Review of Breathless (1983) by Adam G — 17 Dec 2008

A steal for $9 at my local JB Hi-Fi, I was quite looking forward to this apparent classic, its amazingness, and the amazingness of its director, regularly being sung from the tops of buildings and such by certain members of this forum (a certain Scottish secret agent man in particular). And, while I definitely was not disappointed by this film's quality, it lacks a little something in my eyes to warrant me calling it a classic (or, as Colin MacCabe calls it in his introduction on the DVD, "a new Citizen Kane"). But, more on that later. First, the positives.

For one, the acting is, by and large, top-notch. Jean-Paul Belmondo was a stunning find on Godard's behalf, exceptional as the coarse, unlikeable, and rather misogynistic petty thief-cum-copkilla Michel. He comes across as someone who would like to be a Bogart-like figure, as we seem him at one point staring wistfully at Bogey's photo in a cinema display, but lacks all the necessary elements of Bogart - eloquence, cool, and a general sense of trustworthiness. He's generally a roguish bastard, and yet you still can't help but feel a bit of empathy for this guy with no purpose and no tact whatsoever. Jean Seberg is excellent as his counterpoint Patricia, the out-of-his-league budding journalist he loves and wants, but cannot express these sentiments in any way other than crude lustful phrases with modifiers attached (when Patricia tells him to say something nice about him, he responds, "I would like to sleep with you...because you are beautiful"). She may not be the centre of the film, but she's the most relatable character, largely due to Seberg being a genuinely sweet and bubbly person in this.

Also worthy of praise are the direction and the writing. Truffaut's script may be rather simplistic in terms of the way the dialogue is written, but some scenes bristle with intelligent writing - for example, the scene in which Patricia talks with her editor, their work being discussed in to-the-point American and more, well, romantic stories being relayed in French, reinforcing the 'French = language of love' myth while subtly destroying it in the interview with the ostentatious press conference some time later, the renowned French author coming across as rather the lecherous pig, despite his mastery of his native tongue. Truffaut has a lot of ideas here - the influence of film on our lives; the nature of love; the culture clash between French and American - and he manages to address each idea satisfactorily, if not exceptionally. Godard helps a lot with this, his somewhat disjointed direction style (according to MacCabe, a result of convenience more than deliberate artistic decision - though it'd be fallacious to discount the latter - as the original cut was 2hrs 15min - an original cut I would like to see) suiting this offbeat Romeo & Juliet-but-not tale. For example, Godard's direction, utilising the hand-held camera he pioneered (according to the DVD sleeve I have), in the final scene, is perfect, drawing emotion out of the helplessness of the event more effectively than still shots and numerous cuts to advantageous viewpoints could. Godard and Truffaut also drop in some nice little references to their French New Wave buddies, even some a newb to the scene like me could pick out (the girl holding up the Cahiers du Cinema magazine and asking Michel if he "has anything against young people", the repeated references to Bob the Gambler in one scene).

So, what exactly is wrong with the film? Well, nothing particularly. In fact, if this film's guilty of anything, it's that some scenes dragged on too long and were a bit self-indulgent (seriously, Michel and Patricia must have spent forever in that bed in the middle of the film), and that, at times, the film's just a little bit dull and unengaging as the characters repeat themselves over and over again repeating themselves just using different words to reiterate their points that they must reinforce continuously and you see how annoying it can get? Regardless, A bout de souffle is an accomplished film, and one I'm glad to have on my DVD shelf (if only to point at it and make it look like I'm a snob, while hoping everyone ignores Idlewild a few slots down).