Mouchette (1967)

1/5

Two one-star movies from the same director. Does Robert Bresson have a talent for making terrible movies or what? And he is somehow critically acclaimed and lauded by fans. He doesn't believe in acting, dialogue, or emotions. He knows nothing of cinematography, lighting, and editing. He disregards all traditional aspects of filmmaking to generate some self-indulgent form of "pure, austere" cinema. Only it doesn't work. It doesn't interest your emotions, your intellect, or your gut. In fact, it does nothing for you. And it has got to be the most boring movie I've ever seen where stuff actually happens. It's just the most banal, unimportant, and insignificant things that are occurring. The screenshot is about as exciting as the movie gets. How does Bresson make an 80 minute movie feel like an 800 minute movie? Don't watch this movie. Ever. Under any circumstances.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0061996/

Au Hasard Balthazar (1966)

1/5

Wow. This is perhaps the most disappointing movie I have ever seen. I desperately wanted to like it; I thought it would be a masterpiece. It was like anticipating The Godfather and getting The Hot Chick. This is the first time in a long time, maybe even ever, that I felt like walking out of the theater halfway through.

The acting, as in all Bresson movies, is completely flat. The dialogue is there merely to get from one place to the next. Reviewers have called this movie a staggering emotional masterpiece, but I cannot feel emotion for characters I am completely separated from. This separation is a direct result of Bresson's desire for "austere," "pure" images. The music was bare yet melodramatic in its usage, blatantly attempting to evoke emotion that the actors were not allowed to generate. Bresson decided not to explain any character's motivations, perhaps hoping the audience would chalk it up to human nature and how people sometimes act illogically; this decision made the movie not only confusing, but also insulting to the viewer.

I found absolutely no redeeming qualities in this movie. It was a complete and utter waste of 95 minutes of my life.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0060138/

Pickpocket (1959)

2/5

How is it possible that Bresson can make the best and the worst films alternatively? Diary of a Country Priest was terrible, A Man Escaped was amazing, and now we're back to terrible with Pickpocket. I hope Au Hasard Balthazar will be a return to amazing.

As in all his other movies, the actors are emotionless bags of flesh announcing words. It was impossible to watch the dialogue and/or "acting" without cringing. This separates the viewer from the characters and the movie becomes unengaging and therefore boring, no matter what's going on on the screen. If something is even going on on the screen: half the time the camera lingers on nothingness when people enter or leave. The plot was flat and ineffective; it seemed as if everything was planned in order to fit the mold of the overarching theme.

There are only two things I really liked about this movie. The first was a philosophy put to words early on in the movie. Responding to Michel's idea that thieves could be good, a police chief says that it would turn the whole world upside down. Michel responds, "The world is already upside down. This could set it right." In a sense, that was the theme of the entire movie: the reversal of expectations. The second was a scene lasting around five minutes where Michel and two accomplices pickpocket about 30 people on a train. It was an orgy of cool.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0053168/

A Man Escaped (1956)

4.9/5

This movie is the essence of an escape movie. It has some of the most nail-biting tension put to film (thanks in part to the relatively bare soundtrack). It has stripped all the excess and fat off of it (such as a background story and characterization) in order to focus solely on the details of the escape. The shot composition is pretty incredible (made more impressive with long tracking shots).

It would be a pretty terrible movie if you can't get into it, since the entire movie is basically details and nothing else. You just need to know what you're getting into. Lucky for me, I was enveloped from the second it started.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0049902/

Diary of a Country Priest (1951)

2/5

I say this with absolute frankness; this movie is pretty boring. It tells the story of a priest coming to a parish in the countryside and being treated with animosity by the villagers. Its almost ascetic filmmaking and "purified" images didn't do anything for me. The dialogue and message could be interesting at times, but for the most part it just dragged on and tried too hard to get a message across while still being subtle about what the message was. I prefer Bergman for my dose of filmic religion and philosophy; also his shot compositions are far superior to those in this movie. So what does this movie really have to offer? I would probably not recommend this movie to anyone.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0042619/