This is the third Godard, the previous one was also "Madman Pierrot" in the "Fantastic Birds Movie Project", and the last one "Goodbye Languages" was muddled. Godard sees it best now, if it was a few years earlier, he probably wouldn't understand it. Although I only experienced two of them, the heterogeneity of Godard's films also attracted me strongly, just like the excitement when I read Feyerabend many years ago.
The heroes and heroines of the two films are both good-looking young people. Clever, self, read a book but never died, light life willful and casual, obsessed with the trivial beauty of life, committing every crime is as simple as playing a house, but life and death can't be changed. Observing their lives, apart from the beauty of the flash of light (such as the silent one minute in this film, the impromptu threesome dance in the cafe, the girl is forced to take off the stockings and the young man puts on the head to rob), the rest of the time is nothing. . Sartre said: "There is neither a reason, nor a reason, nor is it necessary." The male and female protagonist in Godard's film seems to be a footnote to this sentence. Well, even beauty is not necessary, nor is it a reason for existence, but a kind of light Jiguang Kataba. It’s good to have it, but it’s not worth pursuing. Just like the butterfly is beautiful, but it is not worth it, and it should not be caught.
This is probably the so-called "unbearable lightness of life." Godard patted this kind of light well, smoothly. From the perspective of the deep economic crisis and immigration problems, France in the 1960s was probably the most free era. I believe that in each era, only a few sensitive and intelligent people can feel the pulse of the era and walk ahead of it. Even in France at that time, there were only a few people who committed crimes, murders, and grabbed money from corrupt officials; those who could afford to let them go, and quickly developed love, were also a minority. This is the possibility of Godard, the possibility of freedom above freedom.
But is such freedom really the end of history? After modernity has managed to get rid of all sorts of seemingly irrational stereotypes, is it possible for Godard that the rebellious spirit rooted in people's hearts leads people to it? Everything is deconstructed, and life is finally deconstructed. Construction is impossible. Just like the footless bird in Indian mythology, the moment it falls on the ground is the moment of death.
This reminds me of "The Unbearable Lightness of Life" again. Thomas met Teresa in the dark, and when the Soviet iron cavalry turned them into strangers in their hometown, they obtained simple happiness in the farm life. It was the sudden "heavy" from the outside that pulled the original footless bird back to the ground, but did not allow it to die. Birdless feet actually grew feet on their own. The relationship between light and heavy is really paradoxical. Only a very wise person can take it easy.
Wen Sen once said at Peking University: "Look up at the stars and keep your feet on the ground." But Godard's possibility is "soaring above the stars and overlooking the earth." The choice of the beast and the choice of the bird are naturally different. When the Chinese beast of 2017, carrying the burden of the RV married child, was slowly in the dust, it was hard to imagine the French bird of 1964, with no place to stay and lonely. vice versa. Many conflicts and contradictions come from such mutual incomprehension.
In the end, it must be strong enough to try to give a way out. If the birds and the beasts, light and heavy, can realize true communication and learn from each other's skills, one learns to fly and the other learns to run, everyone can appreciate more possibilities, and it will not be all right. Isn't it, this world will be better?
View more about Band of Outsiders reviews
