363 Mouchette

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Message
Author
User avatar
garmonbozia
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 2:55 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA

#26 Post by garmonbozia » Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:50 pm

Is this really going to be nonanamorphic 1.66?

I know that it usually takes a while for the default "not anamorphic" to disappear from the specs page, but I noticed it said this at the bottom:

"About the Transfer
Mouchette is presented in its original aspect ratio of 1.66:1. On widescreen televisions, black bars will appear on the left and right of the image to maintain the proper screen format."

Is this a standard default as well, or is this an intentional description?

User avatar
tryavna
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: North Carolina

#27 Post by tryavna » Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:00 pm

garmonbozia wrote:Is this really going to be nonanamorphic 1.66?

I know that it usually takes a while for the default "not anamorphic" to disappear from the specs page, but I noticed it said this at the bottom:

"About the Transfer
Mouchette is presented in its original aspect ratio of 1.66:1. On widescreen televisions, black bars will appear on the left and right of the image to maintain the proper screen format."

Is this a standard default as well, or is this an intentional description?
It's standard default -- and probably will be anamorphic in the long run. The 1.66:1 AR is actually a little taller than standard widescreen televisions, so even when a 1.66:1 is made anamorphic, it won't "fill up" the entire widescreen screen. If it did, it would have to crop off part of the top and bottom.

The real concern here is that 1.66:1 is difficult for some companies to do right. CC's Gertrud was cropped, and I believe there were a couple more instances.

User avatar
garmonbozia
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 2:55 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA

#28 Post by garmonbozia » Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:07 pm

doh! I confused myself by reading that description. I know better, but it's been a really long day :D For some reason I read over those specs quickly and equated that with seeing the "not anamorphic 1.66" above. I somehow read it as describing letterboxing.

User avatar
tryavna
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: North Carolina

#29 Post by tryavna » Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:12 pm

garmonbozia wrote:doh! I confused myself by reading that description. I know better, but it's been a really long day :D For some reason I read over those specs quickly and equated that with seeing the "not anamorphic 1.66" above. I somehow read it as describing letterboxing.
No prob. I've done the same before, too. Raising the anamorphic 1.66:1 flag is always worthwhile, since it tends to be a problematic aspect ratio.

In fact, I was just thinking about it last night, as I watched Anchor Bay's Morgan: A Suitable Case for Treatment. Say what you will about Anchor Bay, but for some reason, they seem to have one of the best track records when it comes to getting anamorphic 1.66:1 right. (But that's another thread altogether.)

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#30 Post by domino harvey » Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:28 pm

my heart is filled with joy at this release... is it a January or December title?

User avatar
Galen Young
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 8:46 pm

#31 Post by Galen Young » Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:25 pm

Seeing this posted up at their site made my whole day -- those extras look fantastic. Hopefully early January!

User avatar
What A Disgrace
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:34 pm
Contact:

#32 Post by What A Disgrace » Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:22 pm

The most exciting entry of the month, for sure.

By my count, this is one of only five Rialto films to receive a commentary track on a Criterion DVD (the others being Billy Liar, Grand Illusion, Hearts and Minds and Peeping Tom).

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#33 Post by HerrSchreck » Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:52 am

Snooze.... despite some interesting moments, this film flops badly for me. You know how The Clash (who I love) sorta fizzled out when the whole Yelling About Injustice thing got old?

For me that's what this film is, just a rampantly colorless repetition of drab misery heaped upon itself over & over again. Bresson's style of restrained ambiguity works marvelously when misery is laid against a rich tapestry of artfully assembled setpieces of varied emotional & social textures, with audio & landscape nuances adding to the surface veneer (the deep richness of BALTHAZAAR, where there is a great sense of emotional 'travel', and direction to the mise en scene); his style also works very well in elucidating the torment of an introspective soul versus life's lack of answers (COUNTRY PRIEST, tempo & counterpoint providing poetic crescendo to the ambiguities of the unanswerable); works fabulously when laid over a suspenseful narrative as the vague, subtle style describes the sense of tension provoked by the lack of answers and information among prisoners who can communicate very little, who trust each other even less, and live in fear of execution-to-come (the sublime MAN ESCAPED). His style even works very well in capturing the mysterious motivations of a thief who himself has a vague understanding of why it is that he picks pockets.

