French New Wave

[Michael Lehnert]

Hey, I hope you reconnect to your "old place"! I am not entirely sure how widely taught, shown or accesible those "Frenchies" are right now in US film schools. So every opportunity should be used.

Maybe someone could enlighten me about that?

 

"La Jetée" is really heavy stuff. ARTE (a pan-European art-focused channel) broadcasted it in the late 1990s where I finally caught it, original with German subtitles. I must admit the last film I saw from him was "Level Five". Since then, I wasn't able to catch up with this work at all. So even here in Europe, many filmmakers lack adequate exposure.

 

I just watched "La reprise du travail aux usines Wonder" from tape archive for an article I am writing, and I was thinking that those 9 minutes of 16mm are more insightful as a piece of documentary than many of the recent feature-length investigative documentary films.

 

At least, documentary filmmaking is back on the agenda, as it was kind of "underground" for most decades since the 1970s.

[Michael Lehnert]

Actually, I just noticed: shouldn't this thread be somewhere different than the "Lighting" forum, like maybe "General Discussion", as we havn't mentioned dedolight, arrisun or kino-flo once? :D

Edited October 11, 2007 by Michael Lehnert

[James Steven Beverly]

I discussed these (lacks of) politics of contemporary filmmaking and that important definer of Cinéma Vérité, Direct Cinema and Nouvelle Vague (cf. my earlier posts) with a friend in Poland, and he came up with this (provocative?) encapsulation:

 

"When someone understands that no matter what the shoot or docu film is all about, the chosen cameras for usage today must be from Aaton and shall never be an Arriflex, because that already is a fundamental decision of political art-making, then this person grasps the notion of what Cinéma Vérité, to some extent Direct Cinema, also Nouvelle Vague is fundamentally on about."

 

Now that's something to digest... :P . Most will dismiss it as cr*p, I'm sure; but maybe not... a background on the political economy of cine-tech houses and their corporate history helps to get that point. (although ARRI is not devoid of politics, either)

 

Cheers, -Michael

P.S.: I hope that at least the weather in San Diego is better than in London, and less dangerous than in Texas - gosh, James, don't get killed when ... well... doing anything, really.

 

Good God! See this is why I use Soviet equipment. As for Texas being dangerous, ain't nothin' but a thing, as it turns out I'm a harder man to kill than one might expect. B)

[Jason Reimer]

Good God! See this is why I use Soviet equipment. As for Texas being dangerous, ain't nothin' but a thing, as it turns out I'm a harder man to kill than one might expect. B)

 

You guys had those crazy floods a couple months back, hopefully you'll get the rest of your rain in more moderation...

 

But yeah, politcs and history aside, I am curious about specific lighting strategies those guys used, now that we know their productions weren't haphazard affairs.

[Jesse Cairnie]

Actually, I just noticed: shouldn't this thread be somewhere different than the "Lighting" forum, like maybe "General Discussion", as we havn't mentioned dedolight, arrisun or kino-flo once? :D

 

My original idea was to have a few of you experts on Nouvelle Vague possibly explain some of the lighting techniques you might know from your apparent passion for the era.. exposure techniques, film manipulation, soft/hard light theories etc..

 

but it seems a "philosophical debate" ensued.. fine by me.. the more insight the better.. but maybe I can wrangle everyone back on track..

 

The director and I just watched Jules et Jim, 400 blows and A man and A woman.. not many no.. but.. the director and I both agree that "A Man and a Woman" best suited the vein of her vision..

 

might anyone have any specifics to the making of that film? Cameras, lights, stocks, theories, etc..?

 

Might anyone recommend a film similar in style to "A Man and a Woman?"

 

Also Ive been reading about the Cameflex camera and it seems that it is a very noisy (60db) camera.. with the "on location", "minimal" equipment theory and a noisy camera.. were Nouvelle Vague films shot with location sound? or even scrapped and ADR'd in post?

[James Steven Beverly]

Cameflex?!!....What a minute, I thought you could ONLY shoot a French New Wave film on an Aaton? Claude Lelouch must have not understood the Nouvelle Vague rules and that "A Man and a Woman" wasn't a true New Wave film, you'll have to scratch the whole project! :rolleyes:

Edited October 12, 2007 by James Steven Beverly

[Michael Palzkill]

Others can probably answer this better than me, but I think that to answer your question, it varied.

 

In his book on the French New Wave, Richard Neupert states:

 

"New Wave filming techniques depended on more than shooting quickly on location, however. They altered the conventions of their shoots, looking back to neorealist techniques, but combining what they learned from Rossellini with what they could learn from new documentary filmmakers such as Jean Rouch. Jean-Pierre Mocky, whose first feature, Les dragueurs [...], was one young director who urged everyone to 'eliminate all the dead weight the cinema drags behind it,' which meant not just heavy over cliched stories, but also 'tradition of quality' production norms. Mocky urged new directors to follow his model and shoot silent, like the neorealists, and put the sound together later in the sound studio to save time and money. New Wave directors did shoot silent when appropriate, but some also follow documentary practice, using new lightweight portable magnetic-tape recorders for sync-sound on location. In 1959, the Swiss Nagra III, a new fourteen-pound version of earlier models, became available; it caused an immediate sensation within the cinema verite community and was adapted right away by some New Wave directors."

