Watch 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her For Free

Strong and Moving!

Must See Movie...

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

The acting in this movie is really good.

Godard's films often achieve breathtaking and philosophically rich effects seemingly at odds with their seemingly random, uncontrolled, aleatory qualities and unconventional structures.2 Ou 3 Choses Que Je Sais is such a film.Godard hates the institutions of capitalism, industrialism, war-mongering, consumerism, materialism, pseudo-intellectualism wherever they exist, be it the US or France.Paris is alive with endless tympanic construction designed to facilitate capitalism and consumerism while our xenagogue Juliette, awash in weltschmerz, is decaying on the inside as a result of this "progress". Dead objects are still alive while living persons are often already dead.All the film's themes are in the opening sequence: the adverse psychological and retromorphic effects of construction, the vitiative effects of capitalism and consumerism and materialism on people and society, both internally and externally, people as objects and commodities, psychomorphism (objects are alive and will please you more than another human being or nature: pinball machine is alive and breathing and in full motion and more entertaining than anything else in existence, while Juliet Berto (café scene) treats Robert like an inanimate object), life as nothing but a puppet of advertising, consumption, exchange, money, etc.2 Ou 3 Choses Que Je Sais D'Elle is about the impact of commodity culture on subjectivity and social relationships. The film explores the effects of commodification, advertising, and popular culture on social relations, on subjectivity, and on the status of things and consumer goods in the environment, especially their presence as visual artifacts.Godard shows us a Paris under construction transforming into a vast marketplace and site of consumption. Godard explores the frustration and desperation (prostitution...) provoked by the discrepancy between a large sector of the population with limited buying power and the wealth of goods available for consumption. He was telling us that in order to live in Parisian society today, or any capitalistic society, at whatever level on whatever plane, one is forced to prostitute oneself in one way or another, or else live in conditions resembling those of prostitution.He investigates the impact of an economically and architecturally changing Paris on its inhabitants, which includes the correlation between consumerism and prostitution within the "new" city. He investigates how the way people think and feel and live are contingent on the architecture and economy around them, and how they're forcibly caught between the newly built modernized architecture (defined confining spaces) and the high cost of living within that city matrix.Consumer behaviour is created and shaped and manipulated by architecture. The landscape itself is being prostituted. Urban spaces are being remade in a way that negatively mutates the pathology of the inhabitants.Godard attempts to recover the clear, productive reality of objects and images from the artificial signs and manufactured meanings that glut our contemporary world, especially signs and meanings that are generated by and in the service of commerce.Jump-cuts, weird sound effects, voice-overs, narrative absurdities, close-ups and other formal elements all contribute to the Brechtian "alienation effect", and Godard wields these devises to perfection, disrupting normal kinds of identification and visual pleasure and cinematic narration, and re-establishing concrete distance from subjects/objects, in order to make objects appear like new, which allows viewers to approach the elusive real and see things again like new. Repeating for clarity, he disrupts unconscious viewing habits and preconceptions of "reality," enabling us to approach the "elusive real", and we see things again "like new", even if only for a few brief but precious moments.Verfremdungseffekts - defamiliariazation for distanciation: Godard reduces the emotional impact of art, reduces spectator identification, reduces mimesis and direct emotional involvement, provokes viewers into thought, jolts viewers into exercising our rational faculties, rather than allowing us to emote serenely and passively throughout the performance.Godard highlights and exaggerates many reified meanings in order to deconstruct them. He seeks out an excess in the image which is irreducible to the functions attributed to it by its associated languages, and a potentiality for transformation is revealed. His hyper-reification of normal ideas we affix to things shakes up those ideas and calls them into question. He selects best angle not for visual pleasure, but for glimpses of essence, fresh significance.Language itself has been transformed into a (capitalistic) commodity, branded with a specific value and endowed with a specific function, no longer natural but manufactured.The very tools we use to critique and interpret have been contaminated by that which we are critiquing and interpreting.2 Ou Choses Que Je Sais D'Elle is a commentary on commodification and a commodity itself.Jackhammers, motors, percolators, coffee cups, pinball machines, burning cigarettes, construction sites, signs, radio transistors, beer taps, fashion magazines, book titles, stacks of books, postcards, etc, impede communication.The Coffee Cup sequence is pure bliss.The social microcosm is, on the surface, utterly banal; a barman, a pimp, a bored girl, a guy smoking and drinking coffee, a beer tap, a cup, and unknown characters, American shoes, cigarettes, the Cokes are treated by the camera with the feeling that nature lovers reserve for mountains and waves and trees.The Coffee Cup - the rhythm of the film slows as we enter this other space of meditation, drifting out of ordinary perception: a cinematic poem about the quintessence of things and the role of consciousness in a world which is irreducibly other....During the last shot the camera also drifts out of focus - a striking visual metaphor for lack of mental clarity, and other frustrations of consciousness; our Narrator muses on the enigma of death; then the camera eye and time pace it refocuses "pleasurably" (regular pace) to signify clarity and heightened awareness, which is echoed by the narration.Language is the house in which man dwells.