In all of these we have distinct forms of melodrama which have been quietened, infused with a silence that makes them yell louder. Meanings sprout everywhere like weeds as the softness of the emotional punctuation thumps along with a normal film tempo.

In MOUCHETTE we have almost nothing laid over nothing. There is no classic tempo or even narrative to speak of (and by tempo I mean development of plot, i e the pace that things, however vaguely defined or punctuated, move along). A girl starts out suffering, continues suffering, until she can take it no longer. Just a bunch of miserable repetition, no arc, nothing much "happening offscreen". Too much misery for the classic moments of quiet ambiguity where the viewers brain lights up and participates in the story... none of that glorious Bressonian empty space surging to the brim with meaning.

To me this film is a failed warmup for A GENTLE WOMAN, wherein he far more successfully probed the terrain of a suffering young girl. Unless the docs turn out to be sublime I wouldn't go near this disc with someone else's ten foot pole.

Cinesimilitude
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:43 am

#34 Post by Cinesimilitude » Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:30 am

Well, I already wasn't interested, so thanks for the confirmation there schrecko.

User avatar
Oedipax
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:48 am
Location: Atlanta

#35 Post by Oedipax » Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:26 am

Awesome, they're including Godard's trailer! That's one of my most-wanted extras ever.

User avatar
Steven H
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: NC

#36 Post by Steven H » Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:43 am

HerrSchreck wrote:In MOUCHETTE we have almost nothing laid over nothing. There is no classic tempo or even narrative to speak of (and by tempo I mean development of plot, i e the pace that things, however vaguely defined or punctuated, move along). A girl starts out suffering, continues suffering, until she can take it no longer. Just a bunch of miserable repetition, no arc, nothing much "happening offscreen". Too much misery for the classic moments of quiet ambiguity where the viewers brain lights up and participates in the story... none of that glorious Bressonian empty space surging to the brim with meaning.
To me, Mouchette is all about the girl, and the viewer is given ample time to consider her emotions and understand her interactions. Interactions with other people (like The Devil, Probably) are abstracted and made completely fascinating in this film. I'm not a lover of all things Picasso, but it reminds me of his analytical cubist phase, especially the portraits, where the style trumped the person and made the artful representation of a personality so strange and compelling. This is how I feel about Mouchette.

I do find myself also searching the minds of others, offscreen, during Mouchette as well. The bar scenes, the moments in the woods, and her homelife are all surging with those ambiguous Bresson moments. It doesn't seem any more Hugo in it's concentration on suffering than Au Hasard Balthazar, to me at least.

kevyip1
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:07 pm

#37 Post by kevyip1 » Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:03 pm

Is there no present-day interview of Nadine Nortier among the DVD features? I want to know what she is up to now. Anyone knows?

che-etienne
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:18 pm

#38 Post by che-etienne » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:17 pm

Steven H wrote:
HerrSchreck wrote:In MOUCHETTE we have almost nothing laid over nothing. There is no classic tempo or even narrative to speak of (and by tempo I mean development of plot, i e the pace that things, however vaguely defined or punctuated, move along). A girl starts out suffering, continues suffering, until she can take it no longer. Just a bunch of miserable repetition, no arc, nothing much "happening offscreen". Too much misery for the classic moments of quiet ambiguity where the viewers brain lights up and participates in the story... none of that glorious Bressonian empty space surging to the brim with meaning.
To me, Mouchette is all about the girl, and the viewer is given ample time to consider her emotions and understand her interactions. Interactions with other people (like The Devil, Probably) are abstracted and made completely fascinating in this film. I'm not a lover of all things Picasso, but it reminds me of his analytical cubist phase, especially the portraits, where the style trumped the person and made the artful representation of a personality so strange and compelling. This is how I feel about Mouchette.

I do find myself also searching the minds of others, offscreen, during Mouchette as well. The bar scenes, the moments in the woods, and her homelife are all surging with those ambiguous Bresson moments. It doesn't seem any more Hugo in it's concentration on suffering than Au Hasard Balthazar, to me at least.
I don't think this is simply suffering heaped upon suffering, but suffering slowly revealed, painfully slowly in every good sense of the phrase. I wouldn't say that these instances in which we see Mouchette downtrodden, ridiculed, and violated are very subtle or revealing in of themselves, no, but the point is how she internalizes it all. I maintain that there's a great deal going on "off-screen", and that much of it might be inferred from Mouchette's subdued actions - or reactions as it were - and even more so her subdued expressions.

