Redpill me on Godard.
>>68244950
He realized that cinema can be quite like modern art, a bit of a good. He made stylish movies that were pretentious and lacking any depth, but we're critically acclaimed. While he had a good style, his movies were mostly made without much effort and it shows. He might've tricked the audience's back then, but he hasn't has much luck since the 70s.
>>68245059
I meant that cinema can be a bit of a goof, damn autocorrect
>>68244950
godard was once a maoist who championed the murderous ideology of mao zedong and the khmer rouge. we condemn griffith and riefenstahl of their political sins, but griffith serioiusly tried to prove he was not a hater after 'birth of a nation'. and riefenstahl insisted she loathed nazism but had simply done as told. maybe they were full of shit but at least they tried to publicly distance themselves from extreme politics.
not godard who espoused the most extreme, murderous, and destructive form of leftism. film scholars, so outraged about long dead griffith and long irrelevant riefenstahl, never demanded of godard to face up to his past sins. unlike kurosawa and bergman who candidly confessed their cowardice in face or approval of, respectively, japanese militarism and nazism, godard has never ever apologized in general, or in specific to the countless victims of the tyrants he supported with all his heart.
godard celebrated and championed mao's total destruction of culture and intellectual life and the khmer rouge that transformed camodia overnight into a genocidal stone age marxist state. fuck that piece of shit.
Dumb frogposter.
pierrot le fou is is kïnô
>>68244950
since the late 60s, godard hasn't really been a filmmaker but an intellectual/theoretician working with film. a true filmmaker commits himself to film--its possibilities, form, horizons, etc. godard hasn't been interested in what film can do but what film is.
if we were to use the analogy of the human mind, conventional thinking is what we call thinking. we think of stuff. but, meditative folks think not of stuff but how the mind thinks of stuff. this is true of philosophers and folks like buddha. the mind isn't used as a tool to do stuff but studied as a tool itself. now, a tool has no function on its own. it is designed to fix stuff. film is the same. how does it relate to rest of society? most films serve as spectacle or fantasy reality for us. we use it to exaggerate reality or to escape from reality. godard got sick of that lie. so, he decided to examine film. first, he was radical and thought his findings should serve the revolution. but, he realized how crappy radical revolution was. so, he turned inward. instead of examining film as an ideological tool, he studied it as a psychological tool. godard's main interest is not so much the film's relationship to society but to the individual - to the thinker. and so
godard makes thinker's movies. he's a thinker, and he makes movies for other thinkers. i wonder, however, what godard's idear of thinking is cuz his movies make no sense.
>>68244950
Piece of shit.
>>68245100
This
>>68244950
it could be that alot of us start as truffautians but not gaining the riches, we turn to godardism. godardism justifies our failure, our lack of riches. it says we don't care if we have fame or fortune. but, godard put on this posturing because he had money and culture and fame. godard's disdain for privilege was from the vantage point of privilege. it was from someone who could take privilege for granted because he'd grown up with it all his life. poor kids who embrace godard are really fooling themselves cuz they are pretending that they are not hungry when they are. when you got nothing, it's better to think like young lennon who wanted to be toppermost of poppermost than later lennon who sat around and sang about a world without any possessions. it was easy for later lennon to imagine such cuz he had a hugeass mansion to lie around in and millions in the bank. this is why for all his pretensions, godard never understood the working class nor really wanted to. godard's marxism and maoism were all part of privilege, of playing the radical, of making movies that no one would watch but pretend that one was starting some revolution that would reshape mankind and human consciousness. and the sort of people who cared about any of this were also privileged academics also of priveleged bourgeois backgrounds who had ample time sitting around watching experimental films and doing such shit.
>>68245100
Yep, see also Sartre and Beauvoir. French intellectuals are generally hypocritical obscurantists who focus on image over content every time. They've been embarrassing themselves for the past century
>>68245100
>>68245280
Sure are a lot of spooks in this thread
>>68245320
Stop using that word if you don't know what it means
I know you're trying to portray yourself as being intelligent, but when you fail this hard you make yourself look not just ignorant but also insecure
>>68245100
You haven't said anything about his directorial work
why the fuck does this board hate Godard so much
>>68245059
Not like he had any obligation to make coherent cinematic epics. I like his fast and loose style, it was almost pure experimentation and his general disregard for polish allowed him to make an absolute shitload of films, which of course means a shitload of experiments to study up on.
