Edwin Pereyra
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 1998
- Messages
- 3,500
Jean-Luc Godard’s My Life To Live is about a woman’s slow decent into prostitution. After leaving her husband and child in order to pursue an acting career, Nana, played by Anna Karina who was then Godard’s wife, has to find other means of work in order to support herself.
The film is a cornucopia of cinematic conventions delivering mixed results. I have seen it more than once now and had gone back several times to some of the more critical scenes in the film. While some of the elements Godard use work, others will leave you feeling alienated and indifferent.
For example, in one scene, the street noises are heard but in another, they are totally muted. In another scene, he pans his camera around with varying degrees of speed that the viewer instead becomes caught up with what he is doing with his camera rather than paying close attention and being absorbed by the film and its story. In yet another cinematic technique, in the middle of a scene where certain characters have been engaged for quite sometime in a meaningful and engaging conversation, their dialogue would suddenly be replaced with subtitles and muted sound.
The film is presented in twelve sections, in a documentary style story. And much like its chapter approach, the film, for me, becomes more as an exercise in cinematic style without actually getting close to its central character. There is a feeling of aloofness and detachment that is established even in the early shots. Each chapter in the film, more or less, becomes an outlet to showcase a different kind cinematic style with the camera at the heart of its existence. In a way, it does become an exercise in form while leaving himself open to such criticisms as being self-indulgent. It is about nouvelle vague - a form of cinema making which originated in France during the 1950s that emphasized spontaneity, unconventionality, and the individual styles of directors.
While My Life To Live may be highly regarded because of its unformulaic and unconventional approach, in some cases, it is the other aspects of cinema such as impeccable acting and a well-written script that when combined with Godard’s technical artistry, fine cinematography and when used in harmony, become the true elements of a great film and end up complimenting each other. Somehow in My Life To Live, Godard samples and only manages to gives us certain aspects of that greatness albeit with mixed results.
- - -
Film Greats – A continuing quick look at motion pictures that, in one way or another, have been called “great films” by some. Other Films In This Series: Sergei Eisenstein’s http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/Forum9/HTML/007237.html
[Edited last by Edwin Pereyra on September 05, 2001 at 08:07 AM]
The film is a cornucopia of cinematic conventions delivering mixed results. I have seen it more than once now and had gone back several times to some of the more critical scenes in the film. While some of the elements Godard use work, others will leave you feeling alienated and indifferent.
For example, in one scene, the street noises are heard but in another, they are totally muted. In another scene, he pans his camera around with varying degrees of speed that the viewer instead becomes caught up with what he is doing with his camera rather than paying close attention and being absorbed by the film and its story. In yet another cinematic technique, in the middle of a scene where certain characters have been engaged for quite sometime in a meaningful and engaging conversation, their dialogue would suddenly be replaced with subtitles and muted sound.
The film is presented in twelve sections, in a documentary style story. And much like its chapter approach, the film, for me, becomes more as an exercise in cinematic style without actually getting close to its central character. There is a feeling of aloofness and detachment that is established even in the early shots. Each chapter in the film, more or less, becomes an outlet to showcase a different kind cinematic style with the camera at the heart of its existence. In a way, it does become an exercise in form while leaving himself open to such criticisms as being self-indulgent. It is about nouvelle vague - a form of cinema making which originated in France during the 1950s that emphasized spontaneity, unconventionality, and the individual styles of directors.
While My Life To Live may be highly regarded because of its unformulaic and unconventional approach, in some cases, it is the other aspects of cinema such as impeccable acting and a well-written script that when combined with Godard’s technical artistry, fine cinematography and when used in harmony, become the true elements of a great film and end up complimenting each other. Somehow in My Life To Live, Godard samples and only manages to gives us certain aspects of that greatness albeit with mixed results.
- - -
Film Greats – A continuing quick look at motion pictures that, in one way or another, have been called “great films” by some. Other Films In This Series: Sergei Eisenstein’s http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/Forum9/HTML/007237.html
[Edited last by Edwin Pereyra on September 05, 2001 at 08:07 AM]
I'll give it a spin soon.
