edited by Miéville with a pulsing electronic score by Gabriel Yared, marked Godard’s triumphant return to feature film-making. Starring Isabelle Huppert, Nathalie Baye and the singer Jacques Dutronc as his alter ego, Paul Godard (the name of his father), it was Godard’s second “first film” and the culmination of his recent video experimentation with slow motion. Shot by William Lubtchansky using a lightweight 35mm camera specially designed for Godard by Jean-Pierre Beauviala, the film included a voiceover sequence with Duras, illustrating his desire to engage directly not only with female discourse but also with his “number one enemy”, literature (“texts are death, images are life,” he memorably stated).

Passion (1982), which reunited Godard with Coutard as well as Piccoli, was a soaring tale of aesthetics, class politics and religion featuring tableaux vivants of the great masters. It inspired in turn Scénario du Film Passion, an even more extraordinary video short in which Godard demonstrates how Passion came into being. Next, in quick succession, came the dazzling Prénom Carmen (1984), which marked the first of several performances by Godard as a kind of eccentric professor; the controversial Je Vous Salue, Marie (1985), a genuine attempt by Godard with Myriem Roussel to explore the sacred and corporeal, though it was banned by the pope; and Détective (1985), a humorous take on the genre shot entirely in a Paris hotel.

This remarkable creative burst confirmed that Godard was one of the greatest exponents of sound. Before he had fragmented and rearranged the title music he commissioned from film composers such as Michel Legrand, Georges Delerue and Antoine Duhamel. Now, with the sound engineer François Musy, he was intermixing, recomposing and transforming “found” music (largely classical). In the late 1980s, he made contact with the music producer Manfred Eicher, head of ECM Records, who introduced him to a new set of modern composers, including Paul Hindemith, Giya Kancheli and Arvo Pärt, so providing the soundtrack to his later work.

Nouvelle Vague (1990), starring Alain Delon, was a ravishing paean to the Swiss landscape of his childhood that plays with the theme of revelation and the eternal return. It heralded an extensive phase of personal, historical and philosophical contemplation that engaged with themes such as age and exile, European history and memory, and art versus culture. The prevailing mood of these new, complex film-essays was elegiac, often melancholic.

Allemagne 90 Neuf Zéro (1991) was a meditation for television on the solitude of Germany following the fall of the Berlin wall, while JLG/JLG: Autoportrait de Décembre (1995) presented an intimate study of childhood, memory and loss. Other commissions included Puissance de la Parole (1988) for France Télécom, which made stunning use of video processes and speed; Le Dernier Mot (1988), a short historical study for television about the Resistance (now a central concern); a series of exquisite, dance-inspired video clips for the fashion company Marithé et François Girbaud; and (with Miéville) short pieces for Unicef and Amnesty International.

Godard still attracted an ardently loyal cinephile audience, even if in the UK his work was now barely distributed. He was also an automatic point of reference for French and American film-makers such as Leos Carax, Claire Denis and Quentin Tarantino, who emerged in the 1980s and early 1990s. However, he was now perceived by many critics and cultural commentators, in France and elsewhere, as an increasingly inaccessible and world-weary monstre sacré. He rarely left his purpose-built studio in Rolle except to collect his first honorary César, in 1987, and the prestigious Adorno prize in Frankfurt in 1995, or to act in Miéville’s films of the 1990s.

Yet all the works mentioned, as well as “lost” films such as the enigmatic King Lear (1987), were feeding into a monumental video project, Histoire(s) du Cinéma, which consumed Godard’s energies from the late 1980s to the late 1990s and evolved from a series of lectures he gave in Montreal in 1978-79. Only Godard perhaps could have conceived such an ambitious project – to produce a history of cinema in the very medium itself. Drawing on film archives, newsreels, photography, painting and animation, it brought together history, the history of cinema, and Godard’s own personal histories.

His principal thesis was that cinema had now come to an end, having fatally missed its appointment with the second world war (specifically the Holocaust) and thus failed in its duty to document reality. The video was both a celebration and work of mourning, and Godard’s pedagogical method of “historical montage”, which transformed ideas and the senses through ever more audacious juxtapositions, reversals and superimpositions, was the logical culmination of his long career in montage, formulated now in concrete terms as “thinking with one’s hands”. Histoire(s) appeared also in an art-book and CD version and stands as one of the great artworks of the last century, confirming the view of the critic Serge Daney that Godard was less a revolutionary and iconoclast than a radical reformer tirelessly correcting his own practice and cinema itself.

