1. The Fr ench N W
ew ave
AM 75180-5
2012-13

2. Ai m of Today’s Lect ur e
s
• W i s a N W i n C nem
hat ew ave i a?
• W w e t he or i gi ns of t he Fr ench N
hat er ew
Wave?
• W w e t he i deol ogi cal pr i nci pl es
hat er
behi nd t he nouvel l e vague?
• W w e t he def i ni ng f eat ur es of
hat er
nouvel l e vague f i l m?

3. W i s a N W i n C nem
hat ew ave i a?
AN W i s a m
ew ave ovem i n ci nem w ch
ent a hi
seeks t o st yl i st i cal l y and nar r at i vel y
di f f er ent i at e i t sel f f r omt he dom nant
i
par adi gmof m nst r eamf i l mpr oduct i on.
ai
Usual l y, t he peopl e dr i vi ng t he m ovement
ar e young and ar e dr i ven by an
i deol ogi cal /pol i t i cal i m at i ve.
per

4. O i gi ns of t he Fr ench nouvel l e
r
vague
• D t o t he N
ue azi occupat i on of Fr ance, Am i can
er
ci nem had been banned dur i ng W l d W I I .
a or ar
Af t er t he w , r est r i ct i ons w e l i f t ed and
ar er
H l yw
ol ood pr oduct f l ooded t he Fr ench m ket .
ar
• Fear i ng t hat t her e w l i t t l e exhi bi t i on space
as
f or al t er nat i ves t o H l yw
ol ood, Andr e Bazi n
est abl i shed a num of ci necl ubs i n w ch he
ber hi
w d scr een non-H l yw
oul ol ood, non-com er ci al
m
f i l m O her l i ke-m nded peopl e began t o do t he
s. t i
sam and an under gr ound m
e, ovem w bor n.
ent as
• The scr eeni ngs w e or gani sed and at t ended by
er
peopl e l i ke Jean-Luc Godar d and Fr ancoi s
Tr uf f aut w w d go on t o be l eadi ng f i gur es
ho oul
ew ave ovem .
i n t he Fr ench N W m ent

5. C er s du C ném
ahi i a
I n Apr i l 1951, t he f i r st i ssue of C er s du C ném
ahi i a
(N es on C nem w publ i shed. C C w headed by
ot i a) as D as
Bazi n, Jacques D onoi l -Val cr oze and Joseph M i e Lo-
ar
D uca.
The m agazi ne ai m t o r est or e Fr ench ci nem t o
ed a
pr om nence, as w l as t o di scuss al l f i l mw t h t he
i el i
sam ki nd of i nt el l ect ual cont ext w ch ot her ar t
e hi
f or m w e t r eat ed w t h.
s er i
C C w d onl y w i t e about new f i l m and f avour ed
D oul r s,
l ooki ng at i ndependent f i l m over st udi o
s
pr oduct i ons.
Fr omi t s i ncept i on, f ut ur e and cur r ent f i l m aker s
m
w e heavi l y i nvol ved i n t he m
er agazi ne. Er i c R er
ohm
ser ves as C C i ni t i al edi t or , and Tr uf f aut , G
D ’s odar d
and Jacques R vet t e w e am
i er ongst t hose w w ot e
ho r
f or i t .

7. The D r ect or ’s C nem
i i a
Andr e Bazi n f i r m y bel i eved i n eval uat i ng
l
a f i l mt hr ough t he pr i smof t he di r ect or .
As such, C C const ant l y i nt er vi ew
D ed
f i l m aker s, and est abl i shed a canon of
m
di r ect or s w t hey bel i eved t o be above
ho
t he cor por at e m achi nat i ons of st udi o
f i l m aki ng. These nam i ncl uded Jean
m es
R enoi r (Fr ance), Kenj i M zoguchi (Japan)
i
and Al f r ed H t chcock (Am i ca).
i er

