I've got to agree with the OP on this one.
In my time I've sat through most of the works of Tarkovsky, Antonioni, Monte Hellman, Kiarostami, Gallo, Jarmusch, Bresson, Resnais and Rivette (including the 4-hour "Belle Noiseuse") and been variously enthralled, entranced or at least interested.
But this "Amants Reguliers" was unutterably tedious. How can you make a film about revolution and sexual liberation and have it turn out so boring? Even the riot scenes were dull. Being able to frame a beautiful image is just not enough sometimes.
I don't think it's down to my failing to understand the movie either - it's an old man's movie about regret, lost ideals, the failure of the 68 vision, relating les evenements to the history of France generally, encompassing debates about the relationship of art to commerce, idealism and pragmatism, sex and love. But Godard did all that stuff already (in Sauve Qui Peut for example), and much better.
I did get the impression that a lot of the images were very personal to Garrel, presumably autobiographical, and I assume the film means a lot to him; however the idea that if you tell your own story honestly enough you will connect with the audience seems to be disproved by this movie.
Bush Logic:- Killing American embryos - murder. Killing Arab civilians - business as usual.
reply
share
martyr013
16 years ago
i'm not going to judge the movie, because i'm not familiar with the nouvelle vague genre that it is operating in, but i do have to admit that it was a long three hours. in defense of the riot scene, i think it was deliberately boring in order to show the chaos and pointlessness of it all. while watching it, i was thinking, what the hell do these people think they are going to accomplish? it feels futile and contrived, and unlike most period pieces driven by youth oriented idealism, i never once envied any of the characters. this revolution did not look fun.
reply
share
artihcus022
15 years ago
i'm not going to judge the movie, because i'm not familiar with the nouvelle vague genre that it is operating in,
There is no such thing as a "nouvelle-vague" genre. However Mr. Garrel admitted that his film subscribed to a film policy, the one that believed that L'Atalante was the most beautiful film in the world.
but i do have to admit that it was a long three hours.
And it needs that length.
while watching it, i was thinking, what the hell do these people think they are going to accomplish? it feels futile and contrived, and unlike most period pieces driven by youth oriented idealism, i never once envied any of the characters.
And these characters don't ask you to envy them or do anything either unlike conventional period pieces about the 60s. The film is about how people lived in that period.
In any case your point about thinking it feels futile and contrived is precisely what was so incredible about that period, they didn't know what they were doing or where they were going but did it regardless.(As the Kinks song goes, "This Time Tomorrow/What will we be/On a Spaceship somewhere/Flying over the empty sea")
"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes
reply
share