Le Redoutable (Michel Hazanavicius, 2017)

Discuss films of the 21st century including current cinema, current filmmakers, and film festivals.
Message
Author
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28723
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Le Redoutable (Michel Hazanavicius, 2017)

#51 Post by domino harvey » Tue May 15, 2018 1:01 pm

whaleallright wrote:this
Hazanavicius has the right to his tastes, but I get the vague sense that the film, or at least its admirers, are using the portrayal of Godard as a means of validating their dismissal of his body of post-1960s work.
is not the same as
the insistence that a fan of this film must align oneself against Godard's later period incorrect.
(emphasis mine)
I recognize that there's rhetorical value in lowering the target.
Well, what you said is: If you are a fan of this film, it is evidence of validating a lesser opinion of Godard's later work. So, if you want to base your defense on one word, consider that you didn't say "some" or even "most" admirers of this film, thus "must" is apt

I'm not sure why you are even going so hard on this, considering you haven't seen the movie and yet feel comfortable casting aspersions on it and its audience regardless

User avatar
whaleallright
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:56 am

Re: Le Redoutable (Michel Hazanavicius, 2017)

#52 Post by whaleallright » Tue May 15, 2018 6:54 pm

Not really going hard, just feel that you often offer uncharitable readings of other people's arguments here, and I got a little annoyed about it. I wasn't casting aspersions so much as drawing on some of the reviews (amateur and professional) I've read about the film. The guy/gal who posted above me clearly has some critical distance toward the film's understanding of Godard and his work, while still enjoying the film (perhaps with some irony in there), and you seem much the same, so I wouldn't presume anything of /all/ or even /most/ of its fans. But there does seem to be an element of philistinism in what the director has said about Godard, the view the film seems (emphasis on "seems," since I haven't seen it) to be taking of his work, and what at least some folks are drawing from it. (That kind of gives me the same vibe as that awful "eat your vegetables cinema" thinkpiece from a few years back, in which the author simply couldn't imagine anyone but pretentious phonies enjoying Hou Hsiao-Hsien or whatever.) That's all. /finis



Post Reply