|
Post by pimpinainteasy on Aug 29, 2018 2:33:31 GMT
Yes. I guess in that respect, I'm fortunate to have only seen a couple of his films so far. Still got quite a few to look forward too. I've come to realize im not a big Godard fan and Truffaut is growing on me. i think we might all be too attention deficit to appreciate GODDARD anymore. i likes a few of his films before i bought a mobile phone.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 2:35:30 GMT
I've come to realize im not a big Godard fan and Truffaut is growing on me. i think we might all be too attention deficit to appreciate GODDARD anymore. i likes a few of his films before i bought a mobile phone. I don't think its the fact that his movies demand attention, he is a polarizing figure honestly, you either love his cold clinical style or not.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 2:36:22 GMT
i think we might all be too attention deficit to appreciate GODDARD anymore. i likes a few of his films before i bought a mobile phone. I don't think its the fact that his movies demand attention, he is a polarizing figure honestly, you either love his cold clinical style or not. that said, I love Alphaville and my life to live.
|
|
|
Post by pimpinainteasy on Aug 29, 2018 2:36:55 GMT
I don't think its the fact that his movies demand attention, he is a polarizing figure honestly, you either love his cold clinical style or not. that said, I love Alphaville and my life to live. i loved MY LIFE TO LIVE too. pretty heartbreaking movie.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 2:37:56 GMT
that said, I love Alphaville and my life to live. i loved MY LIFE TO LIVE too. pretty heartbreaking movie. he has the same critique as Kubrick and Tarkovsky.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 29, 2018 2:49:16 GMT
i think we might all be too attention deficit to appreciate GODDARD anymore. i likes a few of his films before i bought a mobile phone. I don't think its the fact that his movies demand attention, he is a polarizing figure honestly, you either love his cold clinical style or not. I still like Godard (and Truffaut) but he has a definite style, and either you go with it or you don't.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 2:50:31 GMT
I don't think its the fact that his movies demand attention, he is a polarizing figure honestly, you either love his cold clinical style or not. I still like Godard (and Truffaut) but he has a definite style, and either you go with it or you don't. have you had any noticeable examples in which a director grew on you?.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 29, 2018 2:51:02 GMT
i loved MY LIFE TO LIVE too. pretty heartbreaking movie. he has the same critique as Kubrick and Tarkovsky. Now Tarkovsky I love, but he's one not for those with attention deficit issues.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 2:52:15 GMT
he has the same critique as Kubrick and Tarkovsky. Now Tarkovsky I love, but he's one not for those with attention deficit issues. true, but I've heard many people claim they find both too polarizing and can't connect with the material, and I respond watch Stalker.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 29, 2018 2:58:02 GMT
I still like Godard (and Truffaut) but he has a definite style, and either you go with it or you don't. have you had any noticeable examples in which a director grew on you?. Best example is probably Ozu. I never disliked him, but didn't think he was anything special. Now he's pretty much my all time #1. More than pretty much any other director you really need to appreciate all his work as a unified whole, as there's not a lot of difference between individual films. It's like he was slowly chipping away at the same formula, trying to make the "perfect film" in his particular style. Took me a while to really get into Truffaut as well. Again, I didn't particularity dislike him, but I didn't think he was anything special. Funnily I was probably expecting him to be more like Godard who has a very distinct, overt style. Truffaut's films are relatively "traditional".
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 2:59:30 GMT
have you had any noticeable examples in which a director grew on you?. Best example is probably Ozu. I never disliked him, but didn't think he was anything special. Now he's pretty much my all time #1. More than pretty much any other director you really need to appreciate all his work as a unified whole, as there's not a lot of difference between individual films. It's like he was slowly chipping away at the same formula, trying to make the "perfect film" in his particular style. Took me a while to really get into Truffaut as well. Again, I didn't particularity dislike him, but I didn't think he was anything special. Funnily I was probably expecting him to be more like Godard who has a very distinct, overt style. Truffaut's films are relatively "traditional". Truffaut tends to get better as he ages to me at least, Anything past 1966 I love. To be fair I do like the 400 blows.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 29, 2018 3:02:18 GMT
Now Tarkovsky I love, but he's one not for those with attention deficit issues. true, but I've heard many people claim they find both too polarizing and can't connect with the material, and I respond watch Stalker. I think the more unique and personal a director (or any artists) vision is the more polarizing they're going to be. And Godard and Tarkovsky are two particularly unique filmmakers. Stalker is amazing, in my all time Top 20, but I love all Tarkovsky's work. Another one who went too soon. Probably the artist that saddens me the most regarding, "what might have been".
