In addition, that period was also the most productive period of Godard's career. According to my own words, if I didn't make a movie, I would be bored to death. Since the film's predecessor, The Carbine, seemed to be his biggest failure at the time—with less than 3,000 viewers in three weeks, Contempt was under enormous pressure to be innovative and subversive. His masterpiece: the biggest budget so far, the biggest female star and the most prestigious director, the most beautiful location, and one of the huge themes - thinking about the history of the film industry and its role as a cultural art A discussion of limitations and immortality.
https://www.carleton.edu/curricular/MEDA/classes/media110/Friesema/contempt.html
saw this review that the film could be counted as a documentary about filmmaking, or it could be said It is Godard's own autobiographical work, and like his other works during the Karina period, the portrayal of the relationship between men and women is very personal. In "Contempt", in the theme of the gradually declining film industry, he incorporated his observations and perceptions of his emotional relationship at that time. The relationship between Paul and Camille is reflected in his marriage with Karina. Of course, it's clear that this work has multiple themes and storylines: a story about a couple's love split, so to speak, or a documentary about the history of cinema, expressing a new generation of directors' struggles with the past. The regret of the post-film industry from glory to decline and so on.
In 1963, Godard and other new generation directors were disillusioned when faced with the crisis in the American and European film industries at that time, not only because the golden age of Hollywood was coming to an end, but the entire European cultural industry was severely hit by American popular culture. The interesting paradox of European Baby boomers obsessed with fresh, free and open American values while slamming and protesting Washington's provocative foreign policy exists today, perhaps in a more extreme mode, because the so-called After decades of cultural export, the "free and open" American culture can be said to dominate all English-speaking countries in the world, including many non-English-speaking regions. Think about our generation's childhood understanding of movies and the exposure to foreign movies around us. channel, American Hollywood commercial "blockbusters" and classic art films, which one will we get first access to? From this point of view, although it is regrettable, there is no doubt that the culture and values that once represented Europe that nurtured those New Wave directors have been defeated and conquered by the commercial culture that has become the "mainstream".
Godard said he never succumbed to popular taste, a spirit of defiance that has become rarer and rarer among generations of video-makers over time. Perhaps this rebellious spirit represented by the new wave directors has already been defeated by the commercial works represented by the United States that cater to popular tastes, even if those works are non-innovative. , just to please the so-called "popular taste" and the empty shell that does not have the soul, thought and depth of the creator.
Many people know that Contempt is one of Godard's most commercially successful films, but it seems to be one of the poorest at the box office for Brigitte Bardot, who plays the heroine in the film. Everything is so ironic, even the original intention of choosing this then-hot and popular movie star to play the role can allude to the strong contrast between the commercial elements and art in the film, or it can be said to be a confrontation with each other.
The New Wave was born in the midst of a decline in the film industry that continues today. An interesting contrast is that Godard and others criticized the wealthy Hollywood Americans in that era, and what is the difference between the Chinese businessmen who are now considered to be wealthy and pouring money into Hollywood? It’s just that the times and objects have changed. What has not changed is that these businessmen who are full of money interests and only care about the so-called public taste have never been close to the real art. Their ignorance and superficial ignorance are the reasons why they refuse to understand and study art. result.
Godard commented that it made him sad every time he saw Lang in the film. The real film master in the film was moved by the admiration of the younger generation of filmmakers, but he had to compromise himself with the American producer for the money, and sadly the real-life Fritz Lang The same goes for having to compromise with Hollywood in order to continue making films in the US after fleeing Nazi Germany. Think again, is Hollywood today also desperately compromising in order to get the money of our deep-pocketed compatriots? (For example, the placement of advertisements in so-called blockbusters such as Transformers is a good example.) And today's European art films have long been closed and played in their own small circles. Our times are just getting worse and worse over the years, it's really hopeless.
This is why I think we need a new "new wave" in this era. Godard's new wave represents the daring to break the tradition and rebel against the inherent emotion born from the feeling of the beautiful past that has gradually passed away. The rebellious spirit of the system and the unyielding principle of pursuing what you really want and refusing to compromise with the so-called popular trend are not the same as the commercial works that please the audience in this era, including superheroes everywhere. What is needed by the video industry dominated by the rich businessmen of Hollywood? Maybe today's young people can only create truly fresh and interesting artistic video works that are as immortal as the new wave of that era if they realize these.
In Godard's conversation with Fritz Lang, Lang said he was not against the entertainment of film, which is pop culture, explaining that his work cannot completely ignore popular attitudes, because all directors want to make themselves His works are watched by as many people as possible; but he also believes that good works are those that have depth and can be discussed by the audience. Perhaps that is the most important criterion for judging whether a work is good or not. Brainless entertainment without thinking value is also art that expresses the creator's theme, mind and soul. The film maestro, who has been between Europe and Hollywood throughout his career, also said that a filmmaker who only thinks about money and a film director who doesn't think about budget at all will inevitably clash. After all, no one is absolutely anti-Hollywood, even Godard. It was because of the influence of the works of the golden age of Hollywood that his early works such as "Exhausted", and in recent years Hollywood is still Every once in a while there are several innovative and interesting masterpieces (such as "Birdman"). So from these things, we can clearly see that the root cause of many problems is that we always tend to or easily go to the extreme side. It seems that it has always been difficult to balance the relationship between the two extremes and solve these problems. Isn't the way of trying to find that hard-to-achieve balance? Having said that, although I'm not anti-Hollywood, I really don't have a good impression of those film dealers who have a lot of money to rent, especially when they have the right to interfere in the creation of directors, and video producers should always treat their own works. It would be better to be more principled, if the producers asked for so much, why didn't they direct it themselves?
View more about Contempt reviews
