Read this article. Choose a scene in Breathless and respond to the following quote. Be sure to write at least 2 paragraphs. Respond to each others' posts for extra credit. Here's the quote:
"This basic sequence of events is the minimal thread of continuity that holds the filmic narrative together. However, causal development and character motivation in the traditional sense are relatively loose. While the film does not reject narrative conventions as a whole, it goes a long way towards weakening the tight-knit structure and explanatory mechanisms affiliated with dominant narrative. The film's visual construction works even more aggressively against conventional film style. It systematically departs from the aesthetic guidelines and rules defined by continuity editing, relying variously on long-take sequences (often shot with hand-held camera) and jump cutting."
I disagree with the quote in saying that the character developmenr and development of the movie was loose. I diagree with the fact that it weakened the movie structure but instead the junp cuts made the movie as a whole. I agree that without the jump cuts some takes would have been too long and boring, but the jump cuts were not only just used as a solution to long takes. They were used as a way to develop and embody characters.
ReplyDeleteThe jump cuts express the behaviors enacted in the film. It represents the disjointed and unpatterned, jumping around of the youth within the film. It represents more Paulette within the film because she is uncertain of which man to choose and what to do with herself. The jump cuts helps this too like when Michel is driving Paulette and just talking about what he loves bout her, it is filled with jump cuts that represents the jumping around of his feelings, but can also represent her loss of interest in what he is saying as the jump cuts are of Paulette just looking around at the scenery around the car with the voiceover, diegetic sound of Michel’s voice. She shows no interest at all to this event. The jump cuts during the killing with Michel shows the viewer and represents how he sees the world and has no interest in society and it is no concern to him. That’s why these jump cuts are so obvious and could even be represented “careless”. The editing within this film reminds somewhat of Run Lola Run and I enjoy, admire the editing within both of these films.
preach (extra credit??)
DeleteI’ll have to disagree with half of this quote, because even though there is a generously weak narrative and it doesn't add any new ground to the film genre, the character development and motivation however seems to push the narrative forward and give the narrative a deeper meaning to the film. This also tends to carry the weight of the movie, along with other cinematic aspects of the film. One scene I choose that explains this, is when Michael is at Patricia's apartment explaining about their own love interest to each other. They also explain on what they are going to do later in their future, such as hoping to loan out some money to go live in Italy. Even though there is no actual story-line within the film, there is a narrative within the characters which give the film an actual story.
ReplyDeleteOne part of the quote I agree with however is where the article says “The film's visual construction works even more aggressively against conventional film style. It systematically departs from the aesthetic guidelines and rules defined by continuity editing, relying variously on long-take sequences (often shot with hand-held camera) and jump cutting." The scene I choose that explicitly explains this quote, when in the beginning of the movie, Michael is seen riding in his car talking about how “great” the countryside and France is to him. While Michael speaks, there are multiple jump cuts and long takes of him traveling through the countryside.After this he was stopped by the police, and from there, showed more jump cuts of Michael shooting and killing the police officer and running away. These use of rapid jump cuts and long takes sequences, helps to propel the character’s story-line a lot further rather than jeopardizing the actual film’s narrative. I also have to agree with this part of the quote because this use of cinematic language and style has helped influenced this genre as a whole, especially for the French New Wave.
Jeremiah it does take guts to disagree with the given quote but you seem to have done a great job with supporting details to reinforce your points. I like your post a lot.
DeleteHi yeah hello disagree completely with the ignorance riddled throughout this quote. First of all, although I am not as established as the author of this quote is as far as critiquing films; however, I am taken back by the complete and utter disrespect and pure mindlessness that is associated with this quote.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, to reject jump cutting as a cinematic employment is one thing, but to go as far as to say utilizing such causes the film's worth and verisimilitude to decline is absolutely absurd to me. As someone who is seemingly so high and mighty as far as criticizing a cinematic masterpiece is concerned, I, myself, am concerned with the reliability of the word of whomever seriously stood by the above quote. It has been my personal understanding in this class this year, that each different film employs different techniques, and in whole, is a massive piece of artwork. If I went to an art gallery-say Albright Knox- I am positive that the works their vary from splattered paint to full on scenic adaptations. Yet no one piece of artwork in the gallery would be considered to be of a higher level of artistry than the other. So why then is a film that incorporates the exemplary employment of film techniques, obviously foreign to the author of the above quote, considered to be a less than as a direct result of such. Personally, I don't think my perception of, "Breathless," would have been the same without the jump cuts that exemplify Paulette's sporadic and indecisive behavior with her life. I don't think the shooting scenes where Michael was in combat with police would have been even close to as chaos ridden as they were with the jump cuts.
