Meeting With Woody Allen (1986) Godard (3)

Even a great brain like Allen is baffled by Godard's silly questions - because they are ridiculous self-flagellating nonsense.

All art MUST serve the viewer - not feed Godard's ego. Not pander, but enlighten the viewer. Godard does not do this - that is why his works have no artistic merit.

rather struggle with film than struggle with other things

The editing of this interview is ridiculous and annoying. Still, it's righteous to see two relatively esoteric and quirky filmmakers conversing... well it was more of an interrogation lol as a pervious poster said.

if it had english subtitles instead of french we could understand it :/

An interview is an interogation. Godard is suspicious of T.V. & journalistic intentions & asks Woody about the press. But interogating is a matter of adapting Woody's cliches to his own method of deconstruction. Unlike Stanislavski, JLG doesn't "cater" to actors, directors, audiences, T.V. & film narrative, or culture, in general. Even as he warms up to the editing, he puts a chill on the cult of personality. But in the end, as the "images" pile up, the whole thing is like Humpty Dumpty

Jesus! Why does that asshole of Godard keep cutting off Woody Allen's answers?

cause he can....its.....jean-luc cinema godard :)

Anyone happen to know the painting at 6:24? It looks like something by Edward Hopper.

Like everyone else, I love Godard's new wave films (Passion, Detective, etc were rubbish) but bloody hell he comes across as a total nob. He asks the most stupid questions that don't mean anything, then there is the editing, the TV thing etc. Still, thanks for putting this up.