hey, any chance this will be an iTunes feed in the future?

This is a boon for cine-goers. We’ll never see this happen in our part of the world. But till then, torrent will keep the hopes alive, so that someday we could watch this movie in a theater.

Erin: That's definitely in the works!

I like movies. I like watching movies. I like being challenged by movies. But I still don't like Godard's movies. So please, Armond, stop speaking in absolute terms.

It's obvious to me, and I think to quite a few other people, that Godard's films are dated. They were built to be dated. They were made so quickly, so haphazardly, and so very much about the times in which they were made, that there was never any outcome other than for them to become dated.

That said, to then compare what Godard was saying, as a filmmaker documenting the 1960's, to filmmakers like Fincher or Van Sant, both of whom are part of the culture in the '90s and zeros -- 40 years apart -- is untenable. Art is always a reflection of the times in which it was created.

In the '60s, Godard's films probably felt radical and liberating -- specifically because of what they stood in opposition to, not necessarily because of any lasting quality (and the '60s, as represented very obviously by The Beatles' progression, was a very fast-moving period). But today, that context no longer exists. The references are obscure and no longer have any urgency. Furthermore, if the ideas expressed were so important in the first place, wouldn't the messages have been more intriguing to more people than the 10 who actually went to see his films?

This is why although Godard's name invariably shows up on compiled top-10 lists of the greatest directors in history, none of his films ever make the cut.

You're welcome to dislike Godard, Mr. Millich, but you're speaking nonsense. Filmmakers from different generations can't be compared? Godard's films are wholly dated? If indeed only 10 people saw the films, catching on with a wider audience would be impossible (and thus, without distribution or easy access, the films can't be blamed for their supposed lack of influence). But the reality is that more than 10 people did see the films, and continue to see the films, and continue to influence (for better or worse) filmmakers as varied as Van Sant, Wong Kar Wai, the Wachowski's, Von Trier, and on. Also, references that are obscure to one man can be richly suggestive, or playful, or illuminating to another. And I've seen CONTEMPT and WEEKEND and BREATHLESS on plenty of "all-time great" lists, for whatever that's worth (I'd say it's not worth much. Are we really going to value an artist by his or her ability to make one universally praised work? Godard's approach to art directly opposes this notion). And on it goes.

Mr. Milch: though I'm the biggest Godard hater I know, that's taking things a bit far. Yes, Godard's worst work drowns in its topicality (and many of his ideas are just *bad* as far as I'm concerned), but that's not an absolute. Ever seen Alphaville or Contempt? Those both work like gangbusters; for once, Godard's not afraid to entertain. And even My Life To Live or Pierrot Le Fou (despite some regrettable digressions) are solid and absorbing. It's not all Marxist theorizing.

I can't believe I just defended Godard. Jeez.

Mr. Milich would rather sell you his teenage daughter than to sit through 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her again. He fell asleep during that one. Even though he was on a date with a hot French girl who dragged him along.

Other movies I tried, but never finished on home video were Alphaville (off after maybe 5 minutes), King Lear (maybe 10 minutes), First Name: Carmen (about 10 minutes).

Even a movie like Masculine/Feminine was only completed due to the amazing VHS technical ability to stop the film so I could go do other more interesting things in the meantime. Breathless was amusing the first time. But, like The Gods Must Be Crazy, its shtick only worked the first time.

I don't even think his movies are okay but not great. I think they're mostly unwatchable. For every one clever vignette, one is forced to sit through another five that either fall flat or simply aren't fully realized. Then, another clever vignette followed by another five that either fall flat or simply aren't fully realized.

Godard built a career out of being the greatest amateur college sophomore filmmaker in history. That was when he was young. Now, his later movies all look like they were made by a film professor who's spent 40 years intellectually theorizing about movies and finally convinced somebody to give him money to make a movie of his own.

Just to be fair, I don't think his filmmaking is completely terrible. I truly do enjoy the trailers of his movies. Those are usually fun and witty. And over in about two minutes.

To simplify things. The way I look at Godard is like this:

A lot of times when a painter paints a picture, he'll do a series of studies, sketches and so on to work out the ideas before embarking on the final piece.

