criterionforum.org

Bulle Ogier and Juliet Berto really propel Duelle, poor Hermine Karagheuz is pretty eclipsed....

Thanks for the comments! It seems like an odd directorial choice to cut what was once a crucial scene, but there must have been a reason for it. Shrew's explanation for Colin's change seems as good as any. The possible interpretations of the final scene are also intriguing. It seems to be a common thread in the Rivette films I have seen - slightly disorienting beginnings where you have to pay attention to pick up the ongoing plot threads, and ambiguous endings leaving more questions than they answer. It is like tuning into a long series and catching a few episodes before tuning out.

Upon rewatching Duelle, I am finding it is rapidly becoming my favourite Rivette, the irreverence and low-key surreal fantasy making for a very enjoyable watch. It deserves to be known more widely. It is funny, mysterious and cute, so I don't see why people who liked something like Amélie and who are on board with a movie being a bit strange wouldn't enjoy it just as much. Hopefully, the set will bring it to a slightly wider audience.

Having let a few days go by to dwell on the end of Out 1, I really can't help but be reminded of the very final sequence of The Prisoner -

Spoiler

the way it's just one, very, very short sequence, put after about 14 hours of constant confusion and surreal/absurdism and deliberate lack of resolution; the way that, without any dialogue or sound, it tries to make you question absolutely everything you've seen before and start it back from the beginning all over again to try in vain unravel its mystery. There's something so uniquely filmic about the lack of words, a single image of a totally pedestrian thing we've seen before (more or less) that leaves us to question whether or not it actually means anything at all. It's one big puzzle box and you can only start to guess at what it makes a picture of once you've got that final piece.

I have to echo Zedz on Merry-Go-Round that while not with charm it suffers from being structurally messy and a little too generic despite the amusing 'Rivette sells out' feel to the movie. For instance I wonder why Elisabeth was ever shown on screen? The story of the film works perfectly without showing her and the scenes frankly come across as very sloppy filler which is kind of lame brained for a 160 minute movie. Most of what follows is basically the same as what went on before her exit and entrance to the movie. It merely has the characters more aware of the plot they are caught in which could have been communicated more efficiently.

I do like, as part of that sell out feel, having a Rivette primarily in english. I always have a fear that the charms of some films for me are merely caused by not speaking the language and native critiques of directors like Bergman or de Oliveira only compact that. So even if this is a flawed movie it's good to know that my favorite Rivette elements are not caused by flaws transitioning into virtues through translation.

Just finished Noli me tangere and I feel high and I haven't done any drugs. Once again, Rivette has me feeling head over heels. More thoughts to follow if I ever regain my composure.

Where to even begin with Noli me tangere? First, in response to the length of the film and endurance: I found myself somewhat distracted at a few points during the first episode. By the second, I was totally sucked in, and I was seldom bored for an instant for the rest of the film's run time. At some point in the second half, I was totally enthralled by the world of Out 1. I've never felt so immersed in a fictional world in my life (though it's important to note that the line between documentary and fiction is constantly blurred by the film.) It's nothing new to talk about the fantastic elements in Rivette's films, but I did not expect it to be so strong in Out 1. The film is high fantasy. It's a fantasy set in a world that looks like the everyday world. And yet, upon further consideration, this film (and the other Rivette films I've seen) really do have a unique look that sets them in a world of their own. The desaturated colors, the environments that tend to be minimalistic. Even the streets of Paris seem to have a muted visual quality. (Of course, much of this is owing to the characteristics of the film stocks and processing available at the time of the film's production, but, even if the aesthetic was not a conscious choice by the filmmakers, its effect is only more universal, as it suggests an applicability to film in general. After all, each film process captures the world in a different way, aesthetically speaking.)









It's interesting to think about the two different design approaches between the Carlotta and the Arrow box set releases of Out 1. The former seems to emphasize the muted aesthetic I'm describing, which is the look of the background and certainly comprises the majority of the colors in the film. The Arrow set, though, emphasizes the careful use of vibrant colors. These colors (turquoise, orange, red, magenta, etc.) are most frequently attributed to people, since, after all this is a film that is foremost about the actors. It's in the way they dress, which the Arrow art appropriately uses as the central design motif. Fashion and appearances are important to the film in so many ways, because these qualities are how the viewer identifies characters. This is consciously played with in many ways, two of which that immediately come to mind are Frederique's sudden change in hair style, and Arsenal's (I hope I've accurately remembered all of the characters names) eventual change in dress to clothes that are very similar to Colin's.









Moreover, consider Lucie de Graf's line to Frederique: "There are two kinds of people in life: the cheats and the cheated on. You'll always be cheated on, because just look at the way you're dressed." The colors of the Arrow box set are reflective of the color palate used as relief from the drab backgrounds (though there are exceptions - most notably, Pauline's Corner of Chance shop, which has walls painted with a wild, psychedelic splash of colors.)



I call the film high fantasy because somehow it gradually drifts into that territory - creating a world all its own - without my even realizing it. It's a fantasy set in a world that, on the surface, resembles the real world. By hours seven or eight, though, I felt totally transported.

Spoiler

Near the end, logic and spatial continuity begin to break down as, for instance, Frederique and Renaud appear without explanation in an idyllic country setting. In the final episode, there are even entire lines of dialogue played in reverse!