...and how can one not be moved by the scene where she has to breast feed her own brother and tears start to flow. For that indelible image alone, this film is worth it to me.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#39 Post by HerrSchreck » Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:35 am

And how could one not be moved by the scene right after that where Mouchette is so hungry from losing the fluid that she has to drill into the brain of the brother she just breastfed and suck the cerebral fluid out with a straw because she is forthwith so dehydrated.

The film is like an afternoon in Darfur. Only without the beautiful arty sunrises & sunsets.

Mental Mike
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 12:06 am

#40 Post by Mental Mike » Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:20 am

I won't buy this blind. I bought Au Hazard Balthazar blind and I still haven't recovered a year after I saw it on CC. I have never experienced anything as bleak as that film...I don't want my emotions manipulated again by a Bresson to the point when my heart leaps out of the body cavity....

...but that may have been due to an animal being abused...when humans are mean to other humans its o.k. But abuse of animals is more than I can take...-

Napoleon
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

#41 Post by Napoleon » Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:50 am

I really do not 'get' the miserablist Bresson's (this and Balthazar).

Rotten people, the evils of human nature: A family turning on a single member in peace time is not unheard of, while atrocities at times of war and religious crime in unstable regions are common. However for an entire community to turn on a person in a rural village at peace time? I don't see how such a scenario correlates to reality. There is no kindness, understanding or compassion in the communities represented by these films and subsequently they don't ring true. Country Priest, by having its characters motivated by things other than spite, works far better for me.

So what is the point of these films? To see how unpleasant life can be? Every day we see the real misery that mankind is capable of via news stories about the latest genocide in some far off land. That is misery for real people in real terms. These films generate feelings using convoluted environments and an imaginary, innocent girl and/or a imaginary, innocent donkey. Although the bit where Mouchette chucks mud at the other kids made me chuckle.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

#42 Post by colinr0380 » Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:06 pm

Napoleon wrote:However for an entire community to turn on a person in a rural village at peace time? I don't see how such a scenario correlates to reality.
I wish I lived in your world! :wink:

User avatar
Anthony
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:38 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA

#43 Post by Anthony » Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:17 pm

colinr0380 wrote:
Napoleon wrote:However for an entire community to turn on a person in a rural village at peace time? I don't see how such a scenario correlates to reality.

I wish I lived in your world! :wink:

Ditto. Napoleon has definitely never witnessed someone vilified by a community before. Where do you live Napoleon?... cause I'd life to live there with you.
Last edited by Anthony on Tue Oct 24, 2006 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

#44 Post by Michael Kerpan » Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:16 pm

Anthony

Love, Love, LOVE your Dragnet Girl avatar.

User avatar
Anthony
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:38 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA

#45 Post by Anthony » Tue Oct 24, 2006 4:12 pm

Michael Kerpan wrote:Anthony

Love, Love, LOVE your Dragnet Girl avatar.
Thanks. It's one of my favorite Ozu films. I would love to see Criterion distribute it someday.

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

#46 Post by Michael Kerpan » Tue Oct 24, 2006 5:09 pm

OT --

I suspect that the Panorama "Dragnet girl" is going to be more than adequate. I wouldn't recommend waiting for Criterion to issue this -- it could be decades (if ever).

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#47 Post by HerrSchreck » Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:49 am

To be specific on my end it is never my allegation that scenarios such as that outlined in MOUCHETTE never occur-- they do on a daily basis. Tales of human cruelty represent some of cinema's finest moments. Think Wise's THE SETUP, think Kirsanoff's MENILMONTANT, Stiller's SIR ARNES TREASURE, Scorcese's TAXI DRIVER o r RAGING BULL, etc.

