MovieChat Forums > Bande à part (1964) Discussion > Pretentious crap

Pretentious crap

posted 14 years ago by Finnish
11 replies | jump to latest

Now I understand why Ingmar Bergman hated Godard's work. I would say this film only appeals to film snobs who don't really love films, but instead love being a snob.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Finnish 14 years ago

Case in point, right there above.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ThreeSadTigers 14 years ago

I think he/she is implying that any movie to inspire thought or consideration on the role of cinema/drama/art/storytelling/etc is pretentious, and therefore we can infer from their attitude that a movie should only be consumed, as a piece of mass-product (like toilet paper), and then forgotten about.

Which makes it strange that he/she is using Bergman as a go-to guide to "self-important cinema", since Bergman films, despite their obvious quality, certainly inspire just as much (often meaningless) discussion relating to pretty much the same concerns as Godard's.

It's also common knowledge that Bergman only insulted Godard because he couldn't take a joke. He was still quick to appropriate the Brechtian techniques favoured by Godard for his own work though, so he must have seen something that was worth responding to.

[–] DukeTogo1300 14 years ago

He can't.

----------------
My favorites:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur7568922/lists

[–] ThreeSadTigers 14 years ago

How so? I mean, what's pretentious about it?

[–] Agent-69 14 years ago

Pretentious????

"Let's hear you call Boris Karloff a c_ocksucker."

[–] AfterwardDeified 14 years ago

How funny that this is one of the least pretentious Godard's I've seen. See Pierrot le Fou and come talk to me then (although the film grew on me in the days that followed watching it). Masculin/Feminin. Alphaville (started off well before falling apart in the second half). Le Mepris might be the OP's best bet.

[–] nimstic 8 years ago

I totally agree. This was such a fun film. Watched it all in one sitting. I loved the scenes with the silence, the lightening tour of the Louvre, the shootout act, the hotel guest story... oh so many entertaining sequences. I enjoyed every bit of this film. Ana Karina was so beautiful and spectacular here too. Definitely one of the best films I've seen. It had a very simple plot. Down to earth setting as well. I think people enjoy 'disagreeing' especially when they see an artist is revered a lot while he has evidently (and understandably) created some average works too (like Masculin Feminin as you've mentioned which I did not like). Not a reason to call this "pretentious"

[–] O'Malley 13 years ago

Jeez, Bergman is the definition of Pretentious Crap. But more than that, Artless Pretentious Crap, where every thing is spelled out, every character talks, ponderously and endlessly, about his or her personal angst. In Godard's films, actions = character, in Bergman's verbose self-analyzing = character. Godard should wear it as a badge of honor that Bergman hated him. Ingmar hated Welles, too, and any 10 minutes of The Magnificent Ambersons or Godard's Weekend are of more artistic value than Bergman's entire oeuvre. Plus, Godard is playful, fun and, unlike the lugubrious Swede, knows film language.

[–] montana_2003 8 years ago

I preffer truffaut or malle