Monday, April 18, 2016
Crime Never Pays?
Michel Poiccard is petty criminal who steals cars like some people speed on the highway. He lies and cheats people close to him, including a girlfriend. He is dangerous when cornered and has murdered a police officer. Yet, at the same time, he is young and glamorous, faithful in his way to Patricia, and in the end willing to pay for his crimes. The film follows some of the rules of a film noir or gangster film. Yet, the film also plays around with those conventions: the police, for example, are incompetent and there is not much tension or excitement in the chase scenes. So what is going on? Is this film saying anything about crime and punishment? Or is it just messing with us?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the film is making an interesting claim about crime and punishment. In normal gangster film noir films the criminals are glamorized and idolized like no other. Their lives are given an aura of excitement and mystery, and viewers are definitely meant to lust after that lifestyle. In this film, however, the criminal aspects speak for themselves, and the glamorization through editing is missing. The criminal activity is still there, like in gangster films, yet the tension that comes through music and cuts and editing is completely missing. As a result, the film seems very anticlimactic at points. As such, I believe that the film is trying to portray crime and punishment as it would normally occur. It is trying to say that crime and punishment are normal occurrences, and while they might be enjoyable and exciting in the moment, there is no way for it to end well. Michel does not have a heroic escape with the love of his life; he doesn’t even escape alone. He ends up betrayed, captured, and imprisoned. In this regard I do believe the film is slightly messing with us. The jump cuts keep the audience from sympathizing with the characters, so unlike a typical gangster film the intent of the director is not to make the audience root for Michel. In fact, the intent of the director is quite vague. If we aren’t supposed to root for Michel, then are we supposed to root for the police? Given the incompetence and brazenness they portray the answer to that question is a resounding no. In that respect the film is making a claim by just messing with us- crime and punishment might seem glamorous to those involved, but in reality it is not.
ReplyDeleteMichele Pioccard resembles one who is a double agent. This is because you will find him breaking the law in the form of robbing and murdering, as well as having sexual tension. However, you will also find Michele spending a lot of his time with his girlfriend Patricia because he cares about her the most, yet he finds himself sleeping around far too much. He tries to show how much Patricia means to him, but is incapable of doing so because Patricia is far too concerned about his life and doesn’t want to be dragged down. Along with that, Michele treats Patricia horribly. He is always asking her to come to bed with him and do things that she doesn’t want to do. Michele makes the relationship about himself and doesn’t care about what Patricia might want. So the question is what this tells us about accountability. Well, it doesn’t tell us much. There was never a time when Michele came close to being caught or punished for anything. The police and detectives are shown as incompetent since they fail to pick up on obvious clues. Unfortunately, Michele was never punished in the Film. He was the bad guy getting the girl, which is something rarely done with traditional film technique. This could be expressing the idea of a failing government and police force, an unpredictable new wave of film, or that truly is a gangster and noir film where unpredictability and lack of discipline are never apparent.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the film focuses mainly on the romance between Michel and Patricia rather than paying for his crimes. This is because the audience doesn't learn of Michel's crime until later in the movie after the relationship between him and Patricia has been established. Along with this, an argument could be made that if it wasn’t for Patricia trying to prove that she did not in fact live Michel, he probably would have gotten away with his crimes. This shows that not only does this film not focus heavily on crime; it also shows how easy it is to get away with it. Overall I think the film is messing with the audience, saying that as long as you’re in love you’re essentially untouchable. As stated before, it wasn’t until he was turned in by his own girlfriend that he was punished for the crimes he committed. The film could also be saying that love is more powerful than paying the price of their crimes. An example of this is when Patricia was oblivious to the fact that Michel stole a car to pick her up and take her to wherever they went. Another example is when Patricia puts aside her morals about stealing a vehicle and instead of questioning him and turning him in to the police. But she is blinded by love which leads her to commit crimes alongside him instead of resent him and turn him over to the police. In conclusion, this film focuses more on love rather than crime and punishment because love blinds the individuals from the crimes they’ve committed.