Godard continued to experiment with digital video. Éloge de l’Amour (2001), a tale of the Resistance, memory and exploitation, used sumptuous black-and-white photography to capture contemporary Paris, then, in its second half, the saturated colour of DV to depict a period three years earlier. Notre Musique (2004) crystallised his intense interest in Yugoslavia since the early 1990s, its central section “Purgatory” charting war-torn Sarajevo, where he played himself meeting writers such as Mahmoud Darwish and Juan Goytisolo.

He embarked also on a major multimedia project entitled Collage(s) de France for the Pompidou Centre in Paris, but after much work and planning fell out with the curator and the project was dramatically scaled down. When it finally opened to moderate acclaim in 2006 as Voyage(s) en Utopie, it resembled less an exhibition than a building site, with its minimalist, art brut-style installations and assorted mini-ruins.

Equally uncompromising was Film Socialisme (2010), a blistering indictment of western Europe’s military and colonial past in the Mediterranean where different kinds of video format are pushed at times to pixellated distortion. Conventional English subtitles were replaced with broken Navajo English and Godard provided six different trailers offering super-speeded-up versions of the complete film, thus demolishing the idea of the artwork as property. Now 80 and physically rather frail, he presented the film as his “last for the moment” and sold off all his assiduously maintained studio equipment.

He did not turn up to collect an honorary Oscar in 2010. Yet he continued to release bold, urgent and visionary works: Adieu au Langage (Goodbye to Language, 2014), winner of the jury prize at Cannes, which deployed makeshift 3D techniques to rethink the cinematic process; and Le Livre d’Image (The Image Book, 2018), a defiant act of collage and rupture which addressed head-on, as ever, the violence in the act of representation.

He is survived by Miéville.

Jean-Luc Godard, film director, born 3 December 1930; died 13 September 2022

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

will_5198
Charter member
63108 posts
Tue Sep-13-22 07:28 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
2. "one of every aspiring film nerds first crushes"
In response to Reply # 0


          

hardly seen anything outside of his 60s run, but what a run:

Breathless (1960)
A Woman is a Woman (1961)
Vivre Sa Vie (1962)
Contempt (1963)
Alphaville (1965)
Pierrot le Fou (1965)
Masculin Féminin (1966)
2 or 3 Things I Know About Her (1967)
Weekend (1967)

some of it has aged better than others, and his style becomes more and more polarizing (or nonsensical) when you keep diving in, but the man remains a legend. he is a director that reminds you that movies are about sight and sound. what is visual style, without substance? it's still amazing visual style.

--------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Sponge
Charter member
6674 posts
Tue Sep-13-22 08:13 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
3. ""No one did more to make movies the art of youth than Jean-Luc Godard""
In response to Reply # 0


          

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/postscript/jean-luc-godard-was-cinemas-north-star

Jean-Luc Godard Was Cinema’s North Star
The French director did more than transform the aesthetic and the practice of filmmaking—he turned the cinema into the central art form of his time.
By Richard Brody

September 13, 2022

No one did more to make movies the art of youth than Jean-Luc Godard, who was born in 1930, in Paris, and died on Tuesday, at his home in Rolle, Switzerland, by assisted suicide. Godard’s films of the nineteen-sixties, starting with his first feature, “Breathless,” inspired young people to make movies in the same spirit in which others started a band. His works—political thrillers, musical comedies, romantic melodramas, science fiction, often more than one per year—moved at the speed of his thought, transformed familiar genres into intimate confessions, and made film form into a wild laboratory of aesthetic delight and sensory provocation. He put his own intellectual world into his movies with a collage-like profusion of quotes and allusions, and cast the people in his life as actors, as stars, or as icons. Working fast, he alluded to current events while they were still current. But it wasn’t just the news that made his films feel like the embodiment of their times—it was Godard’s insolence, his defiance, his derisive humor, his sense of freedom. More than any other filmmaker, he made viewers feel as if anything were possible in movies, and he made it their own urgent mission to find out for themselves. Where Hollywood seemed like a distant, cosseted, and disreputable dream, he made the firsthand cinema—the personal and independent film—an urgent and accessible ideal.