8. Al exandr e Ast r uc - C er a st yl o
am
(1948)
• ‘The ci nem i s qui t e si m y becom ng a m
a pl i eans of
expr essi on, j ust as al l t he ar t s have been bef or e
i t , and i n par t i cul ar pai nt i ng and t he novel .’
• ‘Af t er havi ng been a successf ul f ai r gr ound
at t r act i on, an am usem anal ogous t o boul evar d
ent
t heat r e, or a m eans of pr eser vi ng t he i m ages of an
er a, i t i s gr adual l y becom ng a l anguage.’
i
• ‘By l anguage I m a f or mi n w ch and by w ch an
ean hi hi
ar t i st can expr ess hi s t hought s, how ever abst r act
t hey m be, or t r ansl at e hi s obsessi ons exact l y as
ay
he does i n a cont em ar y essay or novel .’
por
• ‘That i s w I w d l i ke t o cal l t hi s new age of
hy oul
ci nem t he age of caméra-st yl o.’
a

9. The Aut eur Theor y
Ast r uc’s w i t i ng w pi cked up on by Fr ancoi s Tr uf f aut , w i n
r as ho
a 1954 ar t i cl e at t acked t he per cept i on of Fr ench st udi o
ci nem as bei ng a ‘qual i t y’ ci nem Tr uf f aut bel i eved t hat t oo
a a.
m of a pr em umhad pr evi ousl y been pl aced on t he
uch i
scr eenw i t er , r at her t han t he f i l m aker . H pr oposed l a
r m e
pol i t i que des Aut eur s, w ch val ued a di r ect or ’s per sonal
hi
st yl i st i c and nar r at i ve cont r i but i ons t o a f i l mover al l
el se. Fi l m aker s w achi eved t hi s w e aut eur s, and t hose
m ho er
w adher ed t o gener i c convent i ons w e l abel l ed as m t eur
ho er et
un scene – l i t er al l y, a st age set t er .
Thi s w a hugel y i nf l uent i al m of t hought , and m ot her
as ode any
C C w i t er s f ol l ow Tr uf f aut ’s l ead i n l ooki ng at ci nem
D r ed a
f r omt hi s per spect i ve. Bazi n, on t he ot her hand, sur pr i si ngl y
at t acked Tr uf f aut f or i gnor i ng t he hi st or i cal , soci al and
i ndust r i al f act or s i nvol ved i n f i l mpr oduct i on and f or
si m i st i cal l y assum ng t hat a di r ect or al one w
pl i as
r esponsi bl e f or a f i l m .

10. Tr uf f aut on C nem
i a
• "For som cr i t i cs, t her e ar e good and bad
e
f i l m w eas m i dea w t hat t her e ar e no
s, her y as
good or bad f i l m but good or bad
s,
di r ect or s. A bad di r ect or m gi ve t he
ay
i m essi on of bei ng good f or havi ng had t he
pr
l uck of count i ng on a good scr i pt , or
t al ent ed act or s… how ever , t hi s ‘good’ f i l m
w d have no val ue f or t he cr i t i c, f or i t
oul
i s t he r esul t of chance, som hi ng et
or i gi nat ed by ci r cum ances. O t he ot her
st n
hand, a good f i l m aker can m a ‘bad’ f i l m
m ake
due t o adver se ci r cum ances, and
st
never t hel ess t hi s f i l mw d be m e
oul or
i nt er est i ng t o t he cr i t i c’s eye t han a
‘good’ f i l mm by a bad di r ect or .
ade
Fur t her m e, i n a si m l ar w – and si nce
or i ay
t he concept of success or f ai l ur e has no
i m t ance w soever – w
por hat hat m t er s i n a
at
good f i l m aker ’s car eer i s t hat i t r ef l ect s
m
hi s t hought , f r omt he begi nni ng of hi s
car eer t o hi s m ur i t y. Each one of hi s
at
f i l m m ks a st age of hi s t hought s, and i t
s ar
does not m t er at al l i f t he f i l mi s a
at
success or a f ai l ur e.”

11. The Aut eur Theor y and The
nouvel l e vague
W Tr uf f aut t ur ned t o f i l m aki ng, he nat ur al l y t r i ed
hen m
t o m hi s f i l m as per sonal /aut er i st as possi bl e.
ake s
O her cont em ar i es f ol l ow sui t , and t hi s l oose
t por ed
m ovem becom w
ent e hat i s now know as t he nouvel l e vague.
n
These f i l m w e shot by gr oups of f r i ends on a l ow
s er -
budget usi ng new y avai l abl e, cheaper cam as.
l er
Tr uf f aut def i ned t he m ber s as shar i ng not hi ng i n
em
com on but t hei r r ej ect i on of t he excess of m nst r eam
m ai
ci nem a.

