59th Cannes Film Festival

Message

Antoine Doinel · #101 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Wed May 24, 2006 1:57 pm

And a second thing, you're not discussing the actual criticisms of the film which largely aren't tied into the Bresson comparisons.

Anonymous · #102 Post by **Anonymous** » Wed May 24, 2006 3:00 pm

hmm. no: 1 was that the film lacks the 'spiritual journey' of a Bresson film, which I have already addressed. no: 2 was that Dumont has no interest in his character's interior lives: even a cursory glance at a Dumont film (or interview) will tell you that his characters are earthy creatures, they don't think, they act and they experience, this is a directorial choice, a stylisation. no:3 is something vague about 'recycled gestures': well sure, a clear line can be drawn between Dumont's first three films and presumably his fourth - let's condemn every other distinctive European director of the past 100 years whilst we're at it. if that's what constitutes 'serious analysis' i'm out of here...

Noir of the Night · #103 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Wed May 24, 2006 3:03 pm

No, you didn't really address the spirituality of Bresson. You named one movie that doesn't involve a spiritual journey, which doesn't really change the fact that there are spiritual journeys in various other of his films. How can you say that the man who made Au Hasard Balthazar isn't a spiritual filmmaker?

Anonymous · #104 Post by **Anonymous** » Wed May 24, 2006 4:38 pm

I guess I'm the second person to wonder if anyone is carrying the closing ceremonies on US TV. Anyone know...? I guess I'll have to rely on the web to tell me about the prizewinners.

Anonymous · #105 Post by **Anonymous** » Wed May 24, 2006 7:13 pm

this is the point at which I start to swear. Since when was "spirituality" a prerequisite of good filmmaking? Dumont 'lacks spirituality'... Is this the Orthodox Christian DVD forum? Besides, it's highly debatable whether there are 'spiritual journeys' in Bresson's films from Au Hasard Balthazar onwards. These films seem more symptomatic of someone who is losing / has lost their faith (and are no worse for it).

GringoTex · #106 Post by **GringoTex** » Wed May 24, 2006 8:42 pm

ugetsu wrote: this is the point at which I start to swear. Since when was "spirituality" a prerequisite of good filmmaking? Dumont 'lacks spirituality'... Is this the Orthodox Christian DVD forum?

Nobody has said this. You're inventing strawmen to piss on.

ugetsu wrote: Besides, it's highly debatable whether there are 'spiritual journeys' in Bresson's films from Au Hasard Balthazar onwards. These films seem more symptomatic of someone who is losing / has lost their faith (and are no worse for it).

It is not highly debatable whether there are spiritual journeys in Bresson's films from Balthazar onwards. This is a laughable conceit that completely ignores the textuality of the films. Of course, we can argue to what degree Bresson's models find grace at the end of their spiritual journey in the later films, but the leap of faith some viewers take in trying to paste the "athiest tag" on Bresson is a shallow attempt at self-identification.

John Cope · #107 Post by **John Cope** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:19 am

Langlois68 wrote: It is not highly debatable whether there are spiritual journeys in Bresson's films from Balthazar onwards. This is a laughable conceit that completely ignores the textuality of the films. Of course, we can argue to what degree Bresson's models find grace at the end of their spiritual journey in the later films, but the leap of faith some viewers take in trying to paste the "athiest tag" on Bresson is a shallow attempt at self-identification.

Yes. Dead on. I didn't want to contribute further to a thread that's already gone off the rails but I had to add this in regards to late Bresson: I can see why some would want to view the films as suggesting a move away from faith but my question is always the same; why does the kind of deep probing and consideration on display in these films automatically presume an implicit renunciation of faith? In fact, shouldn't the most thorough and exhaustive relationship with any belief system be one that is driven by doubts and an unwillingness to settle into absolute proclamations of understanding and knowledge? Isn't that real wisdom? Is it incommensurate with a life based on religious faith or is it, in fact, intrinsic to it and, at its greatest depths, inextricable from it?

Anonymous · #108 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 7:16 am

Langlois68 wrote:Nobody has said this

NYTimes: "His Bressonian aspirations are evident... Unlike Mr. Bresson, however, Mr. Dumont seems uninterested in spiritual journeys" (and this comment is clearly intended as a criticism).

Langlois68 wrote: It is not highly debatable whether there are spiritual journeys in Bresson's films from Balthazar onwards.

Well we seem to be debating. For me, there is a clear distinction between the journey towards grace presented in Country Priest and the pessimistic deconstruction of human behaviour in L'Argent. The characters in L'Argent are not seeking enlightenment, redemption or meaning. There is never any question of them attaining grace. These are selfish, hollow people, easily corrupted by money. There is a moralism in the film, for sure, but this might just as easily be marxist as Catholic.

I respect Mr. Cope's identification with the work, just as I would expect him to respect my own. And I am not necessarily assuming that Bresson renounced his faith - a question which is ultimately irrelevent. From Balthazar onwards, Bresson is engaging with earthly concerns, the world in all its cruelty, randomness and horror - and he is not presumptious enough to draw conclusions. For you, Balthazar is jesus. For myself, he is just a donkey - and the film allows both interpretations. This is simply a mark of the quality of Bresson's filmmaking.

