I have no clue what the heck this was about it was nasty i dont know why and it was a bore. Whats with the 5min lectures every character has like 5mins of blah blah blah. The commercial with the ladies and stockings was unnessisary.The whole damn movie was unnessisary I wish I could get that hour and a half of my life back.Im old enough to understand(14) but it was downright stupid and I hope noone ever has to see it EVER.
shareOP is a troll
/thread
One thing I think the original poster may be missing (possibly due to his age) is the underlying message in the film. It was of course about the relationship between Jacques and Suzanne, but it was also about looking back at May 1968 four years later. Everything that was fought for and brought such hope to the workers and the youth in France had never really come to fruition. It was a film that pointed the finger not just at the bougeausie, but also those who had taken part in May 1968 for not following through with the momentum they had built. Him and Her personified this idea as two people who fell in love during those adventurous times, but couldn't sustain those feelings because they simply tried to incorporate each other back into their status quo lives.
shareLook im only 15, and i personaly loved the film. If you can not understand the various political and philosophical views displayed in this film then fine, but that is due to your own ignorance NOT the films alleged in-superiority.
shareIf you only saw this film because of your fascination for Jane Fonda then yes, I guess it might seem boring to you, but it also makes your opinion of the film quite hollow and useless.
shareThis became a very interesting thread about this film - thanks to the boldness of a 14-year-old expressing his opinion.
My turn to disagree that this film would not please those who went to see it just for their fascination for Jane Fonda. I didn't go to see this film for her, but I was gratified with the best cinematographic treatment of her face and those lovely eyes that I can recall! Lovely, lovely, lovely!
Of course the beauty of the film as a whole demands more of the viewer. To notice the conspicuous excess of pig's blood on the aprons of all the workers in an industrial environment that is otherwise so clean... You'll then notice the reappearance of blood on the head and chest of the highschool student killed in a factory where he had joined the striking workers... (near the end scene) killed by 'pigs' (the infamous CRS - Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité, all dressed in black).
Details like this are numerous, and Godard always did elaborate films to force the viewer to think. «To think about what?» asks Jacques. «Us,» answers his wife Susan that he calls à la Française, Suzanne.
For those of us who have been engrossed in a trade union, a social movement, or a political party, from the mid-1960s «flower power» to the mid of the present decade's «sustainable development», particularly during the turmoil years of 1968-1972 in France, and 1973-1976 in Portugal (the cases that I know by personal experience), and the subsequent disilusion of the ideals of that epoch, have no great difficulty in relating with Godard in this movie.
(BTW, to those in this thread that have shown less respect for grammar, and spelling, be warned. It's the clarity of speaking and writing a language that differentiates us humans from otherwise very intelligent animals of other species. All the mistakes I've done in this message are due to haste, and ignorance. English is my third language, and I apologize.)
You know I don't think it's about age. This movie really is a difficult film, and considering the amount of deliberate alienation going on, I can understand anyone not liking it. I personally wasn't a huge fan which is too bad because I have liked Godard's stuff before. And it's a personal thing, I understand that by distancing us emotionally these sort of techniques are supposed to make us think critically, but with anything remotely Brecht inspired it's always the humour or untintended emotional connections that get me. This didn't really connect with me though I can't fault Godard on a technical level.
I guess my point is really that I don't think this film is one of those movies you *have* to like unless you don't know anything about film. I really couldn't imagine it *not* being divisive.
Very intelligent.
You can't be taken seriously with the title and your raping of the English language.
[deleted]
Now, this is the kind of response to this movie I was expecting coming here - actually made me laugh upon discovery. Funnier yet is that the kid is pretty much kind of right about it - it´s just another occasion of a confused political activist JLG giving France´s sociopolitical state of affairs circa 1970 a good, dull-as-sh-t mumble while failing to think of a remotely artistically engaging form to wrap his speechmaking in. It´s indeed a totally uncinematic, unimaginative film as the only way JLG knows how to present his moan, is in the form of one endless, tiresome, largely witless monologue after another, with a few bouts of banal dialogue on inane topics thrown in the mix - the dialogues being, of course, occasionally peppered with the oh-so-rad and "subversive" instances of characters breaking the fourth wall to directly address the camera. Apparently, this film is JLG´s idea of a satire, but just like Alphaville before it, it´s mostly witless, stale and definitely not funny at any point. Despite the potentially intriguiging, and hilarious, set-up at the start, nothing much is made of the situation (it´s actually a rather Bunuel´esque - or is it Bunuel´ian? Now, now... - both in terms of the grotesque situation involved as well as the general concern of giving them bourgeois a good ragging, but this stuff should really be left to the Spaniard. Not that his polemic was always that rousing a success, either, but at least he usually had a passable sense of humor and knew his way around absurdity). The poor author himself, of course, is seemingly of an opinion that he´s up to some real deep stuff here, plumbing the intellectual depths as it were, so he sees fit to crank the pretention button also up to the max by announcing His Coming with flashing the French tricolor colors up front and ending the show with the young proletariat repeatedly chanting "me", "you", "France", "1972" etc. One Great Man of his time, this JLG, aye?
So, yeah, another instance of JLG wasting 1,5 hours to say nothing of great insight and doing it in a highly unskillful, mechanical, tedious manner. Give it a 3/10 - which means it´s not quite as supernaturally godawful as that 2 Or 3 Things film from 1967 was. But my, can this guy ever be overrated...
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Yes, you are perceptive. This is drivel. You don't need to be thirty or forty to realize this is a boring, pedantic stroke fest. If you don't like five-minute, rambling monolouges about union salaries or the artistic and moral responsibilites of leftist film directors, definitely don't watch Weekend.
share