12. Key D r ect or s
i
Fr ancoi s Tr uf f aut C aude C
l habr ol Jean-Luc Godar d
Jacques R vet t e
i Er i c R er
ohm

13. St yl i st i c Tendenci es
A gener al di sr egar d f or m (but not al l )
any
of t he pr i nci pl es of cont i nui t y edi t i ng.
The f i l m f eat ur ed t echni ques such as:
s
• Jum cut s r at her t han eyel i ne m ches
p at
• Br eaki ng t he 180 degr ee r ul e
• A heavy r el i ance on l i ght er , handhel d
cam as r at her t han st aged, st at i c shot s
er
• Ext r em y l ong t akes, as opposed t o t he
el
qui ck cut s of C assi cal H l yw
l ol ood
• Fi l m on l ocat i on r at her t han st udi o.
ed

14. St yl i st i c Tendenci es
Al l of t hi s am ount s t o a f i l mst yl e w ch
hi
does not at t em t o conceal t hat t he
pt
vi ew i s w chi ng a f i l m I n f act , i t
er at .
of t en seeks t o act i vel y r em nd t hemof
i
t hi s f act .
N r at i ve i s subser vi ent t o per sonal
ar
st yl e r at her t han vi ce ver sa.

15. w .cr
ht t p://w w i t i cal com ons.or g/M ber s/
m em
ogaycken/cl i ps/br eat hl ess-j ump-
cut s.m p4/vi ew
w .yout ube.com at ch?v=D BJW
ht t p://w w /w Xbm n
V0w &nor edi r ect =1

16. N r at i ve
ar
• M e per sonal , aut obi ogr aphi cal pl ot s. For exam e,
or pl
Tr uf f aut ’s The 400 Bl ow (Les Q r e C s C
s uat ent oups, 1959)
w m l y based on hi s ear l y chi l dhood. As such, nar r at i ve
as ost
t hem t ended t o be br oad – l ove, desi r e, f r i endshi p,
es
quest i oni ng of one’s pl ace i n t he w l d – r at her t han
or
gener i c.
• A concer n w t h t he si t uat i on of t he com on m – bor n out
i m an
of t he l ef t -w ng pol i t i cs of m of t he f i l m aker s.
i ost m
• Som i m over t l y pol i t i cal – G
et es odar d’s The Li t t l e Sol di er
(Le Pet i t Sol dad, 1961) w banned i n Fr ance f or t w year s
as o
because of i t s at t i t ude t o t he Al ger i an r esi st ance
m ovem .ent
• U esol ved endi ngs – of t en no nar r at i ve cl osur e, or
nr
r esol ut i on t o t he ‘pr obl em – i f t her e even i s one at al l .
’
• Som i m t her e w d be no scr i pt , onl y a l oose set of
et es oul
i deas, and cer t ai nl y w i t t en di al ogue w not adher ed as
r as
st r i ct l y as m nst r eamf i l mpr oduct i ons.
ai

17. w .yout ube.com at ch?v=XnyR G
• ht t p://w w /w KR
H ZE
w

18. W w t he nouvel l e vague
hy as
i m t ant ?
por
• Pr esent ed a cl ear al t er nat i ve t o
H l yw
ol ood, est abl i shi ng t hat not al l f i l ms
needed t o be m i n a uni f or mf ashi on.
ade
• I nf l uenced ot her N W ew aves (Japanese,
C zech, Thai , Br i t i sh) and cont i nues t o be a
r ef er ence poi nt f or l ef t w ng and ar t
i
ci nem t oday.
a
• H a t heor et i cal under pi nni ng w ch
ad hi
r em ns i nf l uent i al i n Fi l mSt udi es t o
ai
t hi s day – aut eur t heor y, i nt el l ect ual
di scussi on of f i l mas a l egi t i m e ar t
at
f or m .