MovieChat Forums > À bout de souffle (1961) Discussion > Boring, sorry to say

Boring, sorry to say

posted 11 years ago by bpollen
22 replies | jump to latest

I watched this and expected something....more. A standard weak plot, bad acting, bad camera work. Horrible clothing for such a pretty actress (and horrid haircut). She hardly looks like the beautiful woman she turns into in later films. Horizontal stripes in everything she wears, and poofy unflattering skirts? Seriously? He, OTOH, is appealing, if a bit too skinny and un-buff for our modern times. But appealing in a bad boy way, with the ciggie hanging out the mouth.

But mainly, it's the lack of plot. A wandering around of the characters not doing much of anything except trying to engage in stilted witty chatter.

Not the worst film I've seen, but I really thought it'd be something more.

[–] ComradeKubrick 10 years ago

I agree to a certain point, the film was largely uninteresting. The cinematic technique was interesting at the time, but the story was largely uninteresting. I did enjoy the two main characters, their relationship was fairly interesting. I enjoyed the film overall though. I greatly prefer the 400 blows.

[–] benGsboat 10 years ago

This may be the first time a movie was twice called 'largely uninteresting', followed by 'I enjoyed the film overall though'.

I'm going to watch it tonight for the first time, so hopefully it'll be at least mildly entertaining.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_loaau1ijlT1qiyyhbo1_500.gif

[–] svenrufus 9 years ago

I thought it odd to say it was boring then ficus on clothes and haircuts, as if alternative fashions would have changed your interest in it. I actually agree it was quite dull to watch, but really not for those reasons.

[–] Fluig_2013 10 years ago

I'd call it a museum piece.

[–] benGsboat 10 years ago

Just finished it. While I wouldn't call it uninteresting, it is terribly dated - especially the music and the 'cool' posturing by Belmondo.

At times it was like watching a spoof.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_loaau1ijlT1qiyyhbo1_500.gif

[–] doughazelrigg 10 years ago

I'd thought it was over-rated when I first saw it 30 years ago, and I still feel that way. I can appreciate its unconventional techniques, however

[–] spookyrat1 9 years ago

I can appreciate its unconventional techniques, however

Agreed. It's the technical aspects of the film that I find of most interest, whilst the spartan plot doesn't always serve well to hold your attention. I also agree with some of the other posters who note that the film does appear rather dated 55 years later compared to other classic fare from that period.🐭

[–] JellyFish19 9 years ago

I'm not sure how to feel about this movie. I was expecting something in the likes of Gun Crazy, Bonnie and Clyde or Badlands, but what I got was a constantly smoking jerk who keeps asking a girl to sleep with him for like an hour, before something starts happening...

[–] Chenille333 9 years ago

Very few French new wawe movies are plot-driven, if your main criticism against this movie is that nothing was happening then you should probably not watch any more stuff from this movement.

[–] caribeno 9 years ago

I've seen "Breathless" several times. While I understand how, especially for an American audience, the film would seem boring, diffuse, even enervating but, while I wanted to feel bored by it, "Breathless" always draws me in. I believe that the "time capsule" aspect of the film adds immeasurably to it's appeal for me. 1959 Paris had to be exciting and cutting edge in popular and high culture in many ways. What this film is is one of the first self-referential films that is so common in modern times: films that use all sorts of past film references to tell a story. This was not done before. The naturalistic dialogue in the film would sound boring, at times, yet it gives the film the quality of watching real life lived. The jazz score was very late '50's and totally lifts the film to a level it otherwise would not have achieved. Film audiences had to respond to something in the film or we wouldn't be writing about it 55 years later.

I was born when this was made and it gives me a window to what the world looked like when I was a baby.

As with any film, it will provoke thoughts, feelings, and opinions in viewers. All are welcome!

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Romtonkon 9 years ago

After reading this thread I'm glad I'm not alone who doesn't like this movie and was bored to tears.