Noir of the Night · #109 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Thu May 25, 2006 10:10 am

ugetsu wrote:NYTimes: "His Bressonian aspirations are evident... Unlike Mr. Bresson, however, Mr. Dumont seems uninterested in spiritual journeys" (and this comment is clearly intended as a criticism).

The fact that someone posted a criticism from Dargis doesn't necessarily mean they completely agree with every word. In addition, for a self-professed devotee of Bresson, you seem to have a limited comprehension of one of the most essential components of his work. Yes, Balthazar isn't, without a doubt, a Christ figure, but to argue against the spirituality of Bresson's films would be tantamount to denying the alienation present in Antonioni's work.

Well we seem to be debating.

No. You don't argue with people, you argue at them.

Anonymous · #110 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:11 pm

ok, so Bresson = spirituality, Antonioni = alienation... What pat reductionism shall we come up with next? Renoir = humanism? Fellini = orgies?

I'm not denying the biblical symbolism in Balthazar. Perhaps there is a religious parable there for those who want it. For the rest of us, there is "life in 90 minutes" as Godard put it. The donkey does not turn water into wine. The donkey is not reborn. The donkey does not transcend - it lives, it suffers and it dies.

Noir of the Night · #111 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:24 pm

Excuse, I never even suggested that it was that simplistic. I'm not saying Bresson= spirituality, or Antonioni=alienation. What I'm saying is that these themes are significant aspects of the respective auteurs' bodies of work. I'm not trying to claim that Balthazar can't be seen as a non-spiritual movie. My point is that, regardless of your view of his films, spirituality is, at least in my opinion and the opinion of others, one of the integral parts of Bresson's art.

Anonymous · #112 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:46 pm

All I'm saying is that it is possible to appreciate Bresson's mid-to-late work outside of any religious conviction. This is a close-minded view perpetuated by Schrader's book, which only takes account of his work up to Pickpocket.

Contrast the later work to Les Anges du Peche, Diary of a Country Priest. Or Ordet or Nostalghia... Of course, these are great films, appreciable on many levels. But, ultimately, if you don't believe... there is going to be a veil there, a hardcore athiest may have trouble fully connecting on an emotional level.

Yet, even by A Man Escaped Bresson is keeping his work open. He could have introduced the shadow of a cross at the moment of Fontaines escape... yet he opts not to do so. The film can be seen in terms of grace, religious belief, transcendence... or it can be equally appreciated as a tale of human belief, endeavour and endurance. I do not believe he wishes to deny the viewer either interpretation.

Anonymous · #113 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 3:04 pm

p.s. sidetracking even further but -

John Cope wrote:In fact, shouldn't the most thorough and exhaustive relationship with any belief system be one that is driven by doubts and an unwillingness to settle into absolute proclamations of understanding and knowledge? Isn't that real wisdom?

Religion is, by it's nature, absolutist. You cannot probe or question the metaphysical - either you Believe or you don't. Wisdom certainly doesn't enter into it.

Antoine Doinel · #114 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Thu May 25, 2006 3:12 pm

ugetsu wrote:p.s. sidetracking even further but -

John Cope wrote:In fact, shouldn't the most thorough and exhaustive relationship with any belief system be one that is driven by doubts and an unwillingness to settle into absolute proclamations of understanding and knowledge? Isn't that real wisdom?
Religion is, by it's nature, absolutist. You cannot probe or question the metaphysical - either you Believe or you don't. Wisdom certainly doesn't enter into it.

Says you.

For many - preachers, leaders and followers alike - religion is as much a search for truth as it is for the metaphysical or spiritual. You say wisdom doesn't enter into probably because you yourself don't much stock in the ephemeral. And that's fine. But for many people around the world, their religion is the most intelligent and profound thing that informs every aspect of their life. To question it or try to find a deeper understanding is one of the most fundamental parts of human nature.

John Cope · #115 Post by **John Cope** » Thu May 25, 2006 3:35 pm

ugetsu wrote: Religion is, by it's nature, absolutist.

With all due respect, I disagree. Religious dogma is absolute and has to be as it is a methodology, a philosophical system and a discipline meant to act as a way into a greater engagement with its subject but none of this is an end unto itself.

ugetsu wrote: You cannot probe or question the metaphysical - either you Believe or you don't. Wisdom certainly doesn't enter into it.

Well, yes, you either believe it is worthwhile to consider those premises or you do not but once you decide that you are by no means done. To think that you are reflects an unfortunate modern understanding of religious experience. Metaphysical systems and ideas are not locked down, they are as expansive as our engagement with them.

Anyway, to go back to Bresson for a moment--as has been said already one reason for his greatness is the equally viable and defensible positions one can take to his work. His increased focus on the corporeal is similar to what I value in Tarkovsky but it is far more willfully detached from the specificity of a spiritual reading. You are absolutely right; it is not inherently necessary. Just the same as I am able to get much from, say, the work of Cronenberg even though I do not share his underlying philosophy--his interest in transformation and development and infinite potentiality matches my own and holds great value.

