27/03/2000 at 11:16 p.m.
Louis Skorecki
In this film there, Godard never recovered. Returns to be a fatal disease? French cinema was in bad shape when the young man casually, right-wing writer profile sollersien prefer to speak to the movies because the competition was obviously smaller, inject itself a virus which only unsuspected strength. Do not forget that becoming a filmmaker was hardly more attractive, then, that try to film critic. We probably underestimated the importance of lack of inspiration in the young Godard. Becoming a writer, yes, but write what? Everything has already been done, is not it? Do not consider young filmmaker's literary borrowing as a way of cut-up burroughsien. Y rather see something like a huge admission of powerlessness that can be distinguished from the creative impotence of so many of his young contemporaries in the art of confession, specifically: a way of elegance distracted, an art mild obscenity, the invention of the prophetic word processor and the stylesheet. Godard was a dandy what unshaven artist who loved to ask, sensing with years ahead of that creation can also be envisaged as a sinister fashion Warholian.
We talked about disease. The genius of the young Godard, is that he knows immediately condemned. He accepted the coup as an artist to ask, what does he have to lose? He does not know he invented a few decades an attitude of arrogance which has much to do with rock than with literature. And if there was enough to to state precisely that exists? All this does not explain the beauty of stop Breathless, his silences felines, her seduction ladle. Say that actors are there for something. Let's say they come in cinema history with some kind of nudity that results from ignorance of what they do. A few months earlier, in Saint Joan, in Bonjour Tristesse, Jean Seberg Jean Seberg was already. Belmondo did not suspect but he was already Belmondo. The genius of Godard, it's not them saying anything.
0 comments:
Post a Comment