Godard was also one of the crucial media artists of the sixties, who, no less than the Beatles or Andy Warhol, recognized the echo effects of celebrity and art, and united them in his cinematically and socially transformative activities. (He confessed to likening his own artistic and personal career arc to Bob Dylan’s.) Yet, like many artistic heroes of the sixties, Godard found that his public image and his private life, his fame and his ambitions, came into conflict. He took drastic measures to escape from his legend while pursuing and advancing his art in ways that baffled many of his devotees and those in the press who awaited nothing more than his comeback—especially to those styles and methods that had made him famous. In the late sixties, he withdrew from the movie business under the influence of leftist political ideology and activism. In the seventies, he left Paris for Grenoble and then moved to the small Swiss town of Rolle. When he returned to the industry, he did so by way of exploring his personal life and the history of cinema together, through an ever-more-audacious deployment and reconception of new technologies. What he retained to the very end of his career (his final feature, “The Image Book,” was released in 2018) was his sense of youth and his love of adventure. In his old age, he remained more playful, more provocative, and simply more youthful in spirit than younger filmmakers.

Godard was raised in bourgeois comfort and propriety—his father was a doctor, his mother was a medical assistant and the scion of a major banking family—and his artistic interests were encouraged, but his voyage into the cinema was a self-conscious revolt against his cultural heritage. He sought a culture of his own, and, with his largely autodidactic passion for movies, he found one that was resolutely modern—and that, with his intellectual fervor, he helped raise to equality with the classics. Godard’s name and work, of course, are inextricable from the French New Wave, a group of filmmakers who had got their start as critics in the fifties (especially at Cahiers du Cinéma, which was founded in 1951). Rather than going to film school (such a thing did already exist in France), they did their studying by watching movies—new ones at movie theatres and in press screenings, and classics at the Cinémathèque and in ciné-clubs in Paris. Godard, along with his friends and colleagues François Truffaut, Jacques Rivette, Claude Chabrol, and Éric Rohmer (who was also the group’s elder statesman) shared a catholic love of movies. They recognized the genius of filmmakers (such as Alfred Hitchcock and Howard Hawks), who were then often considered either anonymous craftsmen or vulgar showmen, largely disdained or ignored by established critics. At twenty-one, Godard published a theoretical treatise in Cahiers, “Defense and Illustration of Classical Construction,” which is one of the great manifestos of rigorously reasoned artistic freedom; at twenty-five, he wrote an instant-classic essay on film editing, or “montage,” a word that came to define his career. Though all his prime New Wave cohorts had been critics, Godard was the only one who overtly and explicitly made his movies into living works of movie criticism—who made his filmed fictions overlap with his theoretical inclinations and viewing passions alike.

Many of the commonplaces of modern cinema bear the watermark of Godard, starting with one that he himself had trouble living down—the jump cut, which he used in “Breathless” when he had to shorten it to ninety minutes. He preferred merely eliminating segments of shots to eliminating whole scenes. Before Godard, the jump cut was a mistake, a sign of amateurism; in his hands, it was a cymbal crash announcing that the rules of cinema were meant to be broken. He gave the collaborative cinema its modern imprimatur when he joined forces with Jean-Pierre Gorin in the late sixties and then with his partner (now his widow), Anne-Marie Miéville, in the seventies. Starting in that same decade, he brought video into his movies, and, with Miéville, he made two extensive television series then, too (one ran about five hours, the other, about ten)—for which he invented hybrid, essay-like forms that pushed the outer limits of creative nonfiction. In his return to professional features, “Every Man for Himself,” from 1980, he crafted a kind of analytical slow motion, based on video methods, that he integrated into the filmed fiction. And, as prolific as he was during his first flush of artistic fervor, he was even more so at the time of his return—though he made fewer features (“only” eighteen from 1980 onward), he also created video essays, including the monumental “Histoire(s) du Cinéma,” that were crucibles, epilogues, and living notebooks for his features.