My main point was that to dismiss the spiritual angle from Bresson because it became harder to clearly distinguish in a milieu which is heavily material is as reductive as to say that it is the only way in.

Anonymous · #116 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 3:48 pm

Antoine -

but the metaphysical is, by its very nature, intangiable. how can you measure or investigate something which isn't there? how can you evaluate the truth of something you have never experienced? how can ancient documents written by human hands hold such metaphysical properties? how can there be any 'truth' in the bible when it was completely re-written by St. Paul? If we all still believed that the world was flat would it be flat or round? religion is a man-made conceit, not a fundamental part of human nature but a means of exerting power. many people will believe anything if it gives their life some meaning, however this is really not a productive way to advance the species... and now we are truly off-topic.

Anonymous · #117 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 3:54 pm

John -

John Cope wrote: to dismiss the spiritual angle from Bresson because it became harder to clearly distinguish in a milieu which is heavily material is as reductive as to say that it is the only way in.

Agreed. Although I do not quite agree with the Cronenberg comparison - Cronenberg is straightforwardly an atheist whereas Bresson's later work is genuienly ambiguous.

...

If religious belief is not absolute could you please answer two questions:
- Does God exist or not?
- is it acceptable to murder other human beings for profit?

Antoine Doinel · #118 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Thu May 25, 2006 4:03 pm

ugetsu wrote:Antoine -
religion is a man-made conceit, not a fundamental part of human nature but a means of exerting power. many people will believe anything if it gives their life some meaning, however this is really not a productive way to advance the species... and now we are truly off-topic.

Ah, but that is what you believe. For many others, the mere fact that we are breathing air and standing on Earth is proof of God's existence and the Bible is God's word passed on directly to man. But yes, we are off topic and we can back and forth for pages debating what the essence of true religion is.

Back to Cannes.....predictions on the Palme D'Or?

Anonymous · #119 Post by **Anonymous** » Thu May 25, 2006 4:13 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote:Ah, but that is what you believe. For many others, the mere fact that we are breathing air and standing on Earth is proof of God's existence and the Bible is God's word passed on directly to man.

Well, at least they'll be too dead to be disappointed

Antoine Doinel wrote:Back to Cannes.....predictions on the Palme D'Or?

I'm predicting Flandres.

franco · #120 Post by **franco** » Thu May 25, 2006 6:03 pm

Sorrentino's L'Amico di Famiglia is pretty strong as well. The bottom line is that all of them deserve recognition, but the award will probably go to the most edifying one.

Noir of the Night · #121 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Thu May 25, 2006 6:33 pm

ugetsu wrote:All I'm saying is that it is possible to appreciate Bresson's mid-to-late work outside of any religious conviction. This is a close-minded view perpetuated by Schrader's book, which only takes account of his work up to Pickpocket.

I agree, but I think it's also possible to appreciate The Crucible without being cognizant of the McCarthism aspect, but that part of it is still significant.

Anyways, enough of this. For now I predict victory for Volver. Wong Kar Wai is a fan of Almodovar and he still hasn't won the Palmes D'Or. That, and the popularity of the movie suggest that it will go home with the award.

The other categories are a little harder to predict. I expect a writing or directing award for Babel, and Red Road will probably get the Camera D'Or.

The Fanciful Norwegian · #122 Post by **The Fanciful Norwegian** » Thu May 25, 2006 11:02 pm

I'd rule out Babel for the scenario prize simply because Arriaga won it last year for The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada. Stranger things have happened, though...

Zumpano · #123 Post by **Zumpano** » Fri May 26, 2006 10:47 am

Are the closing ceremonies being broadcast in America? I don't see it listed on Sundance Channel or on IFC/Bravo (don't they usually show it?). Anyone know something I don't?

HerrSchreck · #124 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Fri May 26, 2006 12:13 pm

The last two pages or so clearly must qualify for some kind of award or something. You know like (Bell ding at a certain post), (slide whistle), (confetti & balloons fall, ugetsu starts jumping up & down & clapping) , then voice over announcer, Congratulations, free rubber plant etc!

HerrSchreck · #125 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Fri May 26, 2006 12:27 pm

davidhare wrote:As one with no "faith" who loves most of Bresson I want to ask other posters:

what do you make of Laydu's struggle in Cure de Campagne?

I'd like to answer this. For me, agnostic at best, or religious without a relgion, the film functions as a very functional and universally applicable metaphor for any man (or woman) who remains committed to any idea in a plastic world. A perfectionist criminal could find utility in that film by identifying with a man who feels alone & discloated in a crumbling world: "Fucking heist men nowadays got no class to them, will shoot anyone if they sneeze. I'm the only bastard didn't just crawl outa the toilet."

I think a straight-on-down-the-line-with-his-principles guy like Malcom X could relate. But since this quality of sticking to your principles, and experiencing crises of life-worthiness as result because of loneliness & isolation via your scruples, are matters of the spirit, I do see this as a relevant, non-religious picture that happens to be about a religious subject. It's more of a spiritual matter.