Dick Cavett and Jean-Luc Godard (1/6)

[@Lyraa28]

I was in the audience. Haven't seen another Godard film since. The interview put the nail to it.

[@williamking6770]

I saw Weekend this winter 40 years after seeing it the 1st time.I hated it then and love it now! Artists do not have to explain how they paint. Godard changed the vocabulary of film.

[@citizen1163]

@Royal Dax Right Royal Dix

[@metamorphiclouds]

@08Annasia That's because Godard has never been a conformist. He doesn't dance with whatever's the common tune - his belief in his own vision is paramount. And that's what makes him a true legend, yeah.

[@jackjohnhameld6401]

There is a DVD of the friendship and feud between Godard and Truffaut which I think is still available. Great to revisit Dick Cavett in 2021. Thanks.

[@c.c.7687]

I hate to reveal any ignorance of Godard, a man whose work I've adored for more than 20 years, but I had no idea he spoke English so well. I loved seeing this, even as I lament the fact that brilliant intellectuals like him are all but banished from popular culture now.

[@lawsonj39]

This was a revelation to me, too, despite years of interest in his work.

[@rumundutu7533]

Kinda makes sense tho..he started out as a critic and cinephile in a time where American films were made much more available in France

[@KinchStalker]

Oh my gosh...people cared about Godard in America once?

[@manuellopez1956]

Yes, and Dick Cavette too. Welcome to the Trump era.

[@bramblebop1904]

Lol. Fuckin libtard _had_ to stick Trump in here!

[@GH-oi2jf]

Cameren Lee - In the 1960s and 1970s several French filmmakers were known to Americans. Not, perhaps, to the average filmgoer but to enough to support bringing their films here.

[@waynej2608]

@@bramblebop1904 Well, he needs to be stuck somewhere. Lol

[@robinsonner5461]

theres a great video of tarantino talking about godard. actually about pauline kael writing about godard, there would be no tarantino without godard, and so many great american directors admit a debt to him

[@b17bomber]

thank you for posting this.

[@bondurango]

I saw Godard with Pauline Kael at the Marin Civic Center in '81. It was an informal debate between mirror opposites. Basically, they liked the same movies but for opposing reasons. It started with critiques of "Melvin & Howard". Both found it compromised. Godard thought the whole film should have been like the 1st part with the pair alone in the desert. Kael thought it should have been like the 2nd part with Hughes kept a mystery. That's how it went the whole evening, film after film.

[@DrRestezi]

Back when people had brains and weren't afraid to use them.

[@jc6594]

Happy 85th Birthday Jean-Luc~

[@Irysee]

Happy 90th Birthday Jean-Luc (ten days ago)

[@blipblip88]

The golden age of TV with a focus on good film

[@08Annasia]

Godard is not even interviewed on french tv today, his late movies aren't even promoted anymore in France... Okay maybe they aren't as good as his early ones but he's a legend and he's not going to live forever!

[@corfeandco777]

Because he refuses interview, that's all

[@pitchking5496]

Unfortunately he won’t make anymore interviews now…😢 RIP Jean-Luc Godard

[@Bacalao2929]

I saw Breathless yesterday

[@MrFalconford]

survival without complaint at any cost, the perfect tragedy, absolutely

[@richardstevens8839]

One of Cinema's best

[@mradamcooley]

thank you. GODard.

[@PlayIt4MeAgainSam]

Great interview! I wish I was in the "unusually large studio audience" ☺

[@jondstewart]

His 1965 film Alphaville will always be an anomaly. A seemingly futuristic film really set in an alternate universe with a rude and crude cocky American detective fluent in French driving a 1965 Mustang in a totalitarian society.

[@eecortese]

Lemmy Caution, detective extraordinaire.

[@sebastianalegria3401]

if we start to think those Godard's glasses are coming back to these days, so all these classic glasses, and above all sunglasses. To be honest, I like those customes from 60's & 70's years.

[@WOLVEOVSIBERIA]

Amazing.

[@Baltimore1894]

Cavett caught Godard off guard by asking him why people didn't like his films. That's a lame line of questioning, because "these people" aren't there to articulate exactly what aspect of Godard's films they don't like. You can't defend your work against general ignorance and dislike.