[–] Filler_Killer 9 years ago

Honestly your critique sounds extremely shallow, to say the least. You talk about clothing, about haircuts, about "buff" guys, etc... you think this is what matters in Film?! Film is Art, not silly TV entertainment for the masses.

Yes, the plot is a bit diffuse, but then again, who says that all films must have a clear, straight, Hollywood-like plot? The acting isn't stellar also, but... bad camerawork?

I don't think this film is perfect and I rank many other films way above Breathless, but its sheer gritiness, rawness, grips you by the throat in a way that is difficult to describe. It may not be a film for everyone, but this film definitely has power, in a very unique and idiossincratic way, something that a lot of movies nowadays lack, even when they try to offer "good acting", "complex plot" and "modern camera work".

-

-You won't forget me now?

-No. I've got nobody else to remember.

[–] Romtonkon 9 years ago

Yes, the plot is a bit diffuse, but then again, who says that all films must have a clear, straight, Hollywood-like plot?

The plot here can be summed up in 4 sentences, it's the last thing this movie is praised to.

[–] Filler_Killer 9 years ago

Without any disrespect, I feel tempted to ask: So what? What's the real problem with that?

The same can be said about Mad Maxipad, but that doesn't keep everyone from praising it like it was the last Coke on the desert.

-

-You won't forget me now?

-No. I've got nobody else to remember.

[–] Romtonkon 9 years ago

The problem is that I watch movies for plot and characters. Breathless is cold and absolutely uninteresting, there's no depth here. You can watch it on mute and won't miss anything.

[–] Catrician 9 years ago

the characters in Breathless are extremely complex, belmondo/seberg make the most interesting couple in film of the 60s, and while the plot isn't so important the characters are written very intelligently. i know that many people suggest there's no depth to them, though this is very far from the truth. examining the two under the context of nihilism or just the sexual revolution at the time makes for heaps of analysis, and there's more going on in their relationship as well.

have a nice day
Top 100: http://www.imdb.com/list/mduBIpnlpTA/

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Ore-Sama 9 years ago

The problem is that I watch movies for plot and characters. Breathless is cold and absolutely uninteresting, there's no depth here. You can watch it on mute and won't miss anything.

The first time I saw "Breathless", I enjoyed it for it's style.

Only on repeated viewings did I begin to truly understand the characters. I think this film is often seen as cold because it doesn't really have scenes of intense, obvious emotion, and is done, as is usual for Godard, in an abstract, quirky fashion(though Breathless along with Alphaville are among his most accessible works). However once I started paying closer attention to the dialogue (beyond the quirkiness), I saw there WAS emotional depth, just not presented in the traditional way.

"It's just you and me now, sport"-Manhunter

[–] best_of 9 years ago

Anyone who says Breathless is boring should stick to playing video games. Breathless is a movie experience unlike any other up to that time and it still holds up more than half a century later. Well OP is typical of the bone heads who shoot off their mouths on these blogs, they find it all boring - Breathless, Citizen Kane, Vertigo, Day for Night. That's showbiz!

[–] zhu_bernard 8 years ago

The movie is historically important and encouraged generations of amateurs into the filmmaking world. Comparing to Godard's works after this, Breathless looks terrible now. Pierre, Weekend, Le Mepris are masterpiece of masterpieces.

[–] jason-l-parker 7 years ago

I enjoyed the film!

I wanted to see what Paris looked like in the 60's. I thought the actress was extremely beautiful! The actors face is a little hard to look at but he pretty chiseled. His style was very cool, not so much his clothing, but his wordplay and attitude.

There are so many lines in the film to love. I think the film is much more style than substance. I feel that is supposed to be the this way. On the whole, I enjoyed the style and wittiness of the film.

Sometimes a film can be light and cool and that is enough. I would love to see a films like these.

An interesting link on Godard's perspective on this film.

http://www.newwavefilm.com/french-new-wave-encyclopedia/breathless.shtml