I haven't watched Bresson for a long time, and I have forgotten what kind of height the art of film can reach. Perhaps as Tarkovsky said, the gap between other directors and Bresson is too great.
Bresson took minimalism to the extreme. There is no difference between the people in the film and the objects in the background, but just a carrier, detached from all emotions and subjective colors. Characters and narration are separated. Images are no longer driven by humans but promoted by natural development. The essence of the film has been nakedly separated from then on. Bresson’s lens combines all the advantages of Dreyer and Godard. A single lens can be self-contained but it is inexplicable. When the lens and the lens are combined, they form a substantial connection. It is this connection that reveals the image. significance. The shots in the movie basically range from partial close-ups to the whole to close-ups, and the three-segment shots can be a complete narrative. The angle of view of the lens is mostly an objective point of view. The main body of the shot of the bank grabbing paragraph is a passerby. Following his peripheral light, we can see the behavior of the protagonist. At the end of the murder scene, the scene is composed of an axe-door-shoes-door opening-dog going downstairs-man falling to the ground-dog going upstairs-woman falling on the stairs-axe-lamp and blood, a series of shots The splicing creates a terrifying murder scene, but it can be described as invisible. This shot can only be taken by Bresson.
Money is a clue, people are carriers, money is fake, and people's hearts are fake. The fake banknotes reflect the ugliness of human nature, the mediocrity of the judicial system, and the retribution of cause and effect. Money is the original sin. Of course, Bresson does not attribute everything to money. Counterfeit money is just an introduction. The focus is on a state of nothingness after seeing through the ugliness of human nature and the process of finding salvation after losing the meaning of life. Of course, this state is an unstable state. It can also be said to be showing the law of impermanence. Bresson is still stimulating the nerves of the audience under the cold camera. The protagonist is wronged for the first time but nothing is wrong. He was released from the crime, but he was frustrated to robbery and was caught again. This time he was sentenced to three years in prison. He planned to escape from prison in an attempt to kill the person who wronged him. Who knew he had no chance to see him again, and finally followed the old woman. Being kindly taken in, he brutally killed their family with revenge, and Bresson killed them after giving the audience a glimmer of hope.
After being wronged, he has left indelible scars in his heart, venting his anger in the society and even killing the whole family of the old woman is actually the process of the male protagonist seeking redemption. Salvation in a tragedy is exactly the same as the male protagonist in "Pickpocket" who finally went to jail but received true love. In fact, it shows how deeply the society alienates human nature, and can only be redeemed in this deformed way.
At the end, he drank a glass of wine and surrendered to the police blankly. The camera cut from interior to exterior. The crowd watched the police take the male lead out of the door, but they still stared into the door. They (audiences) What are you still looking forward to?
View more about L'Argent reviews