Artistic power via mise en scene and execution are what is at stake here. And for better or for worse, when dealing with tales of rampant misery, contrasts are explicitly neccessary. The director is almost obligated to break out into some form of relief-- be it comic relief (the automat roundtables in TAXI DR, even the oddness of DeNiro's fantastic acting sitting across from Shepard in the coffee shop during their first 'date), simple moments of blank lightheartedness a la the dancing around the mattress in MENIL when the sisters receive the letter, or even the playing with the cat up the tree in the beginning... the humor of the clunky goomba language & mannerisms in RAGING BULL ("you hit like you take it up the ass", or the noise arguments between LaMotta & neighbor Larry... or "Marmaluke of the year"), even the caricatured humor of the audience members in THE SETUP, the exaggerated nature of all the characters that deliberately amuse.

These are directors who know that to successfully deliver effective tales of unbelievable misery & suffering, they must deliver the absurdity, the absolute meaninglessness of it all... to understand the cruelty of life one must understand it's utter mindlessness. The torment comes from such incredible brainlessness, juvinile jealousy & nastiness... to treat it with unrelenting seriousness at its' source is to honor it beyond what its worth. It's like the common mistake of delivering a portrait of Adolf Hitler as the very Devil himself-- this as opposed to a hyperflatulent, relentlessly monotone, vegetable-dumpling nibbling silly human being who was allowed to effect the horrors he promulgated. No powers from hell, no black magic, no finger-lasers: just a bunch of pathetically stupid people falling for immediately identifiable absurdity. Like the tragedy of the Iraq war-- all of this was very specifically and carefully warned by intellectuals, neither democrat or republican, intelligent folks outside of the world of news & politics. Yet stupid people rule and subject sensitive thinking folk to the cruel rules of their spiteful world. This comes across in DIARY OF A COUNTRY PRIEST, BALTHAZAAR, even A GENTLE WOMAN.. bit is missing from MOUCHETTE.

Most tragedy involves stupidity on mind-numbing levels-- colorless repetition of unremitting misery just doesn't work for me, and tells me nothing I didnt already know about life. MOUCHETTE is about as interesting as walking into the bathroom behind a dude who just took the most wicked beer shit. Just a stream of continual unpleasantness.

Napoleon
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

#48 Post by Napoleon » Wed Oct 25, 2006 6:09 am

colinr0380 wrote:I wish I lived in your world!
Seeing as you live less than 30 miles away from me, I'd say that you do!
Alas, last time I drove through Chapel I didn't spot any ashen faced youths setting fire to a donkey.
HerrSchreck wrote:This comes across in DIARY OF A COUNTRY PRIEST, BALTHAZAAR, even A GENTLE WOMAN.. bit is missing from MOUCHETTE.
You've got one up on me because I don't see any difference between Balthazar and Mouchette. Both contain antagonists that are motivated only the desire to inflict suffering on others. Gerard could have sported a curly moustache and an evil cackling laugh and it wouldn't have made his character less realistic. The only relief comes from Maries childhood friend turns up, and even that is thrown back in the audiences face.
HerrSchreck wrote:To be specific on my end it is never my allegation that scenarios such as that outlined in MOUCHETTE never occur-- they do on a daily basis.
Perhaps my local councilors are right and the big northern industrial city that I live in (with an above average crime rate) is a utopia of human compassion. But I have trouble accepting that this happens in a country at peacetime.
I've heard stories of families keeping another family member as a slave and families killing another member for being possessed. Kids get bullied by other kids at school (and maybe a teacher or two joins in) on a vast scale. But for the surrounding community to be complicit in such acts?

Whether I believe such things occur or not is largely irrelevant, because as HerrSchreck has pointed out the key to making a good miserabist film is getting a balance between light and dark*. Don't allow the dark to utterly overwhelm the light. Country Priest, Brazil, Witchfinder General, LFA Unknown Woman, the films that Schreck mentioned (or at least the films that I've heard of that Schreck mentioned) manage this, these 2 Bresson's imo do not. Must be the 'charmed' life that I've lived.

*Scratch that. The last 2/3's of Lilja 4-ever are 100% misery. The film still works as the scenario and the people Lilya encounters are grounded in reality. She is cut off from anyone who could help her. This is not the case in Mouchette and Balthazar.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#49 Post by tavernier » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:09 pm

Godard's trailer is brilliant - it's one of his best shorts!

The other extras are good, too - the 30-minute German documentary of Bresson shooting the film and a 7-minute segment of a French TV show, also of Bresson on location.

User avatar
Gordon
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:03 am

#50 Post by Gordon » Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:55 pm


Post Reply