Older filmmakers are not big on
innovation. Funhouse deity Jean-Luc Godard is not your standard older
filmmaker, though. He’s an icon, a cinema-poet who has always
attempted to engage and provoke viewers. His latest feature,
Goodbye to Language (opening in NYC this Wednesday
“with a national release to follow”), is a prime example of this
— shot in 3-D, the film is an exploration of themes that have
obsessed him for decades. It is also a sensory experience in which
nearly every shot seems composed with the notion of “deep focus”
in mind.
3-D is a mostly ridiculous gimmick, which re-emerged
about a decade ago for the same reason it was invented in the
Fifties, to lure movie fans back into theaters. It has primarily been
used for big-budget action movies and kiddie features. Three
filmmakers have used the technique beautifully for artistic rather
than commercial reasons: Werner Herzog (in Cave of Forgotten
Dreams, 2010), Wim Wenders (in Pina,
2011), and Martin Scorsese (Hugo, 2011).
Godard has always been head and shoulders above most other
filmmakers in terms of bringing cinema “back to zero.” With his
use of 3-D here (he already experimented with the format for a short
included in the 2013 feature 3x3D), he toys with the nature
of image-making, the notion of counterpointing silence and sound, and
the idea that a series of narrative incidents can be assembled into a
plot if the viewer wishes (if not, just enjoy the ride).
Goodbye isn't meant to be “received” like
the average multiplex movie, or even the latest indie or arthouse
hit. It fills – and sometimes confuses – the senses, as Godard
toys with the “life-like” clarity of digital filmmaking by
editing crystal-clear, jarringly beautiful images together with shots
that are disorienting (even sporadically out of 3-D “focus”) and
take a few seconds to process.
The characters here act out
the “battle of the sexes” that has been one of JLG's main
concerns since Breathless (1960). In this
instance, the film's action involves only a few characters, but only
two really matter – a couple who spend time in an apartment
talking, fucking, and arguing. The man (Kamel Abdelli) looks a great
deal like Serge Gainsbourg and indulges in some Gainsbourgian toilet
humor (the sensory trip here does briefly include shitting noises, a
first for Uncle Jean's cinema!).
Both the man and the woman
(Heloise Godet) are seen naked, but Godard as always dwells on the
woman's body, providing us with yet another painterly study of a nude
(see Passion, 1982). In this case one can't help
but think that the woman's one imperfection – a scar above her lip
– holds another fascination, since the 3-D allows Godard to
“explore” his actors like never before.
The “performer”
who attracts the most attention here, though, isn't one of the human
actors, it's Godard's dog Roxy (whose last name is Mieville, meaning
he is co-owned by Uncle Jean and his partner Anne-Marie Mieville). He
uses the dog as a sort of “anchor” for the film, as it wanders
from place to place and is shown both in beautiful, bucolic settings
and in the apartment, where the two lovers have presumably “adopted”
it.
Roxy takes part in his master's playful spacial
dislocation. One of the many eye-catching shots in the film finds the
dog in the foreground as the background is switched using digital
effects. As is the case with all dogs, Roxy doesn't care, but we are
reminded once more that the life-like quality of digital video is
just one more element in the modern filmmaker's bag of tricks.
Godard could've delivered a visually intoxicating feature, filled
with gorgeous landscape shots and beautiful 3-D images like the one
we repeatedly see of a woman and man behind a barred gate. Instead, as noted, he
mingles crisp, visually arresting sequences with ones that are
somewhat indistinct or “off.” He returns frequently to a dark
image where our attention is grabbed by a small white dot – as in
an eye exam, Godard wants your eye to travel exactly where he wants
it to go.
But the moments that stay with one most deeply are
indeed Godard's gorgeously composed exterior shots (many featuring
his pooch) and his “studies” of the couple. He plays with the
parameters of 3-D throughout, and in one case “violates” visual
logic by having a character move from one space to another, visually
“rupturing” the image. In the two instances in which he uses this
technique, a character moves quickly to screen right, with one eye's
visual information remaining static while the other's continues to
move, until different images are being transmitted to the left and
right eyes.
The character who broke the image
serves as the focal point, and the images in both eyes coalesce
shortly thereafter. It's a bravura editing trick that underscores how
receptive Godard is to technical innovation, and also to new methods
of conveying how artificial and manipulative film and video can be.
The content of Language is thus so
inextricably linked to its form that I'm not certain how it will play
as a 2-D feature. As it stands, the film is yet another of Godard's
cinematic poems (with distinct elements of essay) that revels in
objets trouvés – snippets of classical music,
film clips (including moments from Les Enfants
Terribles, Only Angels Have Wings,
Metropolis, the Frederic March Dr. Jekyll
and Mister Hyde, and The Snows of
Kilamanjaro), and a plethora of quotations from a host of
writers.
But the whole picture is tied together by the visual
experimentation. In this regard, Goodbye continues
the poetic and mostly non-narrative approaches of his recent films
Film Socialisme (2010) and Notre
Musique (2004). It helps, of course, if one has seen the
recent work that JLG has been doing; his fragmentation of cinema
started in his classic Sixties works, but he's been following a
brilliant, very unique path since his best work of the 21st-century,
In Praise of Love (2001), his first fiction
feature to incorporate digital effects.
As I've noted before,
we are very lucky to still have new Godard features coming out on a
regular basis. It's rare than an octogenarian (Uncle Jean is
currently 83) can continue to redefine the medium he's working in,
but Godard does so with each new release, and will hopefully continue
to do so for the foreseeable future.
No comments:
Post a Comment