AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Scarecrow-88 Jean-Pierre Léaud gets a starring vehicle under Jean-Luc Godard's direction as a 21 year old kid named Paul returning from the war a jaded socialist. He meets a young woman his age named Madeleine (Chantal Goya) in a café and the two go through a hot-and-cold, up-and-down relationship that is at times sexual and passionate, aloof and distanced. Madeleine, it appears, is also possibly romantically tied to a roommate named Elizabeth (Marlène Jobert) who helps her on a budding musical pop career. Meanwhile, a third woman named Catherine (Catherine-Isabelle Duport) emerges, another friend of Madeleine's, and although subtle and undefined, she is falling in love with Paul (Paul never realizes this; his activist unionizer friend, Robert (Michel Debord) does). Robert is in love with Catherine, and in a very inquisitive monologue sequence, he posits questions to dig deeper into what makes her tick with no payoff. This is one of many fascinating, lengthy monologues where dialogue is extensive, probing, questionable, commentary, and off-kilter. Most of the time, when there is a dialogue it features a young man and woman (typically Léaud's Paul and someone he's "interviewing"/"polling" or "interrogating") talking about sex, politics, or pop culture. That's the thing about this film: its significance as a cultural and historical artifact is important. It is a pivotal period where Vietnam is on the tongues and a shift in mores in society was changing. Philosophers, musicians, and political figures make their way into scenes with Godard feeling it was key to establishing time and place. This gives the film a relevance that we can look back on and realize spoke on what was happening during that period in the world. Focusing on young adults of different types within a group centralizes them as an example of a cultural shift taking place. Still kids with a direction in life still a bit elusive. I do think Godard can go a little far with including so much of his own art in his films. The inclusion of "Alphaville" for a theatre sequence, such an example. Bridget Bardot getting a rather pointless cameo reading lines with a hyperactive acting coach. Sometimes his films lose steam when he does this.Madeleine, to me, gradually separates herself from Paul (perhaps not even consciously) as her life begins to take off due to her pop career (in the studio, when Paul slides his hand to hers she pulls away; when she is greeted by a radio personality for an interview she treats Paul as if he were her chauffeur) and his takes on a more political and sociological change. One interesting scene has Paul interviewing (he calls it "polling French women in general") a "Miss 19 winner" who won the award and benefited from its "advantages" (travel, niceties, exposure), asking private, personal questions about sex and political issues. Sufficed to say, she tries as she might to avoid the topics that aren't comfortable, although he's quite skilled at pulling out of her certain thoughts she is reluctant to share.The first real dialogue shared between Paul and Madeleine is a good example of what the film is like as a whole. Questions are asked and comments are made quite openly and honestly. Barriers seem to diminish as the two become a bit more comfortable sharing details about themselves. I do wish Catherine and Paul had one such scene as I think these are the two characters with far more potential never realized by the tragic conclusion. A series of violent acts happen around or in close proximity with Paul. A blond shoots two black men with Paul unable to warn them in time. A knife-wielding troubled soul at first appears to be threatening Paul in a game room, eventually stabbing himself. An older man takes some matches from Paul, pours gas all over his person, and sets himself on fire. A "maid" shoots a father in the back while he tries to remove his son from a café. In the final scene, deeply sad and unfortunate, has Catherine speaking about an incident in an apartment to a police officer getting details on it. It proves that Paul's closeness with tragedy eventually befell him.I did find the dynamic regarding Madeleine and Elizabeth interesting in that there appears to be a love affair among them. They think Paul is unaware, but he noticed them in a shower together (behind a steamed glass giggling), and when his eyes are closed while imitating a tune from Bach Elizabeth caresses Madeleine who doesn't swat away her advances. Catherine, appearing to be a third wheel, is given little moments with Paul that would seem to indicate she has a taste for kink and decadence (she asks him if he has ever heard of De Sade; she briefly gets a chance to ask Paul if he is still in love with Madeleine, with him shooing away the question; she playfully disavows Robert's implicating her of being in love with Paul), and a specific interest for him if he'd realize it. But Paul and Madeleine's endless "is this love or not?" back and forth interferes with potential with Catherine. By film's end, he'd never get a chance to truly understand that.

Hitchcoc This is about bored kids in Paris around 1965. France has been dealing with Vietnam since it was called French Indo-China. The U.S. has dived in head first. A couple of young men fancy themselves reactionaries. Their actions are silly and innocuous but they feel they should be doing something. What they actually do is talk a lot. They ask endless questions. Paul, played by Jean-Pierre Leaude, the little boy in "The 400 Blows" is a naive brat who wants to be hot stuff but can't pull it off. He imagines himself like Belmondo but can't even master the cigarette trick that the great one used. The women are really in charge here, although they haven't figured things out that well either. One pretty young thing is a gorgeous, though quite wholesome, pop music star. This role doesn't seem to get her much credibility with her friends, particularly with Paul. She is a celebrity but no one can figure out why. They go to movies, hang around a cafe, but can't feel good in their own skins. Jean Luc Godard lets his characters live, but his point is less tactile.

