|
| • Advanced Search • Help |
My Life to Live | Year: 1962 Classification: Foreign Film - French Directed: - Jean-Luc Godard Actors/Actresses: - Anna Karina - Sady Rebbot The film gets FIVE I give this DVD FOUR stars only because the transfer could have been better. With older films, especially foreign ones, the time and cost of providing a great transfer is too much unfortunately. This an amazing and powerful film that should be owned if you are a fan of Godard or of the French New Wave. For those who have not seen it and are looking for advice, I say: be cautious. This film is not for everyone, especially if you gravitate toward mainstream films. Don't expect Julia Roberts and Richard Gere. The French New Wave era brought out a new kind of filmmaking. The films abandoned and sometimes appropriated traditional methods of narrative and formal esthetics, and used this technique as a critique of sorts. Vivre sa vie is no exception. Jean-Luc Godard made a film that requires something more from the viewer than just their attention span. The fairly simple plot of Vivre sa vie is expanded and turned around by various formal aspects of filmmaking made famous by French New Wave directors. Jump cuts, long takes, deep focus and slow pans are cornerstones of The French New Wave, but my interest lays with Vivre sa vie functions as a text, rather than a traditional narrative. By text, I mean that the film has a greater social theme and works more as an essay rather than a film¡Xsomething needed to be read. Simply put, Vivre sa vie tells a story of a woman that leaves her husband and son, wants to get into the movies, ends up becoming a prostitute, falls in love, then wants to get out of the business. But there is so much more to the film and what is needed is your participation. Participation here, involves much more than a warm body and open eyes. Godard is using the narrative and formal techniques to tell something more about the social predicament of prostitutes and perhaps women in general. He accomplishes this by using very untraditional film techniques that enhances this film to a textual level. When speaking of text, the notion of ¡§reading¡¨ is implied. The viewer needs to ¡§read¡¨ the scene, rather than just watch. Reading requires the viewer to make connections and draw conclusions from the juxtaposition of the words and images, and not just be told or shown what is really ¡§meaningful.¡¨ Watch the 12th chapter (The young man again¡Xthe oval portrait¡XRaoul sells Nana) when the young man reads the Poe story to Nana. I think that really captures the essence of the film. Again, just because people think that this film is great, powerful and groundbreaking, doesn't mean that you will enjoy it. Be realistic. "Il faut se preter aux autres et se donner a soi-meme." (Lend yourself to others and give yourself to yourself---Montaigne): ominous advice for the heroine of one of Godard's most easily digestable and congenial films. A seamless and cohesive twelve chapter documentary, _My Life to Live_, starring Godard's then wife Anna Karina, succeeds at striking the perfect balance between the filmmaker's more esoteric artistic tendencies and the ability to relate to a more mainstream audience. Loosely, the plot involves Nana, a 22-year old woman who leaves her husband and takes up casual prostitution. No doubt it is also an allusion to Emile Zola's novel about a female courtesan of the same name. Brilliant camera work is especially evident in the opening scene where we are introduced to Nana and her husband not by their faces, but by an affronting view of the backs of their heads. This visual device is used throughout and is contrasted with some mesmerizing shots of Joan-of-Arc-coiffed Karina, staring directly at the camera. If you thought Godard too intellectual or abrupt, give this film a try. One of the best films I have ever seen I watched this film in a theater full of people who did not like this film. They were loud, obnoxious, and groaned at the ending. I am embarassed and appalled to say that this was during a screening session at the film school I currently attend. I personally found this to be one of the most amazing films I have ever seen, and because of this was devestated: it was the film that I have always wanted to make, and now will never be able to without seeming like a pale imitation. As soon as the word "FIN" came up on the screen, complaints were flying at the screen. My fellow students lammented either about how the ending was "contrived" or "too rediculously sad." It is my very strongly held opinion that they missed the entire point of this film. This film was not about the ending. This film was not even about the "plot." This film is about the human connections that we make and the human connections that we fail to make. It is about conversation at its most banal and at its most liberating (sometimes seperated by mere words). It is about life, it is about morality, and it is about filmmaking. Although the silouette shots that compose the flawless opening credits sequence are beautiful, they are immidiately outdone by the cinematography of the first conversation of the film. This is a conversation with opposing motivations. The two people "engaged" in it (I use this term in the loosest sense) are not connecting with each other, and, indeed, only seem passively interested in each other. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HEAR A SINGLE WORD OF THIS CONVERSATION TO UNDERSTAND IT. Granted, the words shared are spectacular, and their performance is even better (amazing considering the lines were given to the performers only a few short moments before the camera began rolling) - especially the moment in which a phrase is uttered several times just to explore its different potential meanings. But the words are utterly superfluous - the visual language is all that one needs to take in. Every shot is of the back of the performers' heads. We do not see their faces. They are expressionless. They are ciphers. Their conversation is tossed off, it does not even connect on a surface level. We not only never see their faces, but also never even see them in the same frame. It is disconnection and discontentment completely and utterly represented on purely visual terms. Needless to say, the amazing camerawork continues throughout the film to the point where it would be impossible to analyse it all (not to say that my previous comments were analyzation - you'd need to write at least a 10 page essay just to approximate what the first sequence illustrates effortlessly), so just watch the film yourself, take it in, and enjoy it. May I suggest that if you do not enjoy the film the first time (as my fellow students certainly did not), try to focus on other aspects of it. There are a tremendous number of layers to this film, and any one element of it demands a vi Buy My Life To Live at Amazon.com Buy posters at Allposters.com Jamster - the latest ringtones for your phone!  Search with Walhello on the Internet on My Life To Live Search with the Priority Search Engine on My Life To Live This page in other languages: Suomeksi | Nederlands | Deutsch
|