[@branche14]

that makes my day

[@LettertoJaneMagazine]

@Sapnuojantis KZbin recently took it down because they show a clip from the movie. I'm not sure if I still have this video file but if I do I'll cut out that part and re-upload.

[@waynej2608]

Ty for this. I realize it's been awhile, but I'm just coming to the interview now. It's wonderful!

[@qwe123303]

@edmund184 what? Are you seriously asking if there are films as good as those that came after Breathless? I'll start the very very long list: L'Eclisse, Two Lane Blacktop, Providence, L'Argent, A City of Sadness, Life and Nothing More..., Safe, etc. If you mean films comparable in the 2000s: Yi Yi, Inland Empire, Crimson Gold, In the Mood for Love, In Vanda’s Room, Dogville, Mulholland Drive, Elephant, etc.

[@whenthelightsarelow]

Only just saw that your comment is 2 years old. That's one hell of lull in conversation isn't it?

[@jeffdawson2786]

Women have better ideas. Fascinating observation.

[@catherinefotic4614]

A thought to the great John-Paul Belmondo and Jean Seberg, unforgettable stars of "Breathless"!

[@jonkimberson3253]

Breathless was his very first movie?

[@kmanet4118]

yes. He did a few short films before that

[@arthwr]

Does anyone know where I can get part 2? Or even the full interview? It is of great importance. thx

[@Sapnuojantis]

@LettertoJaneMagazine That would be appreciated. Or alternatively you could upload that part somewhere and PM a link with a download? That is, if you'd be unable to post the second part again.

[@aolivas71]

Godard the auteur still and will forever matter.

[@majimafia]

@LettertoJaneMagazine so did you upload? Can't find it:) Thank you!!!!

[@arthwr]

Where did you get the video ? Is it possible to be found elsewherer on the internet?

[@wggmn3]

I don't want to sound reductive yet - T​he reason for the stylistic differences has much to do w/ the newer WW II journalist cameras, eg - ​Arri (Arriflex 35), Bolex, ​Bell & Howell, Eclair, etccc.. I don't know what camera Godard used in 'A bout de souffle' / 'Breathless', but it had a lot to do w/ Godard's style & interior lighting (​hmmm?.. ​will try to look it up)​.. ultimately he was making the film as inexpensively as possible - finally one could.. the 'stars', who were not as yet 'stars', also helped - you could say that Belmondo's looks & Seberg's hair-cut reflected the films style, its 'look'... One should also note that the moving camera on the Champs-Elysees was in a shopping cart - talk about being economical, being reductive...

[@derrickmullins348]

I was looking up pics of Godard during the filming of Breathless and it looks like either an eclair or arriflex but I can't tell for sure

[@wggmn3]

I think it was an Arriflex (used by his cameraman, Raoul Coutard).. he used both in other films...

[@derrickmullins348]

Either way both are gorgeous cameras lol I've also seen Godard handling a Beaulieu before

[@johntravena119]

Godard bears a resemblance to the Andy Kaufman character Latka Gravas.

[@allthingsfrench1391]

The very best, top. Monsieur Godard, a true mastee.

[@MohorMom]

indeed, indeed

[@Sapnuojantis]

Where can I find part 2 or full version, please?

[@boymiyagi]

I thought this was George Clooney for a minute, lol.

[@AFutureLegend]

He looks like Peter Sellers!!!

[@withacherryontop2258]

Intellectually Godard was smart but socially I think he was more limited because I read he was incapable of small talk. You can see that here if you watch the entire interview (not just this segment) where Godard said he cancelled that meeting with a little girl multiple times because he couldn't think of anything to say to her. Someone in Godard's station in life, I think he could have found a conversation coach to try to better his conversational skills 😄

[@jaredpeace]

@LettertoJaneMagazine Please do!

[@wggmn3]

I also ought to add how good this "interview" is - all KZbin's 6 of Dick Cavett w/ Jean-Luc Godard...

[@whenthelightsarelow]

In terms of popular culture the situation we're in is severely depressing. As individuals and thinking human beings we can choose to ignore it because we know better. We can seek out things that find nourishing. It's hard not to feel worried about future generations though.

