jean luc godard’s ‘two or three things i know about her… ’ will piss people off, and that’s a big reason why i like it. if you’re expecting a film with an easy-to-follow narrative, this isn’t for you. but if graphic art & design plus signage interest you, as it does me, this is a wonderful film to experience, especially since projected film is a moving giant-sized billboard. i am not certain if ferracci’s poster art (included above) originally accompanied the film’s 1967 release. but it really captures the look, spirit and mood of the film—a time capsule of the mid-1960s pop culture and consumerism. plus it is a well-executed piece of graphic art, which conveys the film’s form and content by showing it through text and image but not literally spelling it out by saying so. godard presents many revelvant themes, topics and concerns of his day that are apropos for us now because we still have not fully reconciled these issues. a couple of godard’s concerns are the u.s. invasion and occupation of vietnam, the parallel modernization of paris’ city structures & the newfound ideals of young parisien women, the rampant rise of signage for new commercial advertising and business & consumer products (which are an affliction of post-modernity), women’s artificial need to satiate her desire for friviolous goods such as fashion, which forces women to prostitute themselves to earn money obtaining it, and language not being an accurate form of communication between men and women. in addition, the film is profound in its way to showcase the beauty of graphic design & typography surrounding our daily lives but also indict it for being crass in its presence everywhere.raoul coutard’s excellent widescreen cinematography along with his deftly composed macrocinematography of line art and typography and of all things, the swirling bubbles in a cup of coffee suggest the cosmic grandness of the mundane. in addition, the colors punctuate the visuals and the sound design amplifies godard’s ideas as seen through the characters’ action and the ambient background noise. i always felt i needed more life experience to comphrehend godard, and after seeing this film, i might have just enough to appreciate him now. a film is what it is and should be read that way, not what we want it to be by projecting upon it our desires of it being primarily a narrative vehicle. cinema can also be thought of as a spectacle of imagery and its creators’ worldview rather than just cause and effect plotline. so, the sooner you let go of your expectation for a conventional story, the sooner you will enter godard’s film not feeling alienated and appreciate the beauty of the film’s imagery and attitudes.
1 comment:
ive always wanted to see this film, simply for the wonderful title. but after reading this, its imperative that i do so. superb post.
as far as answering the title of your post, i bet david lynch has the best answer to that question!
Post a Comment