Bande à part

This is a very rich and entertaining work. The plot revolves around two men and a woman who decide to rob the employer of the woman's aunt. However, Godard uses this slender plot as an excuse to riff on a wide spectrum of subjects. The would-be criminals run around, dance, recite newspapers stories to each other and have pretend shoot-outs.

This film is a lot of fun. Watch out for the celebrated dance sequence in the cafe and the scene where the three hold a minutes silence and all the noise on the soundtrack is cut off for the duration.

Acting wise, the film is stolen by the lovely Anna Karina (who was Godard's wife at the time) as the sweet, vague woman at the centre of the trio. Godard himself does the voice-over narration relating the story.

Filmed on the cold, de-glamorised streets of urban Paris, the film has a spontaneous feel that adds a lot to the exhilarating feel of the whole work.

This film is a charming, fun and suspense filled picture from one of the world's most interesting film-makers.

I won't pretend to be a scholar of French New Wave. I've seen a few movies (including BREATHLESS, 400 BLOWS and a few more). And now Godard's BAND OF OUTSIDERS. Of the New Wave I've seen, Godard's films are often the liveliest and most "carefree." At their best, they have an undeniable energy that feels real, like something really happening while a camera happened to be running. Sometimes, you are VERY aware that a film is being made but in a way that delights you with the craftsmanship. And sometimes, you just don't quite know what's going on, because the elements of what we think of as traditional narrative and storytelling are less interesting to Godard.

BAND OF OUTSIDERS touches all these areas. We are introduced, somewhat abruptly, to Arthur & Franz, two young men with little money and big ambitions. And little in the way of scruples. They are both taken with the innocent young Odile (Anna Karina), whom they attend an English Class with. They like her, but they also like the fact that she lives in a home where one of the men there keeps a huge pile of cash in his closet. So they both woo her because they are interested in her, and woo her to get her to help them steal the money. She knows that's their goal, but is nervous about helping. It isn't always easy to tell how anyone really feels about anything. There's actually a narrator there to explain some of this to us, but he never really quite does. The two men are fairly stoic, and its hard to read them. They are clowns. They are romantics. They are men of their era who also like old Hollywood movies. Odile is innocent, but that doesn't mean she isn't interested in and tempted by these guys. She's ready to break out of her shell more than a little.

The "heist" in the movie is almost incidental to watching these 3 interact. At times, their relationship is quite amusing, and at times, there is an undercurrent of danger. Odile fancies Arthur, ultimately, because she thinks he's the most genuine. But to us, he feels the most sinister. Capable of violence. And at it's best, the three have some really amazingly fun scenes together. Best of all was a long sequence set in a cafe, which, after lots of amusing things regarding who will sit where at their table, the 3 launch into a dance (The Madison). That scene, one long, long take, is amazing. Nothing happens, really, except they dance...but it's amazing to watch. Karina comes into her own...she glows in this scene, and for me, at that moment, she became a truly interesting actor.

It's a goofy movie in many ways, and speeds along briskly, but mostly to nowhere. The heist takes the tone of the film in new directions, and I'm not sure how Godard wanted things to come across. It seems remarkably callous. There are times throughout the film where we simply don't have a clue what's going on in the minds of the characters. They engage in conversations that come out of nowhere and we're given no context. Yes, it's all very "new wavey", but we need a little more to be willing to take the journey with you 100%.

It's a fun movie, and feels very evocative of its time and of a particular generation in that time. The young and disaffected with no real prospects. I'm very glad I saw it.

Apart from perhaps being a satire of gangster movies, the point of this film eludes me. Two guys and a young woman plan a robbery at the Paris house where the young woman lives with her aunt. The young woman is naive and constantly scared. The two young men are seemingly rather ordinary. I didn't find any of these people interesting. We never learn much about them or what motivates them. Yet, given that this is a "New Wave" film I doubt that characterization was all that important to the film's director.

