MovieChat Forums > Journal d'un curé de campagne (1954) Discussion > DVD Commentary

DVD Commentary

posted 18 years ago by morris-payne
9 replies | jump to latest

I found this a pretty difficult film to watch, as beautiful as it was. What made this man a priest? His faith certainly gave him no joy at all. Bresson is one of those filmmakers whose work I will always make time for, even when, as in this case, I'm befuddled and--OK, annoyed by it!

I saw this on VHS but now plan to take the DVD out of my local library to take a look at it again with the critical commentary running. Has anyone here seen the film with the commentary? If so, was it worth it?

[–] richvirgo 18 years ago

Yes. And The Criterion release w/commentary track is priceless.ENJOY!!!!!!!!!

[–] temps_perdu710 17 years ago

well this film, and bresson, are not interested in joy. the priest appears very moved by his faith. he sees this as what he must devote his life to. he does not have the modern attitude that you do something because it makes you happy. but it is interesting to question why he is a priest, especially since that is his entire identity in the film and we are not really given information about him from before he made teh decision.

[–] lloydtamlyn 17 years ago

As usual with Bresson, there is no back story (as with Bresson's hatred of acting, which he saw as a closing down, through theatrical interpretation, of the ambiguity of the dialogue) but there does not need to be in this instance. Surely he has no choice but to become a priest? The scene between the young priest and the Cure de Torcy, where the latter talks about climbing back over 2,000 years and locating himself within the gospels, provides the key for the young priest to realise that he is what he is because that is his destiny - imprisoned by the passion of Christ. This realisation constitutes his only real moment of respite in the film.

[–] r-bresson 17 years ago

i just saw it in the cinema
seen many many times not so much in its proper place

i'm enthused with the comments made on this thing
as i was yours

despite your opening remark seeming authoritative.
as though thats the way it is.
i think you have a point
but as i see things, a minor one

joy perhaps not the best work
but certainly there in degrees
of the releases
and the stings

i like what you say throughout though and for caring to post it
i like the response another cat made to his distaste for background info

these kinds of exchanges i think would be a type of joy for MrB
and they make each of us think more and question our feelings on things
instead of just holding on

[–] TapeMaster 17 years ago

Film is amazing, I found the commentary to be both lacking in insight and information...Peter Cowie's fine and good, but he's not really the best for commentary tracks(he also faltered on Visconti's "The Leopard")

[–] r-bresson 17 years ago

agree
if not a little less
all is grace remember

a case of
solid academic
academic solid

but write one better
before you kick ashes

[–] mrura 16 years ago

uncheck
the 'word wrap'
on your
3-inch monitor
before i
kick your ash.

[–] s-tony-kim 10 years ago

Ha, ha, I second that. Some people seem to show off their originality (more unsavory word can be substituted here) in some rather weird way. It annoys the heck out of you, even more than you thought it would :)

[–] JekyllBoote-1 15 years ago

Peter Cowie's commentary was very good on the whole. It did strike me, however, that he quoted Bernanos' novel at excessive length, when he could have been commenting more directly on the film itself.

It was also strange the way that he veered between his native British English (speaking of a "railway station") and American English (e.g. "railroad", and making the word "covert" rhyme with "overt" rather than a homophone of "covet").

That said, I learnt a great deal from his commentary.