The 1960 Mini-List

[swo17]

proto-MRA ranting

Though doesn't the film present this as a lot of deluded silliness?

[domino harvey]

Shoutout to first year teacher me using the dinner table scene to illustrate Marxism

[Mr Sheldrake]

01 Psycho
02 The Apartment
03 L’Avventura
04 Adua and Her Friends
05 The Bad Sleep Well
06 Devi
07 Les Bonnes Femmes
08 Shoot the Piano Player
09 Purple Noon
10 La Verite

[therewillbeblus]

Maybe I have a soft spot for the artificial weirdness of late Ford. That’s the only explanation for why Sergeant Rutledge, a hushed, expressionistic pastel-and-fog western that’s one of his most painterly color works, received no other votes. It’s a film where the tonal mismatches Ford is infamous for add considerably to the film’s social commentary and emotional horror. Hunter is in a feelgood liberal message movie that he’s the star of while the judge and his jolly wife are in a mocking marriage farce (seeming like picnickers at a lynching), while Strode is trapped in a grand Greek tragedy that the white characters are, at best, blissfully unaware of. “We are fools to fight the white man’s war,” a dying friend tells Strode. Strode tries to reassure him with the same justification he tells himself: “It ain’t the white man’s war, we’re fighting to make us proud.” And there is the terrifying contradiction.

I realize that I'm not alone in hating it, but I was shocked by how unconsciously racist the film was on this last watch, which I detailed in the 60s thread. I guess as a piece of ironically-propagated microaggressions by liberal progressive filmmakers, it's an interesting case study, but because the film (nor its fans) seem to see it as what it is, I can't afford it pity points

[Red Screamer]

@swo The ranting is presented as silly but I remember it going on endlessly without many jokes or a strong satirical point. Maybe I should rewatch.

@domino Amazing. I have a friend who uses Artists and Models for teaching English as a second language. Tashlin & Lewis are the new Strunk & White.

@blus It’s bad faith to say that I can’t see the film for what it is or that anyone expects you to offer pity to a classic film. I agree that its racial politics are limited, and probably worse than that, but what I appreciate about the film is how it explores its own contradictions and lays everything on the table, ugliness and all. It’s a horrifying film for a number of reasons. You take issue with the exceptionalism of Strode’s character but that’s an explicit element of the film, the burden of him needing to be a superman to overcome both his social position and his internal self-loathing. The idea that he’s fighting in the calvary “to make us proud” is tragic because his path to work, self-worth, and respect is so restrictive and dangerous (eg him saying it while his friend dies in his arms). On the other hand, Ford the director loves his character’s superman qualities and self-consciously mythologizes Strode for them. But the question of how and why he’s exceptional isn’t exactly uncomplicated. To paraphrase Rosenbaum, I’m less interested in what the film says than in what it tells us.

[swo17]

@swo The ranting is presented as silly but I remember it going on endlessly without many jokes or a strong satirical point. Maybe I should rewatch.

I imagine at the time it played as just some outlandish nonsense to motivate Lewis to perform the next "feminine" task that the plot demanded. There probably is something there about traditional gender roles that would appear regressive from a certain modern viewpoint, though personally, I'm not terribly interested in looking at classic films that way

[therewillbeblus]

Red Screamer- regardless of how aggressive my critique was, my comment was not intended in bad faith: I'm not singling you out for not seeing the film "for what it is." I was talking out loud about how I have yet to read a critique that acknowledges the deeper microaggressions (so for me, what this film "is" has still yet to be recognized by its fans), and so it's hard for me to even give it a little rope ("pity points" was a poor choice of phrase, but I'm lost to how that's tied into assuming an external "expectation"- People talk about it being challenging to give films rope due to x all the time here, and that's rarely met with "Well nobody expects you to!") for its dated progressiveness.

Anyways, I appreciate the response because it's exactly what I was looking for back when I wrote that critique and the lack of discussion only left me encouraged to see the film as I did without pushback, and discouraged that none of its many fans decided it was worth defending- though I think you misinterpreted by issue. I agree that on a basic level that exceptionalism is meditated on in a variety of ways that are self-reflexive to the narrative path and emotional textures Ford is crafting. My problem (or one of them) is that the film takes that a step too far by using a specific superhuman incident that's rooted in coincidence to sell Rutledge's worth as a man on a narrative level outside the courtroom and into the audience's eyes with flashing lights. I'm not saying that this can't or shouldn't happen within this film 'in addition to' the reasons for his innocence, to sell him as a multifaceted character, a moral man, or to stress your strong point about that felt burden. I'm saying that its function seems to dominate both the rationale and emotional attraction for why we as an audience should root for him in this trial, and by pivoting away from Rutledge to make the white characters' self-actualization the central aim of empathy in the final stretches, it all comes across as misguided and gross.

