And that, monsieurs et madames, is how to discuss a film. Would like to have seen what came next in the conversation as Rohmer put forward views that Truffaut wasn't exactly happy with. Merci lachambreverte!
well, not by me! i think that if you refer to USA, no one knows much at all, period. but if you speak of film critics writing in french, he is not overlooked...my god he ws great. The Green Ray. The seasons. the last 3 he made as an old man....
Me watching this interview for about ten minutes in silent mode only by subtitles not recognising that the interviewer is Rohmer himself 😃 I was also wondering about how educated he must be by asking those questions well chosen with an own expertise. Now I understand. Truffaut seeming somehow shy like a little boy and aware of what he's going to answer next 🙃 What a beautiful conversation 🥰
Two incredible directors! Around mid 14 minutes in, they discuss how an excess of picturesque or aesthetic can destroy art until there's no art left (terrible paraphrasing on my part but you get the gist!) I'm not sure if I agree with them on this one, I'm wondering how others feel about picturesque quality in films and in all art forms?
agree completely, and a perfect example is the recent pretty film Roma in which he has these gorgeous long shots in the countryside that are beauty for its own sake and fail to make up for a facile story....there is another , an independent american filmaker whose name escapes me who makes beautifully photographed films that are quite shallow and all surface...One could see Bresson on the subject, whose each frame is a painting, and yet penetrates the psyche deeply....the aesthetic follows the art, does not substitute for it. as Rohmer puts it in his question toward the rear of that section of the discussion, is it the risk of artificiality?
@@PianoMeSasha are you thinking of Nicolas Winding Refn? Amuses me that in response to such criticisms he made The Neon Demon, a film about aesthetic fallacy and a gap between form/content, and yet the film is the same: just another bland, cliche narrative underneath a dazzling exigence.
Bizarre que ce que l'on vient de voir sur Jean Vigo vous fasse penser à la guerre, et laquelle ? Sinon dans le dernier métro, la 2ème guerre mondiale est la toile de fond de tout le film !
Truffaut's opinions about pre-WWII "commercial" French cinema are surprisingly uninformed, "Other than Renoir...Vigo was the first professional avant-garde filmmaker.."
I've just watched L'Atalante and found it really disappointing (just about to list it on ebay!!). One or two arresting moments admittedly and of course the fascinating Michel Simon make it watchable but it's FAR from being one of the greatest films of all time. All the other movies mentioned by Truffaut here TOWER over it.
I agree Dave, I'm always a bit surprised when people describe how great it is! When I watched it I kept feeling like, did I miss something?? So thank you for this comment, I'm glad to know there are others out there! To me it's not a bad film, it's just nowhere near as great as people seem to say it is
Each to their own, David, but you're wrong. Films can never be judged with a stopwatch like athletics, they either speak to you or leave you indifferent. Canons emerge, and shift, over time due to a broad consensus of informed and educated opinion. You might as well say that you find, let's say, Dickens disappointing and far from the greatest novelist of a time. That is your opinion but an enormous number of people will disagree with you.
The first time I watched it I didn't consider it as a great film. Fortunately I watched it again many years later and I realized that I was so wrong the first time. I don't have any idea if it's due to the fact that I knew more about cinema the second time (I mean that I had watched many more films) or if I was not in the proper state of mind the first time... I'm not saying that you're wrong, it's personal, but it's definitely worth a second chance.
And that, monsieurs et madames, is how to discuss a film. Would like to have seen what came next in the conversation as Rohmer put forward views that Truffaut wasn't exactly happy with. Merci lachambreverte!
Rohmer is one of the overlooked greats of cinema !!
well, not by me! i think that if you refer to USA, no one knows much at all, period. but if you speak of film critics writing in french, he is not overlooked...my god he ws great. The Green Ray. The seasons. the last 3 he made as an old man....
He does not say that the contact with reality can be found "in Antonioni" but "in Toni" (by Renoir).
french new wave of legendary two film directors. one off my favourite francis truffaut director.
Je t'aime, Francois💟🇫🇷🌻
J'adore, merci. 3 génies en même temps...
Me watching this interview for about ten minutes in silent mode only by subtitles not recognising that the interviewer is Rohmer himself 😃
I was also wondering about how educated he must be by asking those questions well chosen with an own expertise. Now I understand.
Truffaut seeming somehow shy like a little boy and aware of what he's going to answer next 🙃 What a beautiful conversation 🥰
Très intéressant ! Merci !
Two incredible directors! Around mid 14 minutes in, they discuss how an excess of picturesque or aesthetic can destroy art until there's no art left (terrible paraphrasing on my part but you get the gist!) I'm not sure if I agree with them on this one, I'm wondering how others feel about picturesque quality in films and in all art forms?
agree completely, and a perfect example is the recent pretty film Roma in which he has these gorgeous long shots in the countryside that are beauty for its own sake and fail to make up for a facile story....there is another , an independent american filmaker whose name escapes me who makes beautifully photographed films that are quite shallow and all surface...One could see Bresson on the subject, whose each frame is a painting, and yet penetrates the psyche deeply....the aesthetic follows the art, does not substitute for it. as Rohmer puts it in his question toward the rear of that section of the discussion, is it the risk of artificiality?
@@PianoMeSasha are you thinking of Nicolas Winding Refn? Amuses me that in response to such criticisms he made The Neon Demon, a film about aesthetic fallacy and a gap between form/content, and yet the film is the same: just another bland, cliche narrative underneath a dazzling exigence.
Wes Anderson seems a perfect example of "esthetics" at the expense of art.
Merci beaucoup pour ce partage !
Longtemps, que je ne l'avais pas revu. Merci
It took me some time to realize that Rohmer was... the interviewer!
L' Atalante - the best.
.. et maintenant, il doit voir L’Atalante encore une fois...en 2019!
etrange d ailleurs que Truffaut n
Devoir de mémoire où programmation mentale ?
Bizarre que ce que l'on vient de voir sur Jean Vigo vous fasse penser à la guerre, et laquelle ? Sinon dans le dernier métro, la 2ème guerre mondiale est la toile de fond de tout le film !
特吕弗很有思想。四百击太可了
Truffaut's opinions about pre-WWII "commercial" French cinema are surprisingly uninformed, "Other than Renoir...Vigo was the first professional avant-garde filmmaker.."
Can you expand?
I've just watched L'Atalante and found it really disappointing (just about to list it on ebay!!).
One or two arresting moments admittedly and of course the fascinating Michel Simon make it watchable but it's FAR from being one of the greatest films of all time. All the other movies mentioned by Truffaut here TOWER over it.
I agree Dave, I'm always a bit surprised when people describe how great it is! When I watched it I kept feeling like, did I miss something?? So thank you for this comment, I'm glad to know there are others out there! To me it's not a bad film, it's just nowhere near as great as people seem to say it is
Each to their own, David, but you're wrong. Films can never be judged with a stopwatch like athletics, they either speak to you or leave you indifferent. Canons emerge, and shift, over time due to a broad consensus of informed and educated opinion. You might as well say that you find, let's say, Dickens disappointing and far from the greatest novelist of a time. That is your opinion but an enormous number of people will disagree with you.
It was pretty fucking good in the 1930s mate
Masterpiece. Des questions?
The first time I watched it I didn't consider it as a great film. Fortunately I watched it again many years later and I realized that I was so wrong the first time. I don't have any idea if it's due to the fact that I knew more about cinema the second time (I mean that I had watched many more films) or if I was not in the proper state of mind the first time... I'm not saying that you're wrong, it's personal, but it's definitely worth a second chance.