Matthew F.

Tantuan BFA Cinema 2 Film Review: Breathless In Breathless, Godard has made a deviant and rebellious film: a narrative that breaks from the strong defined mold from the classics, a very energetic and erratic cinematography, on location shots with loose and fresh dialogue, centered around a complex and spontaneous characters that result in unpolished and chaotic view of modern France; all characteristics of the French New Wave. 1 It tells the story of a Michel, a man running away from the law and his lover Patricia, an American who sells newspapers on the streets of Paris. While we get the sense of this narrative after watching the entire movie, the film does not force its story too heavily on the viewer. Instead, we are able to watch it unfold so loosely, almost as if the story is coincidental or undeliberate. Michel kills a cop who pulls him after he violates traffic rules. Michel kills him with a gun he finds in the car, which he stole. The film moves in these scenes so casually, with a very light almost carefree performance by Jean-Paul Belmondo, that a viewer does not initially gets pulled in immediately to the story. Instead, how the story is presented catches the viewer more than what the story is, initially. The narrative itself is almost unsure and as erratic as its cinematography. It occasionally betrays suspension of disbelief as we see even in the first scenes when Michel talks directly to the camera, breaking the fourth wall in classic cinema almost as if in a
1 Neupert, R. J. (2007). A History of the French New Wave Cinema. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

documentary. Benjamin Bergery writes in his book, Reflections: Twenty-One Cinematographers at Work, that Godard intended for Breathless to be a reportage or documentary which was to be shot on a hand-held camera with almost no artificial lighting. 2 Certain parts of the movie reminds us that we are just watching a movie such as a scene when the characters, Michel and his lover kiss inside a cinema house. Thus, we get the energy of the film almost ushering its viewers to the story which almost hides itself behind the characters and the lively shots. The reportage feel, is also achieved through Godards cinematography and editing. The film employs numerous jump cuts that is deliberately artistic and fuels its fresh shakiness even more. In one scene where Michel gives Patricia a lift, the camera is behind Patricia showing the back of her head with cars abuzz in Parisian roads as her backdrop. Michel describes Patricias beauty, and jumpcuts of the same shots of Patricia are placed next to each other. This creates a nervous, hoppy style that tend to define the film. 3 Shots are unstable, always moving slightly, even in static scenes such as those on Michels bed when he has a long conversation with Patricia. The camera apparently is handheld and moves freely inside the set taking skittery shots especially when in a scene

2 Bergery, B. (2002). Reflections: Twenty-One Cinematographers at Work. California: ASC Press.

3 Thompson, K. a. (2003). Film History: An Introduction (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

with a moving vehicle. This gives the feeling similar to modern day documentaries that rely on the shaky-cam to give it immediacy and flavor, though that is less in this movie. Continuity is almost entirely disregarded. Shots of Michel and Patricia conversing in a bedroom never faithfully follows the 180 degree rule. With the constant jumpcuts, eyeline match is also never considered but it still gives it a sense of coherence partly because the cuts usually are just a few frames apart or because it also is consistent throughout. Elements of the film that are still very conventional are its framing and staging. All shots are in a wide depth of field and the framing is nothing out of the usual. This at least makes the film a little more familiar despite its experimental nature. The film offers tribute to different icons and people in art and cinema. One notable example is Humphrey Bogart whom Michel seem to look up to and try to model himself after, as shown in a scene where he looks at Bogarts pictures and posters, and touching his lips accordingly. Another is a scene shows Patricia hanging a Renoir-painting poster. There are other such hints and tributes to different artists in the film which shows great awareness of the films world and of Godard as an artist. The film does not seem to utilize the artificial three point lighting that was widely used by its predecessors. Scenes with the characters in moving cars, entering stores or in a bedroom are lighted just enough to form figures. They appear flat colored, free of the effects a three point lighting system gives: rimlight and reflected light. This removes that oldHollywood feel of lush black and white with a slight glow. Instead, the film looks gritty and unrefined. Sound in the film is clear and crisp but after a couple scenes, it became apparent it was dubbed. This contrasts with the films spontaneous and raw feel in its visuals as the

dialogue are clean and clear of the noise and distraction that would have been caught on with an on-location shoot. However, it also gave the film an anchor to let the audience hold on to. As fellow Frence New Wave filmmaker Robert Bresson says, visuals must not duplicate what sound achieves and vice versa.4 The film avoids total chaos and incoherence by having a crisp sound to go along with the fast and chaotic jumpcuts. While the story is about whether or not Michel is caught for a murder of a policeman which he committed in the very first few minutes of the film, there is little to no suspense built leading toward it in the end. Instead, the film paces itself slowly as we explore Michels life and the whole arc of Patricia. Acting is light and free flowing akin to those of the later improve era. The actors are
never over the top or underwhelming. Jean-Paul Belmondo as Michel Poiccard manages to present a character who never tries too much to be loved by the audience but succeeds in achieving at least a small amount of care. Jean Seberg as his love interest Patricia Franchini is usually lovable and relatable as the love interest who manages to hold herself opposite the menacing Michel. One thing I find is that their emotions are kept in a disciplined restraint. Theyre never too emotional or dramatic in most of their scenes. This quality, coupled with the films fast editing makes it seem less immersive than the modern day drama. On the other hand, it lets the viewers think more, of these characters in order to understand them. Voicovers in modern movies are not in use here, you simply ride along with the acting and dialogue and, ultimately, it works.
4 Bresson, R. (1985). Film Sound: Theory and Practice. (E. a. Weis, Ed.) New York: Columbia University Press.

It spends a good amount of time between the lives of these two and their seemingly casual relationship before Patricia finds out about Michel and betrays him to the cops but he does not run away, instead, he stays until he gets caught. The movie ends with Michel getting shot and running away from the camera clutching a fatal gunshot wound on his back. He seems to tire and grow weak until he falls down, out of breath. He gives his final words to Patricia which she repeats, facing the camera almost mimicking Michel. That scene, together with most of the movie shows strong defiance on the Classic French Cinemas established conventions which defines Godards later works in the French New Wave. Breathless is truly an innovation in its time.

Bibliography Andrew, D. (1987). Breathless. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Bergery, B. (2002). Reflections: Twenty-One Cinematographers at Work. California: ASC Press.

Bresson, R. (1985). Film Sound: Theory and Practice. (E. a. Weis, Ed.) New York: Columbia University Press. Neupert, R. J. (2007). A History of the French New Wave Cinema. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Thompson, K. a. (2003). Film History: An Introduction (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.