What omnipotent film deity decided and commanded forth the, "aesthetic guidelines and rules," for film-making that the author of the quote so strongly suggests? Who decided that continuity must always be present, even in the obvious instance that the lives of the characters are not in anyway harmonious? Humor me, tell me why tradition has to lay an unchangeable set of rules for all those who come after to follow? If the aesthetics of a piece of artwork, which I obviously consider any movie to be, are defined by the intent of the artist, as well as the response of the spectators, how is one individual then able to invalidate the film's commendability with the swift utterance of a string of words based solely on their OPINION. I would have no problem if in the quote there was ever an, "in my opinion," "personally, I think.." but the demanding nature it seems to put forth seems to try to forcefully deny that this film is a cinematic gem. At the rate at which change is not acceptable as different, yet no less, the entire world need not make advancements and innovations in anything, art and beyond, since it is OOOOBVIOUSLY so terrible to deter even in the slightest from the norm.
Thank you and good night (morning.)
there*
DeleteM.B. White is not saying anything derogatory about the film. White is merely expressing that Godard really went beyond the boundaries of conventional filmmaking with Breathless--he broke the mold, so to speak. He further states that basically Godard allowed the medium and its form to define the message and the characters.
DeleteI do agree with the article in saying that the character and plot development are quite loose when compared to other movies, however I feel like that's kind of the point. Both "400 Blows" and "Breathless" and I'm guessing most French New Wave films have pretty loose plots, not saying that they don't have plots, they just aren’t what most people expect from a film. And though the characters might not have been extremely developed like in some movies, they worked well with the spontaneousness of the film itself, they were the embodiment of the film. They pushed the movies along, bringing a sense of humanity to an otherwise kind of lackluster “cliche” (at least, in my opinion). Although I do agree with him(?) in the fact that yes, “Breathless” broke away from conventional film styles, but again, that was the entire point of the French New Wave. They broke away from the “meta” of what was known to many moviegoers(is this the correct term?) and gave a new perspective to films.
ReplyDeleteOne scene that really embodies the what the critic was talking about, was the scene where Patricia is walking out of the New York Herald building and Michel is reading a newspaper in the car he stole. There are many seemingly unnecessary/weird cuts in the scene, where they don’t really seem to make any sense as to why that particular shot was cut in such a way. For example, when Patricia first walks out of the building, she is standing next to a man(her boss?) and then the next shot is her twirling around right next to his car. This is very jarring and can be seen as sloppy editing, since most “normal” films have shots that flow very well with each other, and are not too jumpy. However, I feel like these types of shots are done on purpose(of course) to create maybe a sense of childishness, both with the film and the characters themselves. Perhaps they meant to piss of critics with their "sloppy" and "careless" editing skills.
*piss off
DeleteI believe breathless has a weak narrative, yet in contrast to the beliefs presented in the quote, the abrupt editing and jump cuts add to the texture and continuity of the film. At the beginning of Breathless, they appear rough and choppy yet as the viewer gets used to the techniques, they become enjoyable and add character to the already thin narrative. Sure, the structure and plot of Breathless are not conventional and the characters remain a half mystery but I believe that was just the style of the time period as well as the style of many foreign/European films in general, which is disregarded by many and waved off as non-climactic and uninteresting.
ReplyDeleteIn scenes such as the one a mere two minutes in when Michel is driving and singing to himself, we see the use of this bumpy tactic in a way that progresses the narrative. Although the cuts from inside to outside the car are jumpy and we often and obviously miss entire stretches of road, Michel's singing and soliloquies serve as a sound bridge and, therefore, continuity is preserved. We see the way his minds moves from one thing to another, just as the shots do. He is a petty man who doesn't conform to societies norm, shown as he speeds by the many cars the jump cuts display, almost seeming to be an attempt to be match cuts. Yet we still can't help ourselves from bonding with Michel. I believe Godard intended to create a film that would challenge its audience in this way and succeeded in making a quirky and intriguing film that has yet to be overlooked.