Steve Pulaski Masculin Féminin has been called one of Godard's most challenging films by critics and scholars alike. However, having seen both Film Socialisme and La Chinoise, I think this one isn't nearly his worst in terms of extractable ideas and themes. It's ambiguous, often difficult to watch and grasp, and very disjointed, yet it is also one of the best presentations of pop art, pop culture, and time-specific culture I have yet to see. It's Easy Rider and Two-Lane Blacktop for the 1960's France.The aforementioned criticisms of Masculin Féminin are to be expected with a Godard film; he is a man not easily defined and one who defies all narrow stereotypes of filmmakers and free-thinkers. He is a man who had the unbelievable audacity to go against popular French cinematic customs during the tumultuous times of 1960's, making films that defied convention, critiqued western culture, and valued experimentation over traditionalist practices. Consistently, with the lone exceptions probably being Pierrot Le Fou and Weekend Godard's films are usually more fun to contemplate, analyze, write about, and discuss than they are to watch. They're meals and things you don't appreciate until they're over and done with even though one doesn't necessarily want to revisit it any time soon; watch two in an evening, especially his political works, and I fear for your mental wellbeing.Masculin Féminin centers around Paul (Jean-Pierre Léaud), a young France idealist who falls in love with a pop star named Madeleine (Chantal Goya), completely ignoring their polar opposite views of the world, music, politics, etc. Paul and Madeline, among Madeline's close circle of friends, begin having intimate and inspirational conversations about those topics, often reciting poetry or reading political text in order to communicate their point. In the meantime, Godard structures the film like he so often does, with quick-cuts and interjecting title cards bearing often disconnected and unclear text that we, the audience member, have to try to connect to the film in some way.One of the Godard's most famous title cards appears in this picture, around the third act of the film, and reads, "This film could be called The Children of Marx and Coca-Cola." Here, Godard seems to be stating that the characters we center on in this film, and perhaps he himself, a "Marxist intellectual," are only impacted by two budding forces of the time; they are Marxism, the political ideology coined by the teachings of Karl Marx that addresses issues of class struggle and conflict between people of differing socioeconomic lifestyles by critiquing capitalism and emphasizing a more communistic approach to governing, and Coca-Cola, the globally-recognized soft drink brand that could easily be dubbed a corporate empire. Now, I think the generation today could be called "The Children of Income Inequality and Apple."Another great quote that pops in the film, this time it's uttered aloud, is stated by Paul when he is discussing the roles of a philosopher and a filmmaker. He states very simply, "a philosopher and filmmaker share an outlook on life that embodies a generation." I like this quote almost as much as the above quote because this one compares two ostensibly different people and makes them come together in hopes that people see they achieve the same goal. This could also come full circle to reference Godard himself, as Godard is very much a Marxist philosopher and thinker as well as a radical, experimental filmmaker, and he damn-sure embodies the mindset and opinions of the sixties French students and young-adults.With that, Masculin Féminin is a dialog-heavy film where the dialog can be increasingly alienating and very often dry and unappealing. Background knowledge of the French New Wave movement, mild understanding of Marxism, as well as a high tolerance for complex political readings is almost essential here. In theory, the film shouldn't work - it's far too disjointed, punctuated by interjecting title cards that still do little other than muddle the narrative, and has little character development outside of rather basic descriptions. However, scarcely has a film been this more focused and successful at developing the motivations and thoughts of a specific generation.Starring: Jean-Pierre Léaud and Chantal Goya. Directed by: Jean-Luc Godard.

Cihan "Sean Victorydawn" Vercan (CihanVercan) In 1960s' France, when there is rebellion against every reigning doctrine inside the mind of youth culture; Godard particularizes the downgrading of youth in different cases. Honored with Silver Berlin Bear for his influential leading part, Jean-Pierre Leaud symbolizes French New Wave with playing a captious character by means of critical attitudes. So wisely, Godard doesn't force the story to describe this leading character. Instead he let his leading actor become the viewer. Of every moment at all the scenes Godard puts us in his shoes. When we start laughing at an ironic situation, he became the one who is making fun of the person in the irony. When we start feeling bored of a conversation, he became the one disturbing the talkers. When we start getting confused of the happenings, he came to create his own scene.Not only leading the script, the story and the other actors; Jean- Pierre Leaud also leads us to be part of his daily life, to realize his ambitions. Step by step he charms Madeleine with asking dead-end questions and helping her finding the impossible answers. Even though Madeleine ideally never liked him, she found herself pregnant and realized he has become the one that will share her fate in a little while. You would be impressed how fabulously, Paul convinces Madeleine and her roommate to share the same house, same room and to sleep in the same bed altogether. If this has been Bernardo Bertolucci's "The Dreamers" you wouldn't be amazed that much.Masculin Feminin is a conversation-based movie of philosophy and youth sociology and has the governing idea that even with the feminism women still are under the sway of masculinity. It's centering on masculinity. There is also a hidden analogy here that; as socialism being nothing but a rebellion to the eyes of democracy, so is feminism being nothing but a rebellion to the eyes of a man's self-knowledge. The character profiles are very well sculptured. It inspires confidence over the impossible-to-understand woman characteristics. Yet, for me the best issue is that the story-telling is very confusing, out-of-order; so that it's not really down-to-earth at all.