Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Breathless- Jeremy Brinson

Breathless was without a doubt the most jarring film I’ve ever seen in the sense of style. It was the exact apposite of what I am used to as far of the common aesthetics of film, especially regarding the editing. For one thing, the switching of scenes in the film was not of the same smooth transitions as with other films. For instance with the driving scenes, at one moment the car is on a deserted road, and an instant later the car is on hugely populated lane lined with lush vegetation. Another example of the editing would be would be the lead characters tramping through the city. The juxtaposition of shots makes it nearly impossible to pinpoint his exact location. With these types of decisions Godard made regarding the editing, his film reflected the chaotic dynamics of life of man. This was a daring yet brilliant idea; in life there is not always a smooth transition between points in our life because they are not perfect. Each person is bound to run into dramatic situations that aren’t easily predicted. I reiterate that Godard’s cinematography was a bold move because it was the likes that the public was accustomed to. We are used a film that is clean and seamless, which is what Breathless is not. Breathless communicates chaos and unpredictability. Also, as an aside, there was a considerable amount of instances where a character would break the fourth wall. These moments gripped me, and I’m sure whoever watched it, and said that yes this is different and random, but so is life, and if you don’t like it, “Fuck off”.

1 comment:

  1. Good stuff here, Jeremy. I like what you have to say about the chaotic and kinetic nature of life, and particularly that of our "hero," Michel. Some missing words toward the end of the post make me uncertain if you're saying this is something the audience expects or doesn't expect. But this sense of expectation is an interesting question. One wonders if the work's challenges would have been welcomed or rejected by viewers. And perhaps it's important to consider who the audience would have been.

    ReplyDelete