The quote from the article describes the minimalistic approach Godard takes to the plot of Breathless. The whole movie is very loosely held together by a series of events that almost have no relation. A scene that closely follows this idea is the scene inside Patricia’s bedroom and apartment. The editing of the film creates the loose nature of the films nature. In the scene the shots are cut without continuation and are often very abrupt. The fast cutting technique makes the viewer loose focus on the conversation and individuals within the frame. It is hard to keep on picking up where the last shot was cut.
ReplyDeleteThe conversation does not relate to itself or the rest of the film. There is small mention of other points in the plot but the conversation is largely about nothing at all. This puts the idea loosely held together plot forward. The jaggedness of the conversation makes it hard to follow and predict. There is no transition to the next topic of conversation making it even harder to follow. The whole thing seems random making the feeling of the movie and scene freer. This scene further proves the quote’s point. Saying that the movie is “held together by a minimal thread of continuity” is almost an understatement. The movie seems like it is just a random series of events that happens to the two main characters. The overall feeling of the film is very casual and at times it is barely a film.
I believe that the films unconventional narrative techniques highlight the message and overall purpose of the film. I agree with the article that states that "It often seems that scenes are conceived to show what can be done with cinema rather than to develop the story in a coherent fashion." A lot of times within the film, the camera will abruptly cut making it seem jumpy and chaotic versus the generally desired smooth and easy transition of continuity based films. One scene in particular that I noticed this abrupt cutting in was when he was inside his car in the beginning. It shows the front of his car crossing the line, to inside the car passing a truck, to swinging around showing the truck behind him. All this occurs in about five seconds.
ReplyDeleteThe relative continuity is maintained as in the viewer technically knows what is happening but the transitions and sudden quickness are confusing and slightly disorienting. The manner in which the camera jumps around and changes angles seems to be almost like a cinematic experiment rather than a strive for continuity. I don't think this method takes away from the story or development of the film however it is quite obvious that half of the intended purpose of the film was to explore and experiment with narrative techniques. Overall I think it was very well done and I might possibly try to duplicate this technique in future productions.
I disagree with this quote completely. What he is basically saying (in my interpretation at least) is that since the film goes against what was normal for that time, it is wrong. Yes, this new technique of abrupt cuts is something experimental for the time, and it could be perceived as wrong by some critics. What these cuts actually do for the film is contribute to it as a whole, and the overall theme and feel of it. The jump cuts show characterization throughout, and Paulette with her decision of who she will choose. The jump cuts during the killing with Michel shows his lack of interest in society, and overall distorts his character. The jump cuts come off as a surprise at first, but personally I think they were embedded into the film to move the audience’s attention away from the broad and weak narrative, and more so to the editing style and the characters. One example of this is a scene where Michel is driving and singing in his car. His mind wonders away from society, and more so on how he perceives his own reality. The sudden jump cuts are used to intrigue the audience and foreshadow Michel as a character. The events in the film are loosely put together, and one may argue that the sudden cuts make it worse, however in short, the cuts bring a new style of filmmaking, shaping Breathless as a well-crafted experimental film.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with this quote completely. What he is basically saying (in my interpretation at least) is that since the film goes against what was normal for that time, it is wrong. Yes, this new technique of abrupt cuts is something experimental for the time, and it could be perceived as wrong by some critics. What these cuts actually do for the film is contribute to it as a whole, and the overall theme and feel of it. The jump cuts show characterization throughout, and Paulette with her decision of who she will choose. The jump cuts during the killing with Michel shows his lack of interest in society, and overall distorts his character. The jump cuts come off as a surprise at first, but personally I think they were embedded into the film to move the audience’s attention away from the broad and weak narrative, and more so to the editing style and the characters. One example of this is a scene where Michel is driving and singing in his car. His mind wonders away from society, and more so on how he perceives his own reality. The sudden jump cuts are used to intrigue the audience and foreshadow Michel as a character. The events in the film are loosely put together, and one may argue that the sudden cuts make it worse, however in short, the cuts bring a new style of filmmaking, shaping Breathless as a well-crafted experimental film.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the quote completely. While the general guidelines of film should usually be followed in film, when a director does it with this much style and prowess it works together wonderfully. After all, how can the art of film advance in culture without risks being taken to evolve the structure of film-making as a whole? Jump cuts are very prominent in Breathless. They’re used frequently to move action along in quick succession in an interesting way. This tactic appears very rough and unrefined at first but as the movie continues on it becomes very pleasing and captivating because of how well it works with the film. Jump cuts prove to be a useful tool for Godard because they liven up less than exciting scenes, such as when Michel and Patricia are driving together and he is upset with her, but she is continually ignoring him, fixing her hair in the mirrors. It sounds like such an excessively boring scene but the jump cuts from side to side, location to location, maintaining the same positions in the car keep your focus in the film and prohibits your mind from wandering off in a seemingly boring scene. The same can be said for the jump cuts used when Michel is by himself in the car.