The plot starts out okay, but then meanders, and then becomes increasingly silly and unbelievable. Maybe that was intentional. Midway through, the three main characters suddenly, and for no reason, burst into a dance called the "Madison", the steps to which are nothing if not annoyingly repetitive. This bouncy little interlude goes on for some time, yet it has absolutely nothing to do with the story. Again, maybe that's the point.

Other gimmicks are inserted gratuitously, evidently to shock 1964 viewers into the realization, consistent with New Wave doctrine, that the film is not a product of the dreaded classical Hollywood narrative style of film-making.

But the worst element of this film is the sound. Background, ambient noise is amplified; why, I don't know, except, again, as some counterpoint to standard Hollywood films. Yet, the noise in "Band Of Outsiders" is so distracting, even grating, it takes away from what little value the visuals and narrative may have.

B&W cinematography is unremarkable. Lighting is low-contrast. Visuals trend toward grayish, pallid tones. Production design, in keeping with low-budget film-making, is plain, even cheap looking.

As a daring and iconoclastic attempt in 1964 to provide an alternative to stodgy, old-style Hollywood film-making, Godard's "Band Of Outsiders" probably does have some historical value. But what was visionary then seems campy and trite now.

"Band Of Outsiders" covers about the same ground as "Breathless", but I think with less depth and less humor. Godard sticks more to plot here and less to his wonderful scenes of empty talk that are like good jazz riffs. People may respond more to this one than Breathless precisely for that reason- it more fits the conception of an American B-movie: The plot is conceived, designed and carried out with a few twists and turns in the process.

This movie is the most self-referential of Godard's B-ish movies in that Godard is a director who lives in a world of the junk crime movies he grew up with making a movie about characters who live their lives like a bad crime movie. When Anna Karina jokes that Stolz probably made his loot from cheating on his taxes, then repeats it again in the final scene- this time as stated fact, it shows you how deeply these characters are entrenched in the fiction of it all, how the wisecracking becomes a way of living. What was disappointing to me is that there was less of the memorable nonsense that makes Godard's films unique- although there is some. Godard's overwrought, sickly poetic narration is obviously a gag, as is Arthur's hilariously overacted death scene; the minute of silence at the soda shop where Godard cuts the soundtrack completely is great, and the synchronized (well, almost) dancing is just precious, and I loved it. But it's the almostness of Godard's films that makes it special; if it were too perfect, it would be mechanized and dull. Instead of dancing, it would be choreography, an applied science.

Band Of Outsiders is definitely worth seeing if you like Godard's way of filmmaking; to me, it falls a little short of greatness, but it does have its moments. Beware of croc-Odiles! 3*** out of 4

I must admit I have a bit of a problem with Jean Luc Godard. As he is a major influence on many film makers I love, I'm always curious to watch his movies to see where thay learned their chops. But I usually find Godard's movies a chore to get through and generally disappointing overall. Even his most famous and influential movie 'Breathless' took me a few viewings before I "got" it, and recently rewatching it for the first time on DVD I found it to be a lot less entertaining than I'd remembered. 'Band Of Outsiders' is for many Godard buffs even better than 'Breathless', but I really cannot share their enthusiasm. While in many ways the two movies are similar in approach and subject matter, the major difference for me is that 'Band Of Outsiders' lacks the infectious energy of 'Breathless'. Making a movie about characters who are bored with life there is a great risk that the movie will be boring to watch, and this is too often the case with this film. There are a few inspired sequences I can't deny that, especially the influential dancing scene, the minute of silence, and the race around the Louvre, but these are few and far between. The other main difference is in the actors themselves. Anna Karina is by far the best thing about this movie, but Claude Brasseur and Sami Frey lack the charisma and presence of Jean-Paul Belmondo, and drag the movie to a standstill every time they have a "bit". I'm sorry I just couldn't get into their characters or care for their fate, in the way I could about Belmondo and Seberg in Godard's earlier movie. So there you have it, a movie that buffs will probably want to check out for historical reasons, but apart from that there isn't much reason to sit through it. And yeah, I know it gets a big thumbs up from Quentin Tarantino, but so does 'Days Of Thunder'!