[@edmund184]

He changed the grammar of films? So where is the Casablanca, It's A Wonderful Life, Seventh Seal, Greed, Key Largo, Battleship Potempkin, La Regle du Jeu, 12 Angry Men of our generation?

[@irisesireses342]

edmund184 when languages can't grow or there's no innovation it eventually begins to die.

[@callumbancroft4836]

He fought against contemporary Hollywood in a time that it had become mainstream, he wasn't a member of the elite, and pioneered techniques used by modern day filmmakers now. If Van Gogh was the father of modern art, then Godard was the father of modern cinema.

[@Lakshman-Bharani]

You're talking about good movies...he talks about grammar in his movies...it make huge difference!

[@L3ONARDO07]

Callum Bancroft You’re wrong, he was against contemporary french cinema except Bresson. He adored Hollywood filmmakers. French New Wave had everything to do with revolutionizing french filmmaking and nothing to do with Hollywood.

[@gianca60]

Godard on USA TV 10 years late..Imagine interviewing him when he was maoist.

[@ricconstituantabrogatoirei4999]

J'aime Dick Cavett, mais là il ne fait pas le poids. Au US, la question du cinema c'est de savoir s'il y a une happy end ou pas. La problématique est très souvent réduit à cette simple question. Alors évidemment le cinema européen est intello à côté.

[@wiseonwords]

You have a point!

[@waynej2608]

@iconoclast Good insights. I think that it's unfortunate, that our American film auteurs don't get the appreciation, as much as their foreign counterparts. I'm a huge Robert Altman fan, yet he doesn't seem to get the same 'artistic' praise as Godard. Orson Wells perhaps does, but it's taken awhile. I love Godard, I just think we have comparable directors, too. Perhaps, it is, simply a 'cultural' thing. C'est la vie.

[@danflany]

this awkward gold. hope someone thinks 8:10 is as funny as i do. jeesus

[@x3Sora]

He looks so evil..a bit like Dr. Strangelove with those shaded glasses

[@ThisisBrownfield]

Wow, Americans are not ignorants about cinema ?

[@waynej2608]

No, it's just a rumor. 😎

[@Lamsaengstudio]

Rip gogard.

[@pigeonlove]

he is sucking up to the audience

[@allthingsfrench1391]

Women have better ideas... right on.

[@marguskiis7711]

Godard had so little accent. Jewish accent btw.

[@brookegoslin]

Jewish accent ? What is that sounds like kind of a very anti semitic ignorant comment !??? By the way before you make judgement calls on race creed religion looks and speech of a person do your homework . Jean-Luc Godard was a Protestant .

[@citizen1163]

Dick Cavett, to me, always appears out of his depth when interviewing a person of intellect. His attempts at jocularity don't help. Still, better to have the guests than not. Thanks DC!

[@DilbertHernandez]

His interview with Eddie Murphy shows this as well

[@NakedTongues]

the antiintellectualism is less that than the disappearance of print: when people stop reading they drift to video games etc look at the primacy of words in many of Godards pictures: he was never my favorite by a longshot but he came from Caheih de Cinema and read as well as cranked out some stuff with a camera; the vocabulary of graduates from college now has diminished fifty percent, kind of early Alzheimer desease in a way, when you dont have the words, the tools of cogitation , adios

[@athenapictures]

I'm just in the mood for a big film debate at the moment, so I'm just gonna come out and say that Spielberg is a thousand times more talented than Godard. Okay, I've said it. Please come forward and reply to this comment so we can discuss whether or not I'm right or wrong.

[@ahsannaseer5192]

Well okay then, Spielberg's films are not bad but they are much more conventional, sentimental, banal and manipulative, than the films of Godard. Godard always experiments and does something innovative with the film medium, whether it is to create a aesthetically alluring movie that also questions the concepts of art and intellectualism, such as Le Mepris/Contempt, or to tell a story observed by a dog, Adieu au Langage/Goodbye to Language. So yeah, I guess, if one enjoys entertainment in films more, one should view Spielberg as the better director. BUT if one loves films for their artistic and intellectual possibilities, then Godard is the man for the job. I love the films of both, but Godard's films are more special and important to me. And, oh yes, non of Spielbergs films are groundbreaking like Godard's are!