I mean somebody had to do it.
>>68245320
Are you one of those memekids who knows that he only has a cursory understanding of Stirner at best so you try to keep your spook posts intentionally vague to dissuade a follow up?
>>68245361
>I know you're trying to portray yourself as being intelligent, but when you fail this hard you make yourself look not just ignorant but also insecure
he's a young pseudo-intellectual. probably around 19-22 years old. nothing is lamer than cross-board lit memes. what a a try hard.
>>68245394
He's an emotionless poseur.
Just read up on his failing out with Truffaut.
>>68245394
Indeed
Doesn't even make any sense that at the mere mention of his name, the sperg squad comes drooling, considering that 90% of the board are literal teenagers whose experience with films are capeshit and other blockbusters. It's really crazy this hate-train. Godard 'upsets' simple people, I suppose.
>>68245606
>simple people
It figures somebody like you wouldn't have a problem with Godard, you smarmy cunt.
>>68244950
Zack Snyder's equivalent
>Ingmar Bergman
>[On Jean-Luc Godard] I've never gotten anything out of his movies. They have felt constructed, faux intellectual and completely dead. Cinematographically uninteresting and infinitely boring. Godard is a fucking bore. He's made his films for the critics. One of the movies, Masculin Féminin (1966), was shot here in Sweden. It was mind-numbingly boring.
>[On Jean-Luc Godard in an interview with John Simon (1971)] In this profession, I always admire people who are going on, who have a sort of idea and, however crazy it is, are putting it through; they are putting people and things together, and they make something. I always admire this. But I can't see his pictures. I sit for perhaps twenty-five or thirty or fifty minutes and then I have to leave, because his pictures make me so nervous. I have the feeling the whole time that he wants to tell me things, but I don't understand what it is, and sometimes I have the feeling that he's bluffing, double-crossing me.
>mfw I literally haven't seen a single French New Wave film other than Le Samourai but still shitpost about Godard and call him a posturing fraud and never get called on it
>>68245684
Bergman is a great director but doesn't have the obligation of being a great viewer. That's fine. But kids here and elsewhere always using these 'my daddy is better than your daddy quotes' to one up one another is pathetic.
>>68245606
cringe
>>68245361
>i'm a true intellectual
>>68245733
Unfortunately you're not a special snowflake
>Godard and his cronies shit on Kurosawa for years and say he's not Japanese enough
>Tags along with people paying respects to him anyway and doesn't say or do anything the whole time
>>68245394
I don't hate him, I just despise his public persona and think he's a bit of a posturing psued. He was clearly much more interested in crafting his intellectual-celebrity-rebel appearance than actually making a movie. He has some interesting images but is rarely capable of composing a well-made film that I look forward to watching in its entirety.
I've never been moved by any of his movies. I don't think his influence is anything that important to cinema as a whole. Truffaut was a better storyteller and more innovative director in virtually every respect. Technical experimentation doesn't mean anything to me if it doesn't serve some sort of emotional purpose. Godard is plastic.
>>68245793
Do you have a source for your first claim?
>>68245793
Is that Herzog on the left?
>>68245908
Yup. And you better know who the other guy is.
>>68245879
>Godard’s fellow New Wave critic-filmmaker, Jacques Rivette, writes: "You can compare only what is comparable and that which aims high enough. Mizoguchi, alone, imposes a feeling of a unique world and language, is answerable only to himself... He seems to be the only Japanese director who is completely Japanese and yet is also the only one that achieves a true universality, that of an individual."
>According to these French commentators, Mizoguchi seemed, of the two artists, the more authentically Japanese.
>>68245879
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Akira_Kurosawa#Mizoguchi_versus_Kurosawa_dispute
>>68245908
>Another unusual visitor was the German director Werner Herzog, whose name was then unfamiliar to Kurosawa. There was a book he wanted to give Kurosawa, said Herzog, but he hadn’t been able to find it in the book store and he had a plane to catch, so he had just dropped by to pay his respects. Then the next day, I think it was, he made a special trip to hand-deliver the book–having gone to the trouble of altering his flight reservations to do so. I believe it was a book of drawings. In any case, Kurosawa found this gesture deeply moving.