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 29, 2018 3:04:41 GMT
true, but I've heard many people claim they find both too polarizing and can't connect with the material, and I respond watch Stalker. I think the more unique and personal a director (or any artists) vision is the more polarizing they're going to be. And Godard and Tarkovsky are two particularly unique filmmakers. Stalker is amazing, in my all time Top 20, but I love all Tarkovsky's work. Another one who went too soon. Probably the artist that saddens me the most regarding, "what might have been". I read a theory He might've been poisoned by his own government too damnnn ugh, Fassbender is another, that guy did more drugs then a hoker at a bathhouse, but then again this is the same guy who directed 10 movies in a year.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 29, 2018 3:05:10 GMT
Best example is probably Ozu. I never disliked him, but didn't think he was anything special. Now he's pretty much my all time #1. More than pretty much any other director you really need to appreciate all his work as a unified whole, as there's not a lot of difference between individual films. It's like he was slowly chipping away at the same formula, trying to make the "perfect film" in his particular style. Took me a while to really get into Truffaut as well. Again, I didn't particularity dislike him, but I didn't think he was anything special. Funnily I was probably expecting him to be more like Godard who has a very distinct, overt style. Truffaut's films are relatively "traditional". Truffaut tends to get better as he ages to me at least, Anything past 1966 I love. To be fair I do like the 400 blows. I still have a few to see with Truffaut. I probably slightly prefer his earlier work ( Jules et Jim, The Soft Skin, The Bride Wore Black), but don't think there's any real variation in quality overall.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 29, 2018 3:10:29 GMT
I think the more unique and personal a director (or any artists) vision is the more polarizing they're going to be. And Godard and Tarkovsky are two particularly unique filmmakers. Stalker is amazing, in my all time Top 20, but I love all Tarkovsky's work. Another one who went too soon. Probably the artist that saddens me the most regarding, "what might have been". I read a theory He might've been poisoned by his own government too damnnn ugh, Fassbender is another, that guy did more drugs then a hoker at a bathhouse, but then again this is the same guy who directed 10 movies in a year. Fassbinder's very hit or miss for me. I do really like Effi Briest and The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant.
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on Aug 29, 2018 11:41:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by manfromplanetx on Aug 29, 2018 22:01:49 GMT
“Realism isn’t what’s happening today, or what happened yesterday. When the camera rolls, there’s no present, there’s no past . . . there’s just the moment we’re rolling. You have to get as close as possible to the truth of that instant.” Maurice Pialat The outstanding Classic French films of Maurice Pialat are timelessly appealing, his works overflow with a sensitive and often intense emotional realism. Pialat had an uncompromising vision, outspoken and passionate his cinematic art has a powerful psychological force, and he has been a huge influence on modern French filmmakers. Pialat earned an infamous reputation, being antagonistic both on and off set, he publicly developed a fractious relationship with fellow French filmmakers and even audiences, the director was notorious for his incendiary nature which caused much tension between collaborators, cast and crew. His bold non-conformity led to much difficulty in obtaining finance for his film projects, he wrote and directed only a handful of features but at least half are widely considered masterworks. Pialat drew on his own life experiences with primary concerns about childhood and family. With a fearless focus on the economic, social and psychological background he composed compassionate unyielding portraits. Highlighted throughout his works is an eruption of glorious emotionally spontaneous moments, uniquely orchestrated by himself. By pressuring his actors Pialat prodded them into accessing much deeper emotions, his improvisations triggered the startling naturalism seen in his films, drawing us in to the eye of his storm.. On famous fellow French filmmakers, in Pialat’s eyes, " Godard was proud to be better known for what he said than what he did, Malle was a straight-up incompetent, Truffaut was fortunate to be making one a year, as his films were so ordinary, Rivette a monumentally self-important blowhard, whose quest for some sort of verifiable legacy in the face of Godard’s and Truffaut’s success was accomplished by making aggressively boring films... Highly Recommended the films of Maurice Pialat.. pictured Loulou (1980)
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on Aug 29, 2018 23:30:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on Aug 31, 2018 0:07:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by manfromplanetx on Sept 1, 2018 0:43:27 GMT
Loin du Vietnam , Far From Vietnam (1967). Chris Marker, Joris Ivens , William Klein, Claude Lelouch, Agnès Varda, Jean-Luc Godard, Alain Resnais A collaborative effort spearheaded by the masterful documentarian film essayist Chris Marker, it is a compelling political protest film, a profound cinematic essay. Each director created an episode as a collective of related theme in very different styles. World wide condemnation rang out as the Vietnam War expanded into a major conflict in 1967, anti-war protest found new forms in America and Europe. With this enthralling advocacy documentary film, Marker and his fellow filmmakers unflinchingly focus on the establishment that waged, supported and abetted the Vietnam War. Historically significant the film is a fierce statement in defiance of the main stream propaganda of the time, the 'official story', it was released in advance of the biggest the anti-war movement protests in the United States. Travelling between three geographic centres, Vietnam, New York City, and Paris, Far from Vietnam paints a complex portrait of the tragic situation. exploring with incisive detail not only local reactions and interventions but looking also at the historical & socio-political origins of the conflict. We see Hanoi citizens climbing leisurely into the manhole sized bomb shelters built into every city street, jumping to New York Mayor John Lindsay leading a radical pro-war parade down Central Park, there is even an interview with Fidel Castro and Ho Chi Minh describing their revolutionary philosophies. Boldly Loin du Vietnam screamed out amidst the raging controversial battle. At this time aligning with sides required a brave and genuine commitment. Emphasizing the urgent necessity of doing something Loin du Vietnam is tremendously powerful French political filmmaking.
|
|