If one of these things didn't happen or they happened differently, I could work my way to see how your interpretations of Rutledge's objective struggle and Ford's intricate approach to Rutledge's person-in-environment subjective psychology could make for a provocative and interesting film, even if there are still obviously problematic elements. But the film falls apart in a weird mess of unconscious instinctive distractions that seems to be anxiously turning away from Rutledge with anxiety and shoving a bunch of superfluous information at us to sell the climax at the same time. It just feels very subtly racist and unaware of what regressive demands that seemingly-progress message places on people of color (which is unfortunate since the film is all about that, earlier on at least). I'm far from a moralist, or one to ignore the context of a film when assessing it, but this one just feels like it's operating on a level it doesn't begin to acknowledge explicitly or implicitly (or worse, it does, but then meanders from there and winds up violating the initial points) - and to go off Rosenbaum's vague paraphrasing, what the film tells us implicitly is far more frightening than what it's actually saying.

I do appreciate your response, and I apologize if my admittedly-bristly dismissal of the film was taken in bad faith as some umbrella'd attack on all that love it. Thanks for engaging with me in spite of that, and taking what was regrettably a condescending post about a film that many love as the invitation it was to do so.

[swo17]

I would've bumped it for Le Trou had I waited a few hours before submitting my list (I wound up getting to it yesterday after all, but didn't think I would, and it would've made the top half of my list). Oh well, doesn't look like it needed any help from me!

If it made your top 5 that would have put Le Trou either in a tie with or above À bout de souffle. Otherwise you wouldn't have changed the rankings

[therewillbeblus]

It wouldn't have made my top ten, so good to know I didn't mess anything up. Plus, that would be too weird for Breathless to get pushed outside the top five films of 1960!

[DarkImbecile]

*CoughtotallyappropriateCough*

[knives]

*CoughtotallyappropriateCough*

Another one who didn’t vote for it?

[therewillbeblus]

Over a third of participants didn't

[DarkImbecile]

I intellectually appreciate what makes the film remarkable in the context of cinema history, and over the years I’ve learned enough to “get” progressively more of Godard’s references and pointed commentaries, and at the same time I have never once actually enjoyed the moment-to-moment experience of watching it — including my latest attempt six weeks ago. It’s one of those films I first saw in my insecure early twenties, and one where I blamed my own ignorance/lack of discernment for the gap between my response and its reputation; my continued detachment during this most recent rewatch confirmed for me that it’s not (just) that I’m a callow philistine, it’s just not a movie I like very much — unlike Pierrot le Fou, to illustrate it’s not entirely an issue with Godard himself.

I do value its innovations enough that if I had submitted a longer list, it probably would have been on there near the bottom, but I have embraced the truth that I’m not a cool enough cinephile to actually love Breathless. Support group meetings are at 9pm on Wednesdays behind the Arrow subforum, and if anyone wants to bring coffee I’ll provide the donuts.

[swo17]

As long as you like Pierrot le fou, you're good

[DarkImbecile]

Is the Fou capitalized, or am I a fou?

[swo17]

Finally an important question. If you consider "Fou" to be part of his name then I believe it should be capitalized à la Fat Albert. If not then no. I suppose there's some gray area here but I'm obviously leaning toward the latter

[the preacher]

10 The Young One[/b] [orphan]

Swo, can you confirm that it was an orphan? I think I voted for it, or at least I should have.

[swo17]

I just PMd you your submitted list. You voted for 25 films, and that wasn't one of them

[knives]

As long as you like Pierrot le fou, you're good

Uh oh.

[the preacher]

I just PMd you your submitted list. You voted for 25 films, and that wasn't one of them

Oh, I see what happened. I voted for Zazie (which I hate) instead of The Young One. My fault!

[swo17]

And you gave it a high ranking too! Moral of the story: Double check your lists before you submit them.

I've edited the totals after fixing your ballot, which actually pushes The Young One onto the top 50

[the preacher]

And you gave it a high ranking too! Moral of the story: Double check your lists before you submit them.

I've edited the totals after fixing your ballot, which actually pushes The Young One onto the top 50

Thank you. Don Luis wouldn't have forgiven me.

[therewillbeblus]

I intellectually appreciate what makes the film remarkable in the context of cinema history, and over the years I’ve learned enough to “get” progressively more of Godard’s references and pointed commentaries, and at the same time I have never once actually enjoyed the moment-to-moment experience of watching it — including my latest attempt six weeks ago. It’s one of those films I first saw in my insecure early twenties, and one where I blamed my own ignorance/lack of discernment for the gap between my response and its reputation; my continued detachment during this most recent rewatch confirmed for me that it’s not (just) that I’m a callow philistine, it’s just not a movie I like very much — unlike Pierrot le Fou, to illustrate it’s not entirely an issue with Godard himself.

I get it, Breathless didn't even make my top 50 of the 60s list, and though I do think it's a great film and love the freewheeling nature of it that reflexively makes me feel liberated from multiple sensory conventions/prisons during every viewing (ones that I didn't even know where 'there' until the film entrances me), I can't say it's a film I adore as much when I reflect after-the-fact

As long as you like Pierrot le fou, you're good

A true fact

[domino harvey]

Does Ski Troop Attack have a decent DVD release?

Will be part of a double feature on this upcoming Blu-ray release

[swo17]

Oooh, and I like the film it's paired with as well!