Jacques Rivette

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.

Moderator: DarkImbecile

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1276 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:18 pm

soundchaser wrote:
Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:38 am
I might be exaggerating here, but I think this is the musical that best understands what it is to *be* a musical — in terms of necessity of movement, framing, and subject matter. The way Rivette teaches us from the first scene how his characters move and what that motion means is almost unreal, and then he takes that and says “ok, now that you understand what character movement means, here’s what camera movement means.”
I get what you’re saying but I think if I were to get hyperbolic I’d say this would apply more to a philosophically, rather than physically, constructionist lens. While Rivette is a very spatially aware filmmaker and clearly enjoys capturing the freedom of bodily expression and tangible movement, I’m more interested in how this skill is linked to one’s harmony between their internal isolating struggles and the possibility of the outside world. I just read Rosenbaum’s analysis which expressed my thoughts better than I could on how the ability to participate in a musical stems from romanticism, which is only possible through that relationship between the self and their milieu. I don’t think that specific dissection of what a musical means has been done as well before, but to your point it absolutely hinges on Rivette’s mastery over space and experimental authenticity of character. This isn’t the first time he’s allowed actresses to form their own roles but here it lends a very particular ingredient to accessing that relaxed autonomy that yields empowered vulnerability in musical performance.

This also explains why Laurence Côte’s character feels left out, who - with only one watch under my belt - feels like a peculiar outlier of a character. Her purpose appears to function as a recognition of the polar position mirroring the other girls; one of self-inflicted barriers to participating in the ‘musical’ romanticism of life, which requires shedding of rigid control (and literally so in dance, loosening up body posture, getting out of one’s head, and going with the flow).

However, one of my favorite parts of the film is when she looks at herself alone in the mirror declaring “behind me there is nothing, as if I had no past” before breaking into quiet song about having no ties or connections to her world. The strange aspect is that she is at her most playful in this scene, flaunting herself around her apartment wrapping herself in scarves and she seems almost liberated by this lack, as if it’s a source of freedom. Does the fact that she sings to herself without accompanying music signify that she is holding herself back from participating in the fantastical aspects of the musical? Or does she have more confidence than we give her credit for? Rivette seems to be deliberately subverting the expectation to delve further here, and if she is intended to be the reciprocal yang to the yin of that whimsical surrender, what of the ending?
SpoilerShow
The films ends on her, after boarding up with Karina (who may be her mother?), walking down the sidewalk away from the camera and then breaking into a run. Is she still narrowly searching, walking away from the camera to signify a refusal to participate in these connective games, and running away determined to her next step and without casually soaking up the journey of the walk/life? Or is it the opposite- is she going to find what she’s looking for out there in another story, another film, and is she running towards it with confidence and courage to finally meet the world?
Marianne Denicourt’s number in the park is sublime but something about the spontaneous cute rumba between her and Nathalie Richard up the staircase makes me so happy. Their spirited repartee banter about the man that connects them, and bubble-thought topics like what human meat tastes like, are everything that is promised by Celine and Julie only too brief. I could have watched three hours of only their silly and sweet bond and the film would be just as great.

User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1277 Post by senseabove » Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:34 pm

Which is only two releases in the three and a half years since the deal was announced in October 2016, with a commentary as the only new extra produced for either release (and nothing at all for Joan).

It looks like that 10-film count counts three shorts and each part of Joan as separate (and it's unclear whether Divertimento is included and they just opted to not release it...), so assuming the shorts get a standalone release together, at that rate, I look forward to their last Rivette title being released in... 2030.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1278 Post by Michael Kerpan » Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:31 pm

I was delighted to get a good-looking Joan the Maid -- but shocked that the release was so barebones.

