"movie gun"

To be honest, I instinctively reject any idea of ​​conflating art and politics, even Godard. Although he does leave room for public discussion as he says in the movie, whenever a flag is set up, it is sure to attract refutation from the opposite opinion.

In the eyes of the French youth at that time, France itself was in a period when social ills were urgently needed to be treated, and there were obvious differences of views between thinkers and activists. European-style capitalism in the post-war recovery period could not be as strong as American-style capitalism. It is also unable to learn from the opposing camps through its own reforms, and it is also accompanied by panic caused by the ideological turmoil in the late 1960s.

But in fact, it seems to me that far more people use the fresh political views of the Far East to show that they are new in thinking than people who really think about what Marxism will change or impact, as in the dialogue on the train, young people. To close schools and abolish exams, I'd love to do that too, but they're stuck with the questions that come. It was still in 1967, the revolution had just begun, and what the little red book showed was far from what the group of young people who spent a summer meeting to study quotations could have foreseen. After the mid-1970s, the political color of Godard's films has been significantly weakened. It is estimated that it is not because he is getting older, mature in thinking, and calm in the face of things, but because he has seen the results of most of the issues discussed in this film.

It is true that the film shows a vivid aspect of Godard's rich thinking. Compared with the film writers of his time, he is more of a miscellaneous expert. He uses the attention to the film itself to evoke multi-level and multi-angle thinking on the form and content. If it is said that after the cusp of the new wave gradually subsided, more people adopt the writing attitude of "movie eye", then Godard is the only "movie gun", and some arrogant people say that it should be the director directing the "gun" ", rather than "gun" directing the director, in this respect he is not satisfactory, and "ism" has influenced him too much.