ReplyDeleteMichel is a player in every sense of the word. He goes through life as if he is playing a little game, attempting to just work his way throughout life knowing that it will eventually come to an end. He also is constantly attempting to get in to every girl’s panties. Michel’s character as a whole makes a mockery of what as seen as the conventional systems that govern society. The new youth wave in France that took over during this time period had a similar sentiment that is expressed through the young characters in the movie. French society began to act wildly, often with no fear of any consequences. Michel was easily able to toy with the police and did not abide by any of societies rules by killing people for spending money and a nice ride. Michel has his own moral code that he follows which begins with his loyalty to the people he loves. This can be seen specifically with his inability to flee the scene, after Patricia snitches, and decides to stay with Patricia. I think another way that his is illuminated is through how Godard actually films his movies. With the different jump cuts that do not give us all the information of the different acts, the action scenes between the enforcers and Michel are cut out. We also receive little information on the feelings and background of the character, which does not allow us to see the full picture of who to root for, the police or Michel. I think that this again is a broader statement overall, where the director allows the audience to decide which side we want to root for in the end of the movie.
ReplyDeleteWhile this film is centralized around the crime that Michel does and gets away with, the movie does not follow the generic rules and things we come to know of film noir. The film does not base itself on the action behind Michel getting away from the police and lying his way through women; it focuses on the relationship between him and Patricia and whether or not they end up together. Interestingly, the film does not build up their relationship in a traditional sense; it is unclear at all times whether or not Patricia loves Michel back or if Michel truly loves Patricia or that it’s another one of his mischievous lies. The film has a very mysterious and puzzling aspect to it because it is difficult to figure out whether Michel is truly a bad person- for this reason we assume aspects of the film like crime and punishment and how easy it was for Michel to escape the police is all necessary in order to send a message and focus the film on the ambiguities of the film. In many films, we try to relate to the main character and root for this character to get what he/she wants. In this film, we cannot fully relate to the main character because his intentions are unclear. This film seems to be allowing the main character to get away with the crimes he has committed, only giving him what he deserves at the end- and even that doesn’t seem to give him the pain he deserves for lying and cheating- he was the one that gave up.
ReplyDeleteCrime and punishment are obviously focal points of the story’s plot, because the main character is a criminal, but I think it is interesting to see how the film’s unique editing style somehow takes away from the conventional “gangster movie” impression and really leaves lots of holes. In my opinion, the most significant feature of the film “Breathless” is its abnormal editing style, which includes several poorly timed jump cuts, because it really changes the whole theme of the movie. The first jump cut that really stood out to me was when Michel shot that cop that was chasing him because we never actually saw him do it. We saw Michel holding the gun and then we heard a loud bang. After that, the cop fell over, Michel ran away, and the viewers had to make their own conclusions of what happened. A few more of these cuts happened throughout the entire movie and they really took away from the original film noir feeling that we viewers are used to. Throughout the course of the movie, we clearly see a criminal, but we do not see that same criminal in action very much. This has the potential to leave a lot of holes in the story and a lot of confusion with the viewers. And while we did see enough to conclude that Michel was a criminal, I think it would have helped the plot if the jump cuts weren’t so drastic. For this reason, I’d say that while “Breathless” has some aspects of a “gangster movie”, the editing style made it impossible for the film to live up to its film noir predecessors.