>Later, in Japan, Kurosawa took the first opportunity to go see Herzog’s Fitzcarraldo and was overwhelmed by its tenacious energy.
>>68245280
Sartre and Beauvoir visited Che Guevara and had nothing but praise for his regime
>>68245100
>this copypasta
>>68245968
not him, but fassbinder
>>68246029
>>68245999
Well, it was always true that Kurosawa was the most western of the big guys from Japan. Not that there's any problem with that.
>>68246072
It's clearly Lars Von Trier.
>>68246084
It's also racist as fuck to suggest that a Japanese director is less "authentic" because he happens to be inspired by European and American cinema.
>>68246072
>Von Trier
>Fassbinder
You pulling my leg, mates? That's my man JOHN
>>68246029
Herzog always seems like such a nice guy.
>>68246120
>>>tumblr
>>68246136
oh milius? my bad then looked like fassy to me
>>68245733
>I shit on stuff I haven't even watched.
Many people do this. I'm not sure why you would think you're different.
>>68246174
Based Milius, t.bh
>>68245606
Most of the people who criticize Godard have an understanding of French new wave. Some simply don't like him and that is their opinion.
>>68246171
Tumblr is the type of site that would make Godard's argument. If a white person was inspired by Japanese cinema they'd call it appropriation and inauthentic. And you guys would rightfully call that retarded.
>>68246288
On /tv/? SUUUURE :)
In other places where I have read complete dismissals or strong attacks against Godard, very rarely it was more articulated and well-thought than the classic >pretentious or >boring diatribes.
>>68246120
I'm glad I don't have a brain disorder where I look for an opportunity virtue-signal every five seconds. You deserve to be constantly triggered
>>68246324
Though Kurosawa inspired Western filmmakers he was also inspired by them. Tumblr would have trouble with what to make of that. Kurosawa just loved good filmmaking regardless of region.
>>68245999
Kurosawa was known for his Japanese settings and culture so most people seem to have gotten the opposite view.
>>68246354
While 90% of /tv/ is cancer the posters here seem to have an atleast cursory knowledge of new wave and Godard's effects on it. (Even if they underplay his influence).
what are the classic French New Wave films to get me started?
Oh hey, this thread turned into KiA.
That's my cue to exit (even though I'm very well-informed about Godard and French New Wave).
Adieu, shit thread.
>>68246527
The 500 Blows and Hiroshima, Mon Amour are good films and considered the starting place.
His early work is good, he just faded to obscurity after that.
>>68246567
Surely you meant 600
>>68246032
...and?
>>68246590
Fuck. I meant 400. My French isn't very good.
>>68246594
He was involved with a dictatorship. That is usually frowned upon.
>>68245059
>He realized that cinema can be quite like modern art, a bit of a good. He made stylish movies that were pretentious and lacking any depth, but we're critically acclaimed. While he had a good style, his movies were mostly made without much effort and it shows. He might've tricked the audience's back then, but he hasn't has much luck since the 70s.
Pretty much exactly this.
>>68246390
>white guy is racist for inauthetically appropriating Japanese culture!
>Japanese guy is inauthentic for appropriating Western culture!
What's the fucking difference? You're basically an SJW if you disagree with me.
made some accessible films and a lot of totally not accessible. personally i like his gimmick and i respect him as a director and as a cinephile, but what i focus on is different than what he focuses on
>>68246980
what do you focus on?
>>68244950
He's trash.
>>68245059
Lol this is so fucking true
I enjoyed breathless and alphaville still gotta see some others tho. Gotta give some respect to a guy who does something different. A lot of its kinda cheesy by todays standards and the romance in them feels kinda pointless, but its like hes aware that theyre pointless or something i dunno.
>>68245059
>we're critically acclaimed
>tricked the audience's back then
you sound like you have a ship on you're shoulder
>>68245100
Oh great, now instead of analyzing and judging art on its aesthetic and technical merit all we do is get triggered by the artist's 'problematic' views and life story. gb2tumblr.
>>68245733
desu Melville is the only New Wave worth watching
>>68249933
Melville isn't new wave though
