What was with the film negative shots? - Alphaville: Une étrange aventure de Lemmy Caution (1965) Discussion

[–] ClydeBickle 20 years ago

Maybe the negative shots add to the idea that Alphaville is so intertwined with the Alpha 60 that the city itself is a living computer, and as the inhabitants malfunction and die, so does the city itself. . . or maybe he just thought it looked cool.

"I'm just making this up as I go along." Indiana Jones - Raiders of the Lost Ark

reply

[–] jonschaper 19 years ago

For the same reason he used shots of actors in still poses during the fight scene. For the same reason he had Lemmy get to the moon by driving his car through a tunnel. He was experimenting with film conventions in a movie that plays around with genres. In other words meaningless pretention, but a fun, cool looking sort of meaningless pretention.

reply

[–] donwithnoname 19 years ago

That may be the best explanation of this, or any, film ever... I'm serious when I say that- people forget that even the most pretentious autuers in the world may want to do something just becuase it looks cool...

reply

[–] ClydeBickle 19 years ago

I have a friend who looks for the 'meaning' in everything. He was very confused by Alphaville, but loves Repo Man, and if you ask me Repo Man's crazy visuals probably don't hold a deeper meaning either. I just don't understand some people. . .

"Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!"

reply

[–] Hugh Sullivan 19 years ago

I don't know if this is true, but I read about this in an interview. He said that it was the last scene to be filmed, and that he had ran out of money. They didn't have lights, so after they filmed it he asked them to turn it negative so you couln't see how badly lit it was.

reply

[–] jonschaper 19 years ago

LOL That reminds me of Picasso and his "Blue Period". Art critics thought it was because he was going through a state of depression, so Picasso eventually came out and explained that it was nothing more than the fact that he had run out of money and was stuck with a lot of blue paint.

reply

[–] von_braun 19 years ago

All the economic issues aside I still think it expands on the idea of in alphaville right is wrong, yes is no, and black is white. When Natacha Von Braun
Says yes, she shakes her head, and when she says no she nods. Maybe she is trying to elude to alphavilles wierd logic. So showing the negative is another way of showing that black is white and white is black, everything is backwards.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thecomedyoferror 19 years ago

Godard is naturally an artistic witty guy. Honestly i can tell you that Godard is a director with stories that have meaning watch some of his other movies, Breathless, passion, ect. You will understand what im saying. Some people say he is just weird for effect, but experimental is what is needed in todays society, there i way to much cgi *beep* going around. Same with music, well im a mix between linkin park and limp bizkit...? Come on, originality will be the birth of genius.

reply

[–] antoniomt_2000 19 years ago

Even though the negative shots were in the film and some poeple think that this was a cool thing jean luc did, some people say that it just looked cool and some say there was some sort of expressionistic symbolism behind, one of the elements that occured to me was that this could be the Alpha60 malfunctioning (or at least glitches in the system).

-Anth

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Wisedog 19 years ago

It's also interesting to note that Lemmy is the only character in the film (I believe) who is dressed in shades of grey throughout. All others appear either in black or white, quite appropriately representative of the population of Alphaville, clean-cut, prescripted and neccessarily defined. Lemmy, as a human being, has depth and character, to contrast.

When the film goes to negative during the chaos sequence, Lemmy is the only one who can function. When the world is turned upside-down, Lemmy is still dressed in gray. The people of Alphaville, however, are rendered helpless.

Sincerely,
Your friendly neighborhood Wisedog

reply

[–] fergdeff 19 years ago

I love this stuff. You've hit the nail on the head Wisedog. Those clinically dressed white scientists are suddenly exposed and Natascha begins to look like an angel.
It seems to me (and perhaps this is obvious) that one of the things Godard loved most was the creation of effects which were deeply cinematic. That is, effects which search for the core of the medium, that blend of narrative, image and sound which can only be achieved through cinema. The negative sequences are a great example of this.
I wonder now if the negative sequences in Nosferatu were used to create a similar effect or sensation? It's been some years since I've seen it and can't quite remember.

reply

[–] citizen_conn 19 years ago

I loved the part where the scene goes negative and silent, then you just hear the crash of the cars and it goes back to normal... man that was great.

I also thought it was quite spooky when Natasha tells the story of the little man and he busts out laughing haha that was the only time he even broke a smile in the whole movie.

Dammit I had a question and now I cant remember... but anyway does anyone think that this might have been slight inspiration for George Orwell's 1984? I mean I know this sort of theme is used in many different movies, but, I don't know, the whole scene when she's describing love and they are all forbidden in the bedroom together and the whole big brother feeling in the movie, and everyone only taking direct orders without any sensitivity or feeling implied... Was I the only one reminded of Henry and Julia?

reply

[–] antoniomt_2000 19 years ago

Yes, Orwell's 1984 is most blatant and definately influenced this movie alot. You can see how the characters act unconventionally and the oppressive world that surrounds them.

-Anth

reply

[–] KGB-Greece-Patras 19 years ago

Interesting views everyone, I was a little puzzled by that negative effect as well, not on the basis of "what does the poet wanna say" - but because the moments the effects is used phenomenally seem irrelevant and not synchronized with the sequences or actions that takes place at the time... But maybe this very fact was also within the intensions of Godard - to puzzle the viewer.

And of course Orwell's 1984 is a huge influence in this film. Especially in the way that various feelings, emotions but also semantics have been changed. Some meanings and semantics have been banned and/or forgotten, as part of the computers plan of course....

aCCept me for what I am / or piss off!
extravaganza, extreme, weird, *beep* :)

reply

[–] HaraldNordgren 12 years ago

Wonderful post!

reply

[–] Heinsbergen 17 years ago

the thing with godard running out of money and not able to proper light the scene is not right, i think. the shifts from b/w to negative occur in the middle of scenes, during single takes and the b/w-stuff in those takes looks pretty properly lit so it'd be pretty weird if the reason was him not having the scenes lit well.

Where are you, Mount Everest? Give me some Everest.

reply

[–] Max_Planck 17 years ago

Okay, those negative shots...

If you're a film or drama student you might know what I mean by Godard's allegiance to Brechtian distanciation techniques and Epic Theatre. 'Nuff said.

And if you're not, well, in a nutshell...

For Godard, it's important that the audience does not simply consume the movie and "lose themselves in it" (as is traditionally the case), but is made actively aware that they are watching a movie. To this end, Godard was always drawing attention to the fact that YOU ARE WATCHING AN ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCT CALLED A "FILM", and so the negative shots, like many of Godard's techniques, are there to deliberately jolt you out of passive spectatorship.

The reason? Go to Wikipedia and look up Brecht or "epic theatre". Here follows an excerpt, and if you're interested then there's plenty more on the subject you can read on the interweb, I'm sure.

>>Epic theatre assumes that the purpose of a play, more than entertainment or the imitation of reality, is to present ideas and invites the audience to make judgments on them. Characters are not intended to mimic real people, but to represent opposing sides of an argument, archetypes, or stereotypes. The audience should always be aware that it is watching a play, and should remain at an emotional distance from the action; Brecht described this ideal as the Verfremdungseffekt - variously translated as "alienation effect", "Defamiliarization effect", or "estrangement effect". It is the opposite of the suspension of disbelief: "It is most important that one of the main features of the ordinary theatre should be excluded from [epic theatre]: the engendering of illusion."

(Hope that helps).

reply

[–] jameselliot-1 12 years ago

I agreed with the comments that it looked cool and also that it added a sci-fi touch to a film devoid of conventional sci-fi special effects in the same way the "freeze" positions of Lemmy fighting the guy at the end created a comic book panel effect to a kind of comic book movie.

reply