Right on, sister. Glad to know someone else knows about the chips they plant in our brains.
Jim Bixx is exactly right. I was so enamored after seeing this movie in Toronto that I went to all the reviews...and found them practically unreadable. Goodbye to language, indeed.
To Cody: if you are being snarky: what Sontag says is to stop interpreting/theorizing about art and take pleasure ( or yearn for) in it. Eros means gap or chasm -- it isn't necessarily sexual. It describes the Christian relation of man to God (agape is God to man). If Cody thinks that's funny...well, don't see the movie, you won't get it.
Godard and Bob Dylan are in my pantheon of geniuses. I cannot speak for Andy Warhol, because he is too diffuse and nebulous for me to absorb. Neither use their medium in a blockbuster manner, but they both connect in a deeper way than their fellow filmmakers or musicians respectively. I was introduced to "À bout de soufflé" by a French friend who is a great literary critic and who could have been a marvelous film critic as well. That film intrigued me subtly and powerfully, but my passion for Godard became permanent with a film that received little attention in the US, "Passion," which I saw in London. The ambling plot juxtaposes a fantasy film looking for a marketable plot and the lives of the film crew and community, and the imagery and mise en scene is fabulous. It was magical for me, and since then, I have tried to see as much Godard as possible. I have not been disappointed and hope that I will have the opportunity to see the new film. Thanks for the review.
Rather the reverse, actually. Godard's use (and deliberate abuse) of 3D is quite inspired and adds greatly to the pleasure of the movie. I'm surprised Mr. Scott didn't mention this.
When I described it, or tried to describe it to friends after I saw it at TIFF, a friend who is a graphic designer responded "Do you mean that someone actually used cinema to create art?" To which I can only say "Yes".
It sounds like one of those movies that's more fun to write about than to have to watch.
Re: Godard's "Goodbye to Language," reviewed by A. S. Scott.As long as only male artists, poets, novelists, and film makerstreat women's bodies as "metaphors for the mysteries of nature,"it will remain a partial view, and, therefore, invalid. I will reconsider theissue when women artists, poets, novelists, and film makers also subscribeto that view. Until then, I will remain hostile to gender-centeredthinking on everything, which I believe results from brainwashing and programming.
"A bout de souffle" - Translation: "About the souffle" - a cooking film?
The world can only offer us partial views and nothing else. There are many women artists, anyway, who work with the nude female form, -gay, straight or bisexual as the case may be. No one one can speak for all of humanity. Rather the idiosyncrasy of each artist's vision is what defines and recommends their work to us.
To tstigliano: I don't even "get" your analogy of eros as gap or chasm and "agape is God to man." Do you mean awe in the evidence of something vast and incomprehensible?
“In place of a hermeneutics we need an erotics of art,” Right. Said the same thing to an acquaintance just the other day.
I have always wondered what kind of people feel moved to comment on movies they haven't seen. Now I know -- they're Godard fans.
I am sure if any other filmmaker made this carnage/garbage of a film no one would have talked about it. In fact, it seems that A. O. Scott, film festival gurus and critics, are totally blind/corrupt. Use your eyes for a change. Godard used to be fun to watch but even at his best he is a B-filmmaker and in the last 20 years has made one monstrosity after another. You know, these European filmmakers, I mean the hip ones (Godard and Fellini), not the serious ones (Bresson, Rosssellini, Renoir) used to come to NY in the 60s to steal ideas fro the greats (Brakhage, Markopoulus, Jack Smith) and go back to Europe and make experimental commercial films that silly critics like Scott then praise and Cannes celebrate. We continue to obey filmmakers and critics who prostitute cinema. They are a bunch of charlatans, unfortunately.
Always helpful to have excuses not to have to interact with a work of art. (Cf. The Death of Klinghoffer.) I am very grateful that Chantal Akerman doesn't agree with you.
Still the youngest and the oldest filmmaker in the world. Looking forward to it.
Okay, you were not just snarky about one of Sontag's most famous lines.
Your thinking appears gender-centered to me.
I saw Goodbye To Language in all its 3D glory at the Toronto Film Festival. It is a marvelous movie. Mr. Scott references an overlapping of images that creates, as he puts it, "a jarring hallucination." It is all that and more. It creates an entirely new experience in a movie theater. For that alone, and Godard repeats it, the film is worth seeing.