directors Truffaut-poets
'I can not shoot only what is modern. This tendency to approve in Godard, because he's instinctive. In twelve films Godard has never made any allusions to the past, even in the dialogues. He ponders: even when a character in Godard spoke of his parents or his childhood. It 'amazing! He is a deeply modern type and the fact that Switzerland has its own importance. But almost all the films that mimic those of Godard are unbearable, because they lack the essential. You can imitate her confidence, but you forget, it is no coincidence, his despair. You will imitate the play of words, but not their cruelty. My distrust of fashion, also extends to everyday language, for example, I could never use the term "level" that runs from one end of the "Cahiers cinema gods." For me cinema and art of prose. This is the beauty of film, but without seeming to, or having the air nothing. This, let me enormously, is the reason why I can not bite down 'I love Antonioni, too indecent. Poetry and aggravates me, if someone sends me a letter, I hasten to throw in the trash. I love the poetic prose,, Iean Cocteau, Jacques Audiberti, Genet and Queneau, but only the prose. The directors that I like all have in common is a shame that, at least on this point makes them look like: Bunuel refusing to shoot the same shot twice, Welles that shortens the "good shots" until they become unreadable, Bergman and Godard who work in importance in a hurry to take away what they do, Rohmer that mimics the documentary, which Hitchcock is so emotional that pretends to think only about money, Renoir pretending to rely on the case. All instinctively reject the poetic attitude. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment