Détective
(Detective)
1985
Godard continues to play with the genre after a long time and this time it is the detective/thriller/crime genre. Loaded with quintessential elements like the omnipotent mafia head, the leaf of the tree who tries to make it big, a washed up pugilist, the disguises, the 666/999 room number gag and much more, Detective is a scribble-pad for Godard who floods it with a deluge of in-jokes, Shakespearean references and crossover lines. And as with all Godard films that have traces of a story line, it is the very narrative that makes one struggle to either cruise over the fragmented crust of the film or to penetrate into what is both demanding and enlightening.
Many feel that Detective is one of the weakest links in Godard’s filmography, but I found the film to be the most iconoclastic film by Godard since Breathless (1959). Till Detective, Godard had been objecting the conventions used for representation in the medium and attempted to concoct a genuinely independent form of expression and interaction whereas here, he objects the nature of the medium itself. He did meditate about the idea that the camera is a tool that always captures the past in his earlier films but in Detective, he breaks even that intuitive notion and “records the future”. The detectives are investigating a supposedly unsolved murder but the very murder happens as they are digging. What’s more baffling is that the audience is placed in the shoes of the detectives, they are made to see all that they see and hence are made to witness future – all this in the typically self-reflexive Godardian way.
And the effect isn’t just a perplexing one. Completely different from the Brechtian estrangement theory but achieving the same result true only to the seventh art, Godard appeals for a genuine detachment from the medium and a complete abandonment of belief on cinema and its images that we’ve grown to accept as truth (Le Petit Soldat?). At the end of the film one feels both dissatisfied for wasting such a great murder plot and disillusioned after having his/her perceptions shattered. And obviously, Godard’s intention is the latter.
December 25, 2008 at 1:18 pm
I have this movie, but now I really need to watch it after reading your excellent review.
LikeLike
December 25, 2008 at 1:20 pm
By the way, I would love to read your review of Godard’s In Praise of Love.
LikeLike
December 25, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Yes, it is coming up. I wrote it a couple of days ago.
LikeLike
December 26, 2008 at 12:45 am
I can’t even begin to tell you how much I appreciate the work going on here!
It shames me to think of the so very few Godards I have come to watch so far.
Wonderful reviews Srikanth, always inspiring and a pleasure to read :)
LikeLike
December 26, 2008 at 7:53 am
Thanks for Reading, Samakshi
LikeLike