Band of Outsiders

With this film Godard returned to the (petty) crime genre and his fascination with American pop culture. Odile (Karina), Arthur (Brasseur) and Franz (Frey) meet in an English language class and become friends. When naive Odile tells them she lives in a house where a large amount of money is cached, their imagination runs wild. Fantasizing and discussing Hollywood B-movies and pulp literature, they decide to rob the house with the help of Odile.

Godard goes to even further extremes in "violating" traditional storytelling with his voice-over narration, giving the viewer information during the action and letting his characters talk to the camera. It might not be Godard's most innovative release, compared to let's say BREATHLESS, CONTEMPT and TWO OR THREE THINGS I KNOW ABOUT HER, but is probably more entertaining and accessible to modern audiences than almost any other pre-1970 film he made (his later work is difficult to grasp for any audience). In the case of CONTEMPT audiences might have flocked to the cinemas because of Brigitte Bardot's presence, but besides BB-devotees, that's hardly a recommendation now. But this one generally is an entertaining and insightful film, with the dancing sequence in the bar justly memorable, as is the 9-minute tour of the Louvre.

Still, essential for movie buffs. Godard even credited himself as Jean-Luc "Cinema" Godard. Quentin Tarantino paid tribute to this film naming his production company A Band Apart.

"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'!

Odile has made new friends at English lessons, after making a faux pas, an indiscretion, telling them about a stash, of a great big pile of cash, it's become Arthur's and Franz's new obsession. Now they're conjuring a plan to grab the dough, it's unsecured, and in a place Odile can show, but she's having some concerns, struggling to come to terms, so she voices her unease, to let them know. Alas the plans for burglary do not run well, as barriers unknown block and repel, it's a comical affair, leads the combo to despair, the execution was quite poor, I think that's fair.

It still views well, but you need to digest it with the era in mind, alongside the other material the director produced around then, taking into account the unique style of his presentations.

I found this to be more of a film about film-making than a great piece of cinema in its own right. It started fairly slowly and was unlike anything that I'd seen before but at the same time it wasn't really going anywhere. I watched some of the extras with the DVD and I'm glad I did because it highlighted the camera work and score which is really all that I'd really picked up watching it. The dance scene was brilliant but aside from that I didn't really find much in the characters to hook me in. I understand from the extras that there was no script which I know isn't uncommon with other directors but it did play like that. There was some good interaction between the characters at times but overall the only real spark inside the film itself was the dance. More technical for me than anything else.