Jean-Luc Godard is a master of making nonsense turn into something interesting, something of deep meaning. 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her is full of grand ideas, jumbled up no less, and in return they make a sometimes compelling and sometimes frustrating film. Godard famously once said that the film was supposed to be an homage to The Big Sleep, but instead of a detective, the main character is a prostitute. But if 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her is an homage to The Big Sleep, then I must be a zebra. Frankly, no matter what Godard tries to tell us beforehand, this is a challenging film that has moments of great intellect and inspiration.The "her" in the title refers both to Marina Vlady and the city of Paris itself. Vlady "portrays" Juliette Janson, a bourgeois housewife that doubles as a prostitute in order to pay the bills. "Portrayal" has quote marks around it as Juliette is less of a character and more of a representation: Godard does not intend to tell the story of the complicated woman — he would prefer to study the changing climate of 1960s Paris and its people. 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her marks a huge shift in Godard's career. A staggering fan of American cinema, his earlier projects, such as Pierrot Le Fou and A Woman Is A Woman, were genre films that were stylized as crime thrillers and Technicolor musicals, respectively. But 2 or 3 Things shows Godard more interested in politics and how the increasingly radical ideas of the world were shaping Europe. There are still very American things that show up in certain scenes: in the opening credits, the font is dressed in red, white, and blue. In the rest of the film, advertisements that surround the characters are designed with art deco boldness. But it's difficult to compare the film to anything the U.S. had to offer in cinemas in 1967.2 or 3 Things I Know About Her feels like a delve into Godard's brain at the time. The Vietnam War is mentioned frequently, serving not only as a point of critique but also as a pressing matter, always on the mind. Juliette's immoral lifestyle choice is not a plot device, but a reflection of 1967 France: President Charles de Gaulle's bold transformations to the economic system are prevalent. Skyscrapers are gazed upon with an alienated distance, and Juliette's work was an actual choice many women had to make as cost of living began to increase under his rule.Godard's positions are fascinating, but at times they begin to ramble and become disjointed in their aesthetic. 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her is at its most exciting when characters are simply having normal conversations. When they deliver fourth-wall breaking monologues, they lose quite a bit of their charisma as they feel as though Godard is talking to himself. Too much Godard can be too much Godard, after all.2 or 3 Things I Know About Her features more successes than failures; it's a film that doesn't have much emotional relevance but manages to create interest on a philosophical level. Godard had a great '60s, and this is a fitting closing.Read more reviews at petersonreviews.com

This is a film collage, or experimental film, about the state of Paris as Godard sees it in 1967. The old, romantic Paris is reshaped, large suburbs of tower blocks are built, which Godard correctly predicted to be soulless and inhuman to some degree. The film loosely follows the life of a young housewife and depicts her consumerist lifestyle, which Godard likens to prostitution. At one point she and her manicurist prostitute themselves to a US-American, who wears a stars-and-stripes-T-shirt and makes the girls wear bags over their head. The narrative is so weak that I had to look it up on the internet. Unfortunately, Godard doesn't limit himself to depicting the state of life in 1967, which could have made a fascinating cinematic time capsule. In a way, he seems to be p*ssed off with the state of things in general. Les banlieues -- bad. Vietnam war -- bad. Bright boxes of soap powder -- bad. Cinematic conventions and storytelling -- bad. It's like watching the rant of a miserable old man. I thought the analogy between capitalism and prostitution was pretty cheap. Prefab tower blocks were going up in the Eastern bloc like mushrooms. What alternative does he have to offer? Is he just hankering for the old days of "gay Paree"? As if prostitution hadn't existed back then. In a way, he's part of the parcel. People in 1967 were moving into high-rise slabs, surrounded themselves with bright plastic, and had to endure soulless movies like this one.Yet I'm not angry with Godard. He tried new stuff in this movie, and wasn't very successful with it. I'm angry with film critics who make this out to be a cinematic masterpiece merely because it's "political".

Godard is a God ard. Some people find his films easy. Some find his films hard, Godard is a cinema BardWith "Breathless," Godard created new wave cinema in 1960. With this movie, Godard created postmodern cinema. The amazing thing is how much this film captures a moment in time and space. In fact, in one scene, we are told that it is being filmed on August 17, 1966. We can say that this the date when the Postmodernist world was born.One has to see it as a transition from Pop Art to Postmodernist art. Part of the film is obsessed with the artistic nature of household products. Part of the film is a meditation on our lack of being and our amazing relationship to language.Godard's treatment of woman is quaintly pre-feminist. He is treating them as sex objects,yet at one moment he asks a woman to speak about the sex between her legs. The woman rebukes her and tells her its stupid. Another astonishing moment in a film that has many.The film is non-narrative for the most part. It is Brechtian theater translated into cinema. Godard proves that non-narrative cinema can provide a great deal of pleasure, foreshadowing the future - present cinema.Godard is a God ard.