-
Llewellyn 2022-04-24 07:01:22
#LFF2# The first 60 minutes were good, the last 30 minutes were boring. However, the fragmented opinions of the film, such as a large number of monologues of one person, and the camera does not feel very interesting to that person, which makes people pay more attention to the content of that paragraph. At the end, bloody rabbits, killing pigs, and beating on corpses Eggs are disgusting to...
-
Desmond 2022-04-24 07:01:22
Maoism makes me...
-
Destiney 2022-04-24 07:01:22
From beginning to end is not because of the charm of the film but because I have enough patience and Godard's fame. Dislikes this narcissistic expression: truth is not recorded on camera but escaped on camera; climax is not recorded on camera but escaped on camera; lines are not edited with the person who said the lines; story is messy and clueless; not recorded Entertain and spread meaning. Bazin said that "movie is also an art of utility...
-
Evie 2022-04-24 07:01:22
Rich and varied shots and editing give way to complex surreal situation construction and mise-en-scene, texts and performances are loose and cathartic, while a large number of panning shots and 360-degree panning are tight and full of ritual. This changes the audience's experience from "catching" to "seeking", the former being targeted and more dynamic, and the latter becoming loose and...
-
Hillard 2022-04-24 07:01:22
Dislocation and alienation constitute the journey, and the hijacked passage is the alienation of the entire journey, with very clear attitudes and themes, but it is strange that Godard, who has repeatedly questioned the rules of genre and popular culture, can always find it in his own works. In the book, he contributed some passages that are also very powerful in the traditional sense, perhaps thanks to the composition and color, but the book bag finally gave way to the emotional...
-
Camden 2022-04-23 07:03:54
A-, #LFF2#, Godard is so malicious to the audience. My ears were raped by Godard. Jesus was a communist. God is an old gay and fucked Alexandre Dumas. Really TM are crazy. Watching it go from a husband and wife murder mystery to a comedy and then a property homicide to a novelty and finally a shootout. It's the kind of film that talks a lot but doesn't actually talk about...
-
Destin 2022-04-23 07:03:54
Rebel to the end, not accepting it, Godard exalts the audience's intelligence and experience, and ignores any common sense, but also uses a certain type of film illusion to attract the audience, which can be described as cruel and overturned everywhere. Cars mean the collapse of civilization, wanton violence and gunshots signal revolution, picture and sound are separated, language and meaning collide, political declarations and drum beats are integrated, a 9-minute track witnesses the famous...
-
Scot 2022-04-23 07:03:54
Finally know why Murantova admires Godard's...
-
Reagan 2022-04-23 07:03:54
The babbling language of the leftist always pulls the audience back to reality, but the story and the behavior of the characters sometimes push people into a dreamlike nothingness. (SIFF Ring...
-
Hollie 2022-04-23 07:03:54
A film that rejects the "point of view", with massive lateral motion shots and pans scanning the screen, abstracted into a powerful form - "tracking shots is a moral issue". The camera movement is no longer mired in the objectivity or subjectivity that classical Hollywood likes to discern, but a game of provocation. If watching a Hollywood movie is a joy, it is a pain to watch...
Weekend Comments
-
Corinne: I went with Monique to her room. Not bad. There was a fire. I took off my raincoat. Monique looked at me. She asked why I seemed to be shivering, if I was cold I could undress. No need to feel embarrassed. Then she helped me.
Roland: To do what?
Corinne: Take off my skirt and pullover.
Roland: I see.
Corinne: I was in my bra and panties. I went to the fire. My back was to her, but I knew she was watching me. I asked why and she said nothing. She didn't reply, so I turned around. She was by the window, her back to me. She sensed my gaze. She took off her dressing gown. She was naked. She asked if I thought her bottom was too big. I said no. She turned around, parted her legs and asked me to describe them. I said she had white thighs and her bush was a black smudge above them. She called Paul. She came up behind me.
Roland: Why?
Corinne: To unhook my bra. Then Paul came in. Wearing pajamas, the coat open. He had a bottle of whiskey. He made me drink. Then he told Monique to go on.
Roland: What was she doing?
Corinne: Fondling my breasts.
-
Corinne: Paul stripped off too, and flaunted his penis for me. He told Monique to take off my panties. He made me kneel and put my head between Monique's legs. Now my back was turned to Paul. I remember she was describing my buttocks and he gazed at them all the time then came closer and fingered them. The rest of the bottle was poured over my back. I felt the liquid run between my buttock. Paul knelt down and began to lick my ass. It wasn't unpleasant. It was quite wonderful. I felt Monique's bush against my neck, her hair mingling with my hair. While her husband caressed my buttocks, she put my hands on her buttocks and she fondled my breasts again. I felt her buttocks open to receive my fingers, then close upon them.
Roland: And you?
Corinne: They wanted me to talk about it, so that my sensations excited them.