This idea of constructing a world is so fundamental to the film. As I said before, this is a film about the actors and their characters. Whether we're watching an improv group performing acting exercises under various self-imposed boundaries, or Frederique or Colin conning people out of money with their fabricated stories, the focus is constantly on people constructing stories/lives/worlds. And I was riveted by nearly every minute of it. I think it's important to dispel for any prospective viewers the notion of this 13 hours French film being some impenetrable work. Yes, it's dense, and I'm sure I'll be thinking about it and writing about it for years to come (and I've go to read some Balzac very soon), but, to use a totally personal example, I think any adult who has ever spent time play-acting with a partner - creating characters and situations and just having fun - can find something to appreciate in this film. As Thomas says to Sarah in episode 7: "You have to get into the idea of a game. Just as if you were playing cards, of if you were playing...It's an almost childlike state of mind...of readiness and a desire to have fun."

Post edited to re-link images.

Petty Bourgeoisie wrote:

Spoiler

Renauld was definitely alive last I saw him. Did anybody else get the sense Renauld and "The Devourers" were about to ambush Pauline as she returned to Paris in order to (possibly) see Igor. It was like she was being lured back and and Thomas sensed it and became distraught about it. Thus, the breakdown on the beach.

That is how I read it - and his anguish just all of a sudden diminishing and him walking away was, to me, and emphasis of Rivette's ideas on performance and how their "organization" thrived from a sort of melodramatic over-acting.
Or wait - am I messing something up?

I still think Merry Go Round is damn interesting and quite a good film, but I feel the issues with the musical performances and general "Fuck it!" vibe that seems to have been a result of Schneider being hard to work with.
I do love Noroit and think it's a worthy companion to Duelle, though L'Histoire... is clearly my second favourite when it's allowed to be seen as part of the thematic "quadrology" (Haut Bas Fragile - which I didn't finish - makes me think dropping the musical wasn't a bad idea).

I watched Merry Go Round for the first time this week. There are some amazing visuals and moments, without a doubt, but it ranks as my least favorite Rivette so far. I think Schneider should have been given the boot and Hermine Karagheuz should have been inserted as co-lead. But, all in all it shows what a stand-up guy Rivette was in helping out the producer even though his health still wasn't fully restored.

This set really does do a good job of arguing that Karagheuz should have been a big star. She's absolutely amazing in Out 1 and especially Duelle where she practically single handily grounds the film is some sort of recognizable existence.

I'm afraid I wasn't nearly as enthralled by Karagheuz -- in any of her Rivette appearances. I actually thought she was rather a weak link in Duelle.

The Mysteries of Paris really shouldn't be overlooked - it's remarkably adept at trying to explain just what this weird thing is. I was very pleasantly surprised by the amount of input from Rivette in archive interviews - which appeared to be ludicrously detailed, assuming we didn't see everything, and I also really admire the fact they don't just stop with the film being made. and actually try to convey the significance of its restoration. A great bonus.

Does Out 1 get better than the first episode? I mean as long as it focused on actual performance like the first rehearsal which was great, but man that second group rehearsal was just torture

Yes, yes it does as many of the posts in this thread attest to.

Orlac wrote:Oops - http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p ... ount=21900" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can anyone confirm if this glitch is on the Kino?

Is there any official word on the glitch in the fifth episode of Noli me tangere? I'd really wish Arrow gave us a replacement disc or something, if just to make one of their best box sets perfect. ](*,)

andyli wrote:Is there any official word on the glitch in the fifth episode of Noli me tangere? I'd really wish Arrow gave us a replacement disc or something, if just to make one of their best box sets perfect. ](*,)

Can one even see this unless one goes through the film frame by frame?

No, the entire set's been ruined, might as well throw it out

Just chucked mine in the skip currently on my drive.

No, you'll see it while it's playing if you know it's there - I certainly did. Considering this set's size, I'm totally cool with it being there though and don't really want/need to go through the process of replacing the disc for it though.

It's a bit odd that apparently it isn't on the Kino as we had been told the encodes are exactly the same files - wonder what caused this? Just a weird mastering thing?

We believe it's a player-related issue. The person who took that screengrab contacted Arrow and we tried the disc on eight different players of various makes and models, but couldn't replicate the glitch on any of them.

antnield wrote:We believe it's a player-related issue. The person who took that screengrab contacted Arrow and we tried the disc on eight different players of various makes and models, but couldn't replicate the glitch on any of them.

You might want to keep trying. Using both my blu-ray drive (an LG UH12NS30) and workstation as well as those of a friend, with multiple pieces of blu-ray playing software, I replicated the problem consistently.

It's even less apparent than it seems to be from that photo posted above, though, and obviously doesn't detract from a magnificent set.

I wonder if it's a US vs. UK player issue. Something like this came up with Soda's Chris Marker collection, where they were unable to replicate playback issues faced by some US customers.

While unfortunate, I wouldn't be surprised that this gigantic set simply has a couple encoding glitches here and there.

Michael Kerpan wrote:Can one even see this unless one goes through the film frame by frame?

Yes, you would. A bit like the dropped frames on Code Unknown, it will alter the smooth flow of the picture. You might have, however, to go backwards and freeze frame to understand what you just saw, though.

Does the Carlotta US set have the same glitch?

No, it doesn't. Arrow claims it does not appear on their own internal equipment/masters/what have you. I see it on mine, I noticed it in the episode when it occurred (mind, I knew it would be there near the start of Episode 5 so I kind of knew to look out for it), I continue to see it and I can't imagine what possible situation would cause this to only apply to certain players. It's such a minor thing considering the scope of this set, though, so I really can't mind too badly.