User avatar
Never Cursed
Such is life on board the Redoutable
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:22 am

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1279 Post by Never Cursed » Thu Apr 30, 2020 4:29 pm

Céline and Julie Go Boating will have its first-ever American release on the Criterion Channel May 28 alongside Paris Belongs to Us and La Belle Noiseuse

User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1280 Post by senseabove » Sat Jul 04, 2020 1:48 am

Finally took a day to watch Rivette's excellent Joan the Maid, and I'm even more annoyed at Cohen for how little effort they're putting into their cache of Rivette licenses.

The subtitles are terrible, almost entirely obfuscating any subtlety in the language, frequently using simple word-for-word translations that make little to no sense in English, as if translated by a native French speaker who thinks they know English. There are simple non-native mistakes like asking someone, about their hair, "when was the last time you combed them?", but all too often more ridiculous mistakes like just leaving out words: at one point a woman comments that Joan's armor must hurt, and the subtitles have her response as "What hurts is not being there" for "What hurts is it not being there." The most succinctly egregious example of this sloppiness is perhaps when Joan is accused of making "arguments spécieux," which the subtitles translate as "spacious arguments."

I sincerely hope this and the rest of the Rivette restorations get a UK release from someone who gives one half a shit.

User avatar
headacheboy
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:57 pm

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1281 Post by headacheboy » Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:40 pm

senseabove wrote:
Sat Jul 04, 2020 1:48 am
Finally took a day to watch Rivette's excellent Joan the Maid, and I'm even more annoyed at Cohen for how little effort they're putting into their cache of Rivette licenses.
senseabove, I'm with you on this. I just watched Peppermint Soda yesterday on Criterion Channel and it is a Cohen title. There were misspellings and incoherent sentences that made little sense. I was equally frustrated with Joan The Maid which I bought. I'm already not buying Kino; crap, does one not buy Cohen titles that require subtitles?

User avatar
feihong
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:20 pm

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1282 Post by feihong » Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:50 pm

Growing up with Hong Kong movies and their often bizarre English subtitles, this kind of thing leaves me a little nonplussed.

But didn't Cohen plan to release L'amour Fou at some point? It seems like that may have fizzled out.

User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1283 Post by senseabove » Sat Jul 04, 2020 6:50 pm

Upthread, there's some indication that a restoration and release of L'Amour Fou is in the works, but nothing concrete and no ties to Cohen that I've seen.

Cohen do have the US rights to these ten, with a * for titles they've released on disc and † for ones with restorations that have had limited theatrical presentations:
Love on the Ground (1984)
Wuthering Heights (1985)
The Gang of Four (1989)†
La Belle Noiseuse (1991)*
Divertimento (1992)
Joan the Maid: Part 1 – The Battles (1994)*
Joan the Maid: Part 2 – The Prisons (1994)*
Up, Down, Fragile (1995)
Top Secret (1998)
The Story of Marie and Julien (2003)

Plus three early Rivette shorts:
Aux Quatre Coins (1949) †
La Quadrille (1950) †
La Divertissement (1952) †

User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1284 Post by senseabove » Sat Jul 04, 2020 6:59 pm

And my background being in literature, a lot of it translated and a lot of it poetry, makes me especially irritated by the flippancy with which translated subtitles are typically treated. It's a pet peeve... I'm used to a norm of translators who take especial care to carry over the subtlety, consistency, and consideration in the original. It baffles me that, for movies, subtitles are often treated as if they're secondary, almost inconsequential, as if plot and image are the only thing we need bother with.

This was just an especially egregious case because it's obvious they didn't have an English speaker even glance over the subtitles for grammatical sense, much less sync them to the movie to make sure they make sense in context. And it's like that for 6 hours...

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1285 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Jul 05, 2020 10:35 pm

That's really disappointing to hear. That kind of thing really annoys me too.

User avatar
soundchaser
Leave Her to Beaver
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:32 am

Re: Jacques Rivette

#1286 Post by soundchaser » Wed Jan 13, 2021 8:45 pm

The 4K restoration of Gang of Four is up on Amazon Prime, for anyone with access to the Cohen Media Channel. Not sure what's taking them so long to get it out on Blu-Ray.

Post Reply