To me, Godard's movies are a collage of studies and ideas without the finished painting. Sure, if you paste the preliminary sketches and photos and notes together you'll wind up with something interesting -- lots of good ideas, lots of bad ideas. But doing that in lieu of a finished painting does not a masterpiece make.

Go blowhard, go.

Hey, guys, let's avoid the cheap character attacks, okay? There's plenty to discuss, debate and even disagree with, but comments like the one directly above are not going to fly with me in the future... keep it classy, friends.

Point taken, Aaron, but I commented (if too snidely) on the harping, vendetta-like blather, not anyone's character. Yet I do enjoy when people proudly claim to have stopped watching films after five minutes, and then proceed to make sweeping proclamations about them. Thoughts like these can only ever find publication in comments sections, and thus we have this unfortunate string.

Alas, thanks for bringing us this podcast Mr. Hillis.

I think the 5-10 minute argument would be apt if we were discussing a single movie that I was speaking negatively against. My point was the pattern of giving movie after movie of his a shot to get me, and time and time again I thought the movies were so bad that I couldn't finish them. Or that if I did finish them, I had to watch them in pieces. In all, I'm talking probably 8 movies -- half finished, half unfinished. And I think I've seen enough to have my own opinion of his work, whether you agree with it or not.

Mr Milich -- While it's no longer hip to be a Marxist (or Maoist) as it was back in JLG's heyday, many of his ideas about art, culture, and cinema are JUST as valid today as they were all those years ago. Are not his criticisms of the onslaught of American culture in Europe spot on, and even a bit prescient? Do you not see the common thread that runs from Le Mepris to Elogie de L'Amour?

Vadim -- You just reminded me about another 2009 resolution. To make you love Godard. I'm talking at least third base.

Mr. Grant,

I'm not even getting to his "ideas." This is why critics like his movies. They look at the shotgun blast of ideas and start analyzing. But you don't prove your marksmanship by aiming at a target with a shotgun. And like I said above, while it might be interesting from an analytical standpoint to peruse his studies and sketches, he still doesn't make finished paintings. The studies should be a side note of interest if you already appreciate the end result, not in lieu of it.

For me, Godard's ideas are functionally irrelevant if he can't make a fully functioning movie in the first place. I'm not entertained. I'm not intrigued. I'm not impressed by his technique.

If he feels so strongly about expressing his ideas, he should go write a crappy op-ed. And come back to art when he has the patience and will to actually create a finished painting.

-Mr. Milich

May I?

www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2008/may/12/godardtheembodimentofthes

I'm genuinely curious as to your definition of a fully functioning film.

I agree that ideas should be secondary, and I think in Godard's case they are. I discovered Godard at around 18, and at that time I had no idea about the ideas behind Le Mepris, Pierrot Le Fou or Weekend -- but that didn't detract from my absolute enjoyment of them.

I'll admit that some of his 70s output (the work with Gorin and the Dziga Vertov Group) is perhaps less user friendly, but his work prior to that is immensely entertaining. As Armond said in the podcast, yes, Made in USA requires you to work a little, but isn't that preferable to the passive viewing experiences of, say, Benjamin Button, Revolutionary Road, et al?

I'm not talking about doing work. I'm talking about the artist taking his time and making a strong, cohesive whole -- not a haphazard quickie with a jumbled bunch of ideas/episodes that's supposed to be high art simply because it's unconventional.

Godard was always about quantity over quality. There's probably more effort put into any 10 minutes of a Kubrick film than Godard put into a whole picture. And it shows.

Which brings me to Ronald's post. Because the single most significant, innovative, acclaimed and influential picture of 1968 didn't have Godard's name on it. That giant immovable object is called 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Truth is, we can argue this forever. The reason we like different movies or artists is really kind of intangible. Sort of like falling in love.

Vadim wrote:

I'm the biggest Godard hater I know

No, you're not.

I came across this thread on JLG through google. I'm a graphic design student and I'm designing a fictitious JLG film festival (his new wave films). I had not heard of him before this project came along, but I accepted the challenge.

I'm trying to watch his films, read books and proceed with my project, but I'm struggling with finding a robust common thread in his films (apart from politics, "all u need is guns and women", anna karina, silliness, humor, love triangles...). Since you all are well-versed with his work, can someone please help me with figuring it out? Any help will be much appreciated! :) Thank you!