 

That was probably unnecessary, but in going along with the rest of the thread, I thought I'd do it.

 

In answer to your question. Some filmmakers did it, some didn't. I don't know if they shot sync-sound with the film you are looking at or not, I haven't seen it, but this part of the book I quoted came to mind when I read your post, so I thought I'd reply. I'm sure others probably have a better answer to your question, though.

Edited October 12, 2007 by Michael Palzkill

[Adam Thompson]

James helped cloud this post up. (and btw man, I'd take the actor, director, writer, etc, etc off your sign., it looks really egocentric and I'd bet is hardly accurate. Pick one thing and go with it dude)

 

Jesse, I'd list some more information about the kind of locations and camera your shooting with. What you are talking about here is a technical issue more than anything else. Now that you have 500asa film and T1.3 lenses, etc. you can have more freedom and options than they did in those days. To start with I know you should be talking to the set or production design person about how practicals placement can be used to help you. Photofloods, windows and big bounce boards should be part of the vocabulary.

[James Steven Beverly]

James helped cloud this post up. (and btw man, I'd take the actor, director, writer, etc, etc off your sign., it looks really egocentric and I'd bet is hardly accurate. Pick one thing and go with it dude)

 

Oh, you mean like Orsen Wells, Clint Eastwood, Charles Chaplin, John Cassevettes and many others did? I list what I do. It's not egocentric, it's fact,, YOU stick with one thing if that all you feel you're capable of, I'll keep on doing what I've done sense I was 16.

 

As for this thread, I clouded nothing. I answered a question:

 

"So my question is.. is there a "New Wave Technique"?.."

 

and was challenged on the validity of my answer. I defended that answer. You will note in Michael Palzkill's quote from Richard Neupert's book:

 

"New Wave filming techniques depended on more than shooting quickly on location, however. They altered the conventions of their shoots, looking back to neorealist techniques, but combining what they learned from Rossellini with what they could learn from new documentary filmmakers such as Jean Rouch. Jean-Pierre Mocky, whose first feature, Les dragueurs [...], was one young director who urged everyone to 'eliminate all the dead weight the cinema drags behind it,' which meant not just heavy over cliched stories, but also 'tradition of quality' production norms. Mocky urged new directors to follow his model and shoot silent, like the neorealists, and put the sound together later in the sound studio to save time and money."

 

That my statements seem to have been proven accurate, at least according to what Mr. Neupert wrote, so I don't see how that muddied up anything.

Edited October 12, 2007 by James Steven Beverly

[Michael Lehnert]

Cameflex?!!....What a minute, I thought you could ONLY shoot a French New Wave film on an Aaton? Claude Lelouch must have not understood the Nouvelle Vague rules and that "A Man and a Woman" wasn't a true New Wave film, you'll have to scratch the whole project! :rolleyes:

 

Ohh, James... (i know, this does sound like a Bond Girl line...)

 

...the chosen cameras for usage today...

 

I did not know that "Un homme et une femme" was still in production. I must have mixed up the controls of my cryogenetic bed, then.... ;) . Don't forget that French filmmaking is not under the impression that art-making (incl. films) are devoid of or outside the political realm. To believe that politics don't matter is naive, and a quick stroll through the forum threads over the past week irrepresentatively contextualises above lighthearted point here, here, and here.

 

That my statements seem to have been proven accurate, at least according to what Mr. Neupert wrote, so I don't see how that muddied up anything.

 

Ohh, James... (hey, Bond is a franchise, so I can use the same joke twice).

You should start a career in government communications or become a career academic. Your source reading would qualify you for that 100%. The sheer elegance with which you overread and extracted the part of the Neupert quote that establishes the distinction between C.V. and N.V. is full of grace and beauty:

In 1959, the Swiss Nagra III, a new fourteen-pound version of earlier models, became available; it caused an immediate sensation within the cinema verite community and was adapted right away by some New Wave directors."

 

---

 

And now for something completeley different, namely to Jesse's problem and the original topic, once and for all:

 

Might anyone recommend a film similar in style to "A Man and a Woman?"

Also Ive been reading about the Cameflex camera and it seems that it is a very noisy (60db) camera.. with the "on location", "minimal" equipment theory and a noisy camera.. were Nouvelle Vague films shot with location sound? or even scrapped and ADR'd in post?

 

The Cameflex is like a jackhammer, but it