The New Wave is not friendly to newcomers, and Godard is not friendly to newcomers.
There are a lot of redundant lines, and they are all from the back; the two people have a serious discussion of philosophy face-to-face; the heroine dances happily in the middle of the movie, and has a unique sense of rhythm. . . .
Wait, remember who and what?
To say that Quentin's Pulp Fiction did not draw inspiration from this film, I would not believe it. After all, there are not many talkative directors, except for the two of them, Woody Allen is the only one left.
If you taste it carefully, Godard really made a movie that is like a movie except that the movie is not like other movies. A lot of "nonsense" in the film does not reveal much about the inner activities of the protagonist, 80% of the words are close to daily life, and 80% of the words are heard by looking at the back of the speaker's head. Well, it's quite the pleasure of eavesdropping.
But the progressive relationship presented in each scene slowly reveals the director's inner aspirations. From the beginning of the colleague reading the newspaper, to the lines of "Joan of Arc" in the middle movie, and finally let the heroine have a conversation with the philosopher directly.
These are all telling you that this is existentialism, this is an existential whore.
Godard's creative intention is obviously not to tell a story, because it is obviously not his original intention to tell a story so hypnotic. Movies are just a part of his implementation of a sophisticated plan, all he does is throw his creative inspiration to the audience through the form of movies. Moreover, Godard believes that a movie is a movie, without the historical responsibility of "telling a story" and without the commercial burden of serving the public, so his movies are more suitable for viewing from a philosophical, rational, and speculative perspective.
One such piece.
The whole film revolves around Nana's inexplicable desire for 2,000 francs. . . What did she say herself?
I think we are always responsible for what we do. We are free. I raise my hand - I am responsible; I turn my head - I am responsible; I am unhappy - I am responsible; I smoke - I am responsible; I close my eyes - I am responsible; Even if I forget I am I have a responsibility, but I still have a responsibility. I want to tell you there is nowhere to run. Everything is good, all you need is to be interested in something. After all, things are themselves. Message is message, plate is plate, man is man. And life is life.
Is it very existential?
A step-by-step choice, without coercion or non-choice (although non-choice is an existential choice). She doesn't have children and a husband to support like other co-workers, she just wants to do it. After renting out his body, he still retains his dream of being a movie actor and can be responsible for his own choices. The final death was also because she wanted to make her own choices, choose her clients, choose to end her career, and choose the rest of her life. Unfortunately, as Sartre said, it's a bad world, and there may not be as many options. Doesn't Nana know that? The dialogue in the last few scenes introducing the lives of French prostitutes at that time, whether in law or in reality, makes it clear that they do not have many choices. So before Nana made a choice, she knew, but she decided to go her own way (I think she has done something, otherwise she would not be sold), does this sound very feminist?
So I understand that Godard is not just showing off the concept of existentialism, but the ideas of all the political movements he has participated in recently (Godard is said to be very political) are gathered in the film, in prose, in poetry , using pictures, using dance, anyway, not in the general form of film to output their thoughts. Films are made in the form of philosophical speculation, making films of workers that the working class cannot understand. . . . Talent can do anything right.
View more about Vivre Sa Vie reviews