ReplyDeleteA scene which uses jump cuts extraordinarily in my opinion is the bedroom scene. In this scene both Michel and Patricia go from bathroom to bedroom to side of the room etc. basically all over the room because of the jump cuts. In this scene, there is a moment where Michel tells Patricia that he’ll stare at her until she looks away and she says the same. Before letting us see who looks away first, there is a jump cut of the two kissing. This technique is used throughout the film to end a conversation or a sequence to enhance and speed up the narration while having enough deviation from the central theme to keep it from being too boring or too fast paced. It is obvious that Godard knows how to use his jump cuts excellently. However, the jump cuts were not just used as a solution for longer takes but I also believe they contributed to the characterization of certain people in the film. Jump cuts are so common that it can be argued they are used frantically and are unresting just like the French youth.
-Adil Kadwa
Well it seems that the majority of my classmates disagree with this quote, I would agree wholeheartedly with it. Having seen the film multiple times now, it does seem that a lot of the movie is not so much dedicated to plot and development as it is breaking rules and pushing the limits of what can be done with a film camera. That is not to say that there is no advancement of plot or character in the film; just that it seems to be second fiddle to the stylistic techniques and ideas. The loose, casual, jumpy, playful camera work and editing feels much more like the focal point of the movie than the rather silly story. I think Godard intentionally leaves the story very un-fleshed out; it leaves him with more of a chance to dazzle us otherwise. Look at the scene in which Godard kills the policemen; theoretically, in the hands of a different director, this could serve as an early centerpiece, and extremely fleshed out and important scene. Instead, Godard seems to gloss over it, seemingly jumping back and forth between perspectives rapidly, and confusing the audience entirely; in fact, it’s hard to tell if Michel has even shot the policemen. This glossing over of important events may seem normal now, but back then it was extremely innovative; the jumpy editing, disregard for story, and overall playfulness of the movie seems very much like an exercise in Godard’s personal technique, and less like a coherent story. That’s not a knock on the film of course; it just feels – evidenced by the shooting scene – that coherence and story were sacrificed for innovation.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen saying the character development of the movie was loose, I strongly disagree, I also disagree with the saying that it depleted the movies complexion but one thing that helped the movies meaning as a whole was the jump cuts. If this movie was filmed without any jump cuts, many of the shots would have been tedious. The jump cuts did have more purpose than to just shoot long shots. The reason for the jump shots was to establish and exemplify the meanings of each character.
ReplyDeleteThe jump shots show the attitudes achieved throughout the entire movie, they serve as a way to show the incoherent bouncing around of the innocence in the film, mostly talking about Paulette considering the fact that she can’t choose a man and doesn’t know where she is going in life. In the scene where Paulette and Michel are driving around in the car, the jump cuts really play a big role here because while they’re driving, Michel keeps telling Paulette all the things he likes about her and the camera keeps going through jump cuts showing chaos and probably referring to how he feels towards Paulette, his feelings are all over the place. During the killing scene, the jump cuts are very important because it gives the audience the feeling that Michel never really had any interest in what was going on around him, he didn’t want any involvement in anything, which would explain why these jump cuts were so conspicuous or even casual.