mystery meat wrote:filmstruck is sick. i know the social media person, she's awesome. i wish them the best. also i write for their tumblr so am biased.
say whats up to the philes for me
mystery meat wrote:filmstruck is sick. i know the social media person, she's awesome. i wish them the best. also i write for their tumblr so am biased.
yeaaaaaaaaaaaa american nostalgia love it suburban living civilized families this could be my life
Buddy Glass wrote:New Godard short on Notre-Dame-des-Landes, ZAD and capitalism:
Sort of a spiritual sequel to Je vous salue, Sarajevo.
dcm wrote:quilty wrote:whereas brody conceals a major (humiliating) encounter with godard
what's this?
A decisive moment in the writing of Everything Is Cinema was the interview Brody planned to do with Godard for a profile he published in The New Yorker in 2000, which took him to Godard’s office in Rolle, Switzerland. The beginning of their first exchange was touching—or sinister, seen in retrospect: Godard showed Brody a New Yorker cartoon of a unicorn sitting behind a desk, as he was doing at that moment, with the caption: “These rumors of my non-existence are making it very difficult for me to obtain financing.” After that the interview proceeded swimmingly, continuing over dinner at Brody’s hotel, but when he went back to the office the next day he found a note stating that “Godard could not continue the interview because ‘it was not a real discussion and was ‘flou’ (out of focus, vague) but he wished me a better ‘game’ [an allusion to tennis, a sport Godard enjoys—there’s that stiletto] with people I’d be seeing in Paris.”
There’s nothing particularly secret about this incident, which is described in Brody’s article, “An Exile in Paradise,” as is the ghastly dinner he ate at his hotel that night with Godard and his wife, Anne-Marie Miéville, eating at another table and pointedly ignoring him, after a chillingly polite “bon soir” and “bon voyage” from Godard. It must have been a very painful experience, but Brody omits any mention of it in the biography, instead profusely thanking Godard for his time in the acknowledgments. Am I somehow insinuating that Brody’s book, with that one really bad thread, is some kind of patricidal passive-aggressive revenge on the author’s part? Yes I am, although I wasn’t sure until I reached the last page.
Buddy Glass wrote:MacCabe definitely wins on overall coherence, but I didn't like the way he kind of just skims past the 90s films and plays it off as like "He kept making films, but the real focus of his endeavors during this period was the Histoire(s)..." Whereas Brody discusses many more of the lesser known/seen works (Grandeur et Décadence, Le rapport Darty, Les Enfants jouent à la Russie, etc) and, forced biographical readings aside, still has a lot of valuable things to say derived from his interviews with crew members and so on from that period. There's just stuff in there I've never seen anywhere else so I like it for that reason, even if his overall project is pretty vile.
Buddy Glass wrote:So... who knows! For now I accept it's fake but there still seems to be some larger explanation missing as to how it was created in the first place.
broodstar wrote:nicole brenez edited le livre d'image??
Users browsing this forum: 31GeeWhizz ☑️, Albatross, Autarch, barbara_h, Beanbag America, Brother Kenny, Christmas Ape, creedence tapes, Cronos, Double McDouble, Eyeball Kid, Google [Bot], hbb, Ill-Advised Webinar, Jaboticaba, jca, jewels, Kuma, Littlelulusfanclub, mariko-juku, mcwop23, mystery meat, papi chulo, Peter Criss, pink snake, Repo, rich uncle skeleton, ruiner, scurrydog, shizaam, Shotfrog, trampoline, uncledoj, Urek, velvet anus, wakeman, Woke Mind Virus and 277 guests