Jean-LUC Godards Breathless as Compared to Mel Gibsons Braveheart - Essay Example

Section/# Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless as Compared to Mel Gibson’s Braveheart Although it is easy to compare filmsbased on the overall box office numbers that they generate, when one is attempting to measure the level of cinematic nuance and experimental styles employed, such a metric is insufficient to determine these factors. As such, this essay will examine two films that, except for the purpose of this analysis, would be unlikely to ever be mentioned in the same sentence. As such, Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless will be compared alongside Mel Gibson’s Braveheart. The purpose of such a seemingly disjunct analysis will be to determine the correspondence and/or divergence that is exhibited between what one might consider a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster and a lesser known, yet highly experimental, French “new wave” film. One particularly important factor to note, with regards to the differences exhibited in style between Hollywood blockbusters and “new wave” films of the 1960s and beyond, is the freedom of expression and experimentation that is oftentimes exhibited within such “new wave” films. As Hollywood is creating films on a profit basis and positioning and/or advertising them according to the belief of the analysts that the film is a money maker, the overall ability of the actors, directors, writers, and producers to exhibit the same level of experimentalism and free expressionism that films such as Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless is severely limited if not non-existent. To a great degree, this helps to explain the fact that even the more thrilling and action packed movies that Hollywood churns out for consumption by both the international and domestic market rely on an a heavily formulaic approach that gives many viewers the distinct impression that they may have watched the film - or one highly similar to it before. This is a decided drawback to the way that Hollywood blockbusters are made in that expression and experimentation are discouraged in lieu of whatever factors might most broadly appeal to a diverse international audience with different levels of film knowledge, experience, expectations, and likes. In this way, films such as Mel Gibson’s Braveheart have to appeal to the lowest common denominator among these groups without affording the luxury to employ stylistic expression and experimentation throughout the medium. For instance, Jean-Luc Godard experimented heavily with the technique of the “jump shot” in Breathless in order to convey an unrealistic and decidedly cinematic feel to some of the shots exhibited within the movie. This decision enraged many as it worked to draw the viewer’s attention to the fact that the work was edited and took away from the overall illusion that cinema often had of creating that alternate reality that film-goers so deeply craved. What is especially fascinating is that although Jean-Luc Godard employed these jump shots to great effect within Breathless, he juxtaposed this with heavy reliance upon another technique that was experimental, somewhat unappreciated at the time, and definitely a harbinger of change that many future films would employ. A secondary feature that Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless employs that was considered highly avant-garde at the time was the use of handheld cameras to film many of the sequences. This allowed for many of the scenes to have a true-life, gritty, and raw feel that was otherwise uncustomary for the movies of the time. Although Jean-Luc Godard did not pioneer this approach, he successfully employed it in such a way that he re-introduced the technique to such great effect that it was later picked up and re-introduced to a number of subsequent highly profitable films. On a side, note, it is possible to say that Hollywood might not employ this technique to the extent it does today in such films as the Bourne Identity if it were not for such a bold introduction and use of such an innovative tactic by Jean-Luc Godard during the 1960s. It is important to note that although this analysis has perhaps been a bit harsh with relation to the industrial-like aspects of the way that Hollywood produces and defines their blockbusters, they still deserve a modicum of credit. This is due in part from the technically flawless nature of delivery that Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters, inclusive of Braveheart, exhibit. Due in no small part to the fact that a team of accountants perform cost-benefit analyses on each and every target market/demographic with relation to films, Hollywood often is fully aware of precisely how much revenue a given film will earn. Likewise, due to the fact that these films are churned out with near assembly line tactics, it has allowed every individual involved in their production to acutely hone his/her precision and the resulting technical flawlessness of delivery that is exhibited among these blockbusters. In this way, a major credit must be given to those in the business that are able to regularly display such a high degree of perfection and technical expertise with relation to the sheer mass of movies produced. As with many forms of art, the implementation of such bold and ground-breaking approaches by Jean Luc-Godard in Breathless caused quite a stir among film critics and cinema purists at the time the film was released. The underlying distastes for the methods sprung from the conservatively held beliefs of those that stood in opposition to such styles that they took away from the overall plot device and unique attributes that the film might display if not encumbered by some of the experimentations that Godard employed. However, it is these very experimentations and deviations from the norm that has made Breathless into a timeless classic; as well as ensuring that it remains its position as definitive of the French “new wave” films of the era. Likewise, even though this author appreciates the stylistic excellence that is exhibited in the Mel Gibson’s Braveheart, the nuances of stylistic effect as well as creative use of little-known techniques and/or experimentation is supremely lacking. It is important to note that these factors are not necessary for the film to have become massively successful based on practically every measurement method available. It is likely for this very reason that the development team, producer, and editors were bound by the need to focus on stylistic excellence, quality of set, and the acting performance in order to provide a polish that would ensure such wide financial success. It should be noted carefully that although a great emphasis has been made in this analysis with respect to the cost basis that Hollywood examines and subsequently funds and produces such blockbusters, this is not to say that a careful cost-analysis was not also included in the process of production of “new wave” films of the 1960s and beyond. At the end of the day, each of these films ultimate goal was to generate revenue. As such, it should be carefully noted that one cannot compare the greed and industry-like nature of Hollywood with the artistic expression of “new wave” films. Indeed, Jean-Luc Godard himself actively sought a new leading lady due to the fact that he wanted the film to appeal more appropriately to an international audience (Balio 28). As such, the issue comes down to the fact that the unique flavor that experimental elements bring to the “new wave” films are not necessarily the result of a desire to inject expression and high art into the film; but rather, an attempt to differentiate these films at least in some way from their high-budget Hollywood blockbuster competitors. Work Cited Balio, Tino. The foreign film renaissance on American screens, 1946-1973. Madison, Wis: University of Wisconsin Press, 2010. Read More