[@athenapictures]

Ase Nareen but just because Godard created these possibilities for filmmaking doesn't make him a better director. It just shows that he understands the medium more. Spielberg is a better director in terms of actually telling the story through sound, visuals, and the ability to put them all together in order to get the desired reaction out of his audiences. Godard may have created many techniques in terms of filmmaking, but while Godard's intentions were to push cinema forward with something new, Spielberg teaches us how classic Hollywood filmmaking is more affective as a means to grab hold of your audiences emotions. 

[@ahsannaseer5192]

Yes I can see what you mean when you talk about Spielberg, he is a masterful director who knows how to affect his audience. But I just don't think he takes chances with his films, he is fantastic at what he does but he does nothing new with cinema. And although some of his films are considered classics, none of them are big artistic expressions. They are just a showcase of great storytelling, which is not a bad thing. But you're right about Spielberg, and he has actually a larger audience because his films are more appealing, in the conventional sense. They are just great entertainment, but they are often devoid of the experimentalism and playfulness of cinema in my opinion. And if you watch his films more than three times, or so, they loose their spark, where Godard's films are better at standing the test of time because there is always something special to be attentive about. Cause after all, filmmaking is not just an artform for the storytellers!

[@athenapictures]

+Ase Nareen I have to respectfully disagree. I feel that though Spielberg is able to occasionally come back to his typical sentimental style like E.T, Indiana Jones, and Always (the latter: bleh), he's actually been taking more chances with his films more than he did back then. True, they aren't as risky as Godard's or Kubrick or even Scorsese, but he does attempt to push his stories into darker territories. The reason why I loved "Munich" is because unlike his other films, the film wanted to ASK the audience questions rather than give them an answer. The film itself is possibly the most horrific film Spielberg's ever directed in terms of content and its message. "A.I", though I dislike it, did attempt to bring up themes of humanity and love. "Schindler's list" took more chances than people give it credit for. Just telling a Holocaust story, or a film having some connection to the Holocaust, is already a big enough risk and if done wrong, it would've had big consequences. I feel that Spielberg does take chances in terms of what he's showing, and that for me personally, I enjoy his films more and more on repeated viewings due to being able to watch his (dare I say) complex characters and visual appeal. But I think what you're saying is that Spielberg doesn't take chances in terms of filmmaking in general. I do agree that Godard can take chances with the overall medium, but I will say this again: Just because a filmmaker tries something new and original doesn't technically make it good. Sometimes, a film does something different and it turns out great (Birdman) and sometimes a filmmaker does something different and it turns out to be terrible (The Brown Bunny). Spielberg is someone who makes films for the audience, but he doesn't try and force feed them the same crap either. Godard is someone who makes films for himself and wants to give it to audiences who will appreciate it, even if that audience is a small one. Filmmaking IS an artform for storytellers. Directors help focus the crew, telling them how a shot should be done, how the scene should be edited, and making sure it all goes according to plan. Editors tell the story through pacing, fluidness and putting together shots to make one giant story. A Cinematographers job is to make sure each shot has some sort of story behind it. A writers job is to lay out scenes to make a story. A composers job is to help tell the story through music in order to help a scene or moment reveal what sort of emotion it wants the audience to feel. It is all about storytelling. It's about how to put sound, visuals, and writing together. If you hand a script by Aaron Sorkin over to Tommy Wiseau to direct, the end result would prove that the script, despite being brilliant, was butchered because of the directors failure to tell a story properly.

[@ahsannaseer5192]

Yeah, I loved Munich too. But I prefer Polanski's The Pianist, which was actually in some ways inspired by Schindler's List, when it comes to films about the Holocaust.

[@anticorruptionnyc]

godard is so over-rated

[@keepplayingnice]

Why do you say so

[@karimmohamed7285]

no

[@johnnynoirman]

Your comment is worthless.

[@mattlepokora]

No. Tarantino is.

[@waynej2608]

@K L Whoa. Tarantino is a Godard fan. To attack him, on a Godard thread seems incongrous.

[@michaelsiebert1874]

wow wow wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!