ReplyDeleteIn, "Breathless" Michel is a deceiving criminal who lies and steals from anyone yet his life his glamorized throughout the movie. The movie portrays Michel to have two sides. One being his deceiving stealing side, and the other being his soft and loving side. Michel loves Patricia but not enough for him to stop lying and stealing. In the end Michel is caught because Patricia told the police where Michel was located. This goes to show that no matter what your bad actions will always catch up to you in the end. Michel could not stop his deceiving ways not even for Patricia, because a thief is who he truly was and he could not change that. Even though the police did find Michel in the end, they still could not find him on their own. In fact the police needed the help of a woman in particular. This can be portrayed as the movie attempting to show the importance of woman in society and their growing more important role in everyday life. The incompetence of the police could also just simply be attempting to portray the police as dumb people who cannot do work themselves, and need to help of society in order to achieve their task. To me this means that the police use the people to do their work for them rather than finding the answers themselves, and the fact that the police had to go to a woman for help to me shows the growing role of women in society during that time, and it shows that woman are beginning to become more valued and appreciated, but that the world, men in particular still have a lot to work to do in the way that they treat their woman.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThis film is not talking about love, or even attempting too. It’s critiquing the romantic view of crime by taking the style and pushing it to its extremes. In this way, it reveals the inherent flaws within the concept of taking a violent criminal and turning him into a romantic lead. Not only are Michel and Patricia unrealistic, they are not even unique characters. Michel is the classic dashing gangster found in poorly written paperbacks. He eludes police officers with ease and has very little trouble pulling off multiple thefts. He carries himself in a suave and eye-catching manner, yet somehow manages to avoid detection, despite his face being plastered upon the front page of a major newspaper. Similarly, Patricia is just a typical femme fatale. Both frigid and overly emotional, she is constantly changing but not necessarily evolving in any kind of meaningful way. She betrays Michel yet it is never clear whether she made this decision easily or of she suffered over it. Regardless, she can hardly be seen as a depiction of an authentic person. Since the main characters deviate so significantly from a realistic portrayal, they can only be assumed to be a commentary on the ridiculous depictions of love being used in modern film and literature. So many movies tried to glamorize crime and imbue it with a romantic aura. But this movie shows that the notion of a romantic criminal was incompatible with modern life and could only end badly.
Throughout the movie, Michel is portrayed as a man having two sides to himself. He is a lying and stealing criminal running away from the police while being a sweet and sensitive man with Patricia. Gangster films usually highlight the crimes of the criminal, but this does not occur in this movie. Instead, Michel’s love life with Patricia is highlighted and how gentle he acts towards her. But at the same time, he doesn’t treat her with the respect she deserves. He constantly attempts to take her clothes off and force her into bed with him. He doesn’t listen to what Patricia wants and believes that she will do whatever he asks her to, such as sleeping with him right then and there or moving to a different country with him. Clearly Michel is very good at manipulating people since he has been getting away with crimes and hides from the law. His manipulation is evident throughout the toxic relationship with Patricia. Since Michel is getting away with crime for basically the entire length of the film, the movie is saying that crime is possible to get away with. Although even if you can get away with it for a very long time, it’ll eventually catch up with you. In the end Michel is found and is running away from the police and got shot and killed. Proving that if you commit a crime, you will eventually pay the price.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the film intends to glorify crime, punishment, and especially criminals like Michel, which many gangster movies tend to do. Whenever the protagonist of a film is a criminal, one can be sure that they will be charming, modern, and totally ahead of the police, which pretty much defines Michel. The incompetency of the police is simply a device that keeps you routing on our protagonist. We get to focus more on his personality and his relationship with Patricia because we don’t ever have to worry about the police. A specific scene that shows how Michel can commit a petty crime with little to no repercussions is when he follows a man all the way to his apartment and snags the man’s car keys with ease. Then he gets to drive a cool new car and hang out with Patricia. For the audience, that’s exactly what they want to see. What is interesting is that even though the police end up getting Michel at the end, it’s not because they become any less incompetent. It’s only because he lets them catch them in order to stay with Patricia. This is another reason why the criminal is well liked by the audience and legitimately doesn’t care about the police. As we see in the end, even as he’s dying he has words to say to his love, and he doesn’t care about his death. This is why the film glorifies crime and especially Michel.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the film intends to glorify crime, punishment, and especially criminals like Michel, which many gangster movies tend to do. Whenever the protagonist of a film is a criminal, one can be sure that they will be charming, modern, and totally ahead of the police, which pretty much defines Michel. The incompetency of the police is simply a device that keeps you routing on our protagonist. We get to focus more on his personality and his relationship with Patricia because we don’t ever have to worry about the police. A specific scene that shows how Michel can commit a petty crime with little to no repercussions is when he follows a man all the way to his apartment and snags the man’s car keys with ease. Then he gets to drive a cool new car and hang out with Patricia. For the audience, that’s exactly what they want to see. What is interesting is that even though the police end up getting Michel at the end, it’s not because they become any less incompetent. It’s only because he lets them catch them in order to stay with Patricia. This is another reason why the criminal is well liked by the audience and legitimately doesn’t care about the police. As we see in the end, even as he’s dying he has words to say to his love, and he doesn’t care about his death. This is why the film glorifies crime and especially Michel.