From early on, Godard’s work was politically engaged; his second feature, “Le Petit Soldat,” from 1960, about espionage battles amid France’s Algerian War, was banned by France. Even after abandoning the Marxist orthodoxies of his work in the late sixties and early seventies, he never left politics behind: his “King Lear,” from 1987, is rooted in the Chernobyl disaster; his 1996 film “For Ever Mozart” dramatizes the civil war in the former Yugoslavia; and his 2010 feature is titled “Film Socialisme.” Nonetheless, having jumped off the speeding train of the sixties, Godard never quite got back into the center of the times. His later films are, to my mind, even more innovative, even more original than the ones that made his name. They’re also more defiant. If his earlier films signify that anything is possible, his later ones push possibilities so far that they virtually defy younger filmmakers to even try. His way of sustaining his own cinematic youth was largely to overwhelm the new generation of young filmmakers with his own artistic power. There’s a sublime spite in his later work that emerges similarly in interviews (of which he was a deft dialectical master, throughout his career). It comes off not as a cantankerous old man’s rejection of his successors but as an eternal youth’s fight for a place in the world and a chance to make it a little better than he found it. Having moved to the margins, he made himself an outsider again and lived and worked—and struggled—like one. To the end of his life, he was still fighting his way up and in, even from the heights of cinematic history that he had scaled.

For me, Godard’s passing is personal. A viewing of “Breathless” at seventeen, in 1975, transformed me—made me instantly certain that my life would be centered on movies. I had the benefit of ignorance: I knew nothing of classic Hollywood, nothing of art cinema, and nothing of Godard. There was no legend to look up to, no dominant figure to inspire or overawe; I naïvely but sincerely saw the film face to face, so to speak, and saw him in it the same way, as a filmmaker virtually addressing his audience, across the decades, in real time. It was then his criticism (collected, along with his interviews and other writings, in a book called “Godard on Godard,” translated by Tom Milne) that guided me into movie-viewing. His films—including those of the seventies, largely under the journalistic radar—have remained my cinematic North Star.

I had the honor of meeting Godard, in his office in Rolle, in 2000, for a Profile of him that I wrote for The New Yorker. His later work seemed as vital to me as ever, but it was hardly seen in the U.S. People I knew were surprised to learn that he was still alive. At sixty-nine, he was vigorous and active (and completing one of his greatest films, “In Praise of Love”). He spoke to me in his office for three hours, he showed me some new work, he stood around casually chatting with me about it, and he invited me to dinner. At the restaurant where we ate, he was voluble, and his conversation was wide-ranging, embracing Shakespeare (we discussed “Coriolanus”) and “Schindler’s List,” the Second World War and the later films of classic Hollywood directors and aspects of his own youth (such as his avoidance of military service both in France and in Switzerland), and he talked of food (the coffee and the local fish), and made winking fun of the shirt that a man at another table was wearing. When I learned of Godard’s death, it wasn’t the movies or the celebrity but the man across the table, jocular and reflective and bracingly candid, who came to mind.

He filmed with small crews, often doing camerawork hands on, editing at home; in leaving Paris for Rolle, he turned a small Swiss town on Lake Geneva into his own plein-air studio. (I interviewed Godard’s longtime cinematographer Raoul Coutard, who called the town Rollywood.) Godard made his domestic activities and local observations converge with the history of the cinema and the grand-scale politics of his era. The awe-inspiring example of his films has converged with his personal practice to enter the DNA of today’s cinema. The best of recent movies are both personal and grand, innovative and political, engaged with the overt crises of the moment and with the submerged ones of the history of the art, and they’re as insubordinate regarding expectations and conventions as they are contentious in their emotional life. Godard achieved his goal: leaving his legend behind, his work has become, very simply, the central reality of the modern cinema. In his office, Godard told me that he thought the cinema was nearly over: “When I die, it will be the end.” He was wrong—and it’s his own fault.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Sponge
Charter member
6674 posts
Tue Sep-13-22 08:38 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
4. "'96 interview"
In response to Reply # 0


          

https://www.filmcomment.com/article/jean-luc-godard-interview-nouvelle-vague-histoires-du-cinema-helas-pour-moi/

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Lobby Pass The Popcorn topic #746028 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com