Godard-Truffaut rivalry; Jules et Jim vs. Masculin Feminin

Truffaut's Jules et Jim (1962) is the story of two friends and the schizophrenic woman they both love. The story, as told through the eyes of a third person narrator, thereby lending itself to a storybook feel, consists mostly of upbeat fanfares, orchestral melodies, and a great deal of frolicking. Jules and Jim are good friends, the former being the first to meet and claim the heroine Catherine, the latter falling in love with her soon afterwards. The character Catherine herself is simply too mediocre; not gorgeous, not devious enough, too emotional, and completely insincere. They both ending up marrying the broad and one or the other has a child who disappears at the midway mark with her. Well, in actuality they both get her pregnant, but that detail is pretty unimportant. It's easy to poke fun, but Tuffaut seems vaguely aware that this particular story is a farce of a movie; I refer you, oh my brothers, to the discussion of the “Swedish playwright's play” early in the beginning, verbatim: “The play's vague and complacent, showing vice to illustrate virtue. We don't know when or where it takes place. He doesn't say whether the heroine's a virgin or not. Yes, if the story was only sentimental, but he says the hero's impotent... plus a homo brother and a nympho!” As if speaking to his audience, Truffaut includes that self-loathing gem up front; in his defense, the setting is explained at some point in the film. Truffaut's narrator is the real star, never appearing or playing any role in the movie, providing excellent commentary throughout; the most telling line is the one in which he tells of the “Three Idiots” and their wonderous time together. I couldn't have put it better myself; Jim the “homo brother” is too pessimistic to be happy; Jules has no balls, that is he is too passive; and Catherine doesn't know what she wants. It's the some archetypal sitcom that Two and a Half Men will later steal.

Truffaut's film emulates some of the stylings of silent era films, with details such as musical themes (there's a frolick soundtrack and Albert, the odd suitor out who makes a couple appearances throughout, has his own theme) and overly exaggerated facial/body acting. However, he falls into the the pitfall of simply showing a spectacle, as if he only had a silent film to work with. The film lacks depth and purpose. When Truffaut's Catherine finally kills herself, the smile on her face is the same exhausted one I had on my own.

In stark contrast, Godard's Masculin féminin: 15 faits précis (1966) is a more real, politically charged film with both depth of character and purpose. The characters are more natural, their interactions make sense, and the passage of time is far more believable. Where Truffaut showed the love triangle from the lovers point of view, Godard shows the same triangle from the loved's point of view; the object of affection in Godard's version is male instead of female and it is the literal opposite of Truffaut's movie- inverted perspective, likable characters whose actions are grounded in reality, non-slapstick humor. Godard even relies on a repeated musical theme, which is slightly hypnotic rather than irritating. Whereas Truffaut portrays some fantastic bastardization of reality, Godard portrays an incredibly distinctive reality with characters that are personable and normal. The character Paul's constant flipping of cigarette's into his mouth comes to mind; as the hero, the audience hangs on his every action and when he flips a cigarette into his mouth and fumbles it, the audience is very aware of the mistake. And it makes Paul more human. Or another way Godard creates a better relationship with the audience is his extensive use of innuendo and double-entendre, veiled humor and even riddles.

The greatest commentary that Godard makes in his film is a political statement against the Vietnam War. There is a clear political agenda to which his characters adhere. Borrowing Truffaut's anarchist graffiti opening scene, Godard paints a clear picture of anti-Vietnam, anti-American-imperialism; where Truffault only mentions war in passing, Godard shows the effect it has on children and men. He makes it clear that war is a serious matter and not something to be taken lightly, something that Jules et Jim overlooks at best. But without losing sight of the movie itself for his political stance, Godard also tells an entertaining story that anybody can watch and relate to. His dialogue is superb, sexually-charged, and matched with excellent cinematography.