ReplyDeleteThis film portrays a man that has two very different sides. In his glamorized life, he can be a lying criminal or a charming and sweet lover. The film does not follow the rules of a film noir completely as it is mostly focused on the sweet and loving side of Michel. The film manages to focus on this side by having an incompetent police force. Because of the police’s incompetence, Michel does not really have to worry about them catching him so the story can focus on his romance with Patricia. This is very different from the typical gangster film, which is centered on characters’ actions against the law and how they manage to stay untouched by the police. Furthermore, typical gangster films really only show the bad side of the characters so the audience is not confused trying to figure out if the character is truly a bad person. In Breathless it is very different as the film does not really tell the audience that Michel is a bad man. I believe that the film is just messing with the audience as it leaves many things untold. With the way the action scenes are filmed, the audience is left to figure out what exactly is going on as the jump cuts used by the director don’t really provide the excitement that a gangster film does. In this film we do not really know who we should be rooting for unlike the typical gangster film, the audience is left with no one to root for because we know Michel is a criminal who even lies to girlfriends but there also aren’t any reasons provided for us to root for the police.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the film is definitely is thwarting the roles of these conventional positions. The police force in the movie is definitely undermined. The force themselves lacks mental thinking. The scene where Michel is being pursuit-ed by the police and he pulls off to the side of the road. One of the officers proceeds to clearly pass him. Any sensible person would have been able to see the car pull off to the side of the road and attempt to hide in the forest. The chase seen itself is not full of action either and ends promptly with the killing of the officer. The officer should have fired when he saw Michael reach into his car for the gun. Now Michel's face does make it into the paper but the task force does not do much to find the "cop killer". When they were following the girl, for example, they were doing a very poor job in doing so. Crime as a whole seems to be taken very lightly in the movie. When Michel is convicted, sure there's an add in the paper, but the task force assembled to look for him was very small and trite. 2-3 men at best were on the hunt for him and their tactics were not the most professional either. So from the lack of attitude towards their duties to the intellectual abilities of the police force, we can clearly see that crime does not seem to be a big deal in that film.
ReplyDeleteBreathless is a satire of the traditional gangster film because it mocks conventional plot development and toys with the viewer. The film does not speak much about crime and punishment until the finale when Michel is finally caught by the police. He commits criminal activities at every turn throughout the film with seemingly no repercussions. He steals money from an ex-girlfriend, but is not caught in the act and her character is never seen again. The only instance where he is discovered, the police are always one step behind him in their pursuit. After killing a police officer, Michel gets away but later sees his warrant in a newspaper advert. He is often in the same location as the police chasing him, but always gets away with minimal effort. Michel is finally caught in the end because Patricia phones the police to turn him in. However, Michel refuses to leave her side even after she betrays him. It is through this that his string of crime is ended. This is meant to be frustrating to the viewer because it is highly unrealistic for a criminal to stay with a girl he has barely known after she turns him into the police. This is not a serious commentary on crime and punishment because the characters do not behave as one would expect in most situations. For it to be a serious commentary, I would think that the director would have portrayed more realistic characters. Rather, it makes more sense that Breathless is meant to make a mockery of a film genre that is inherently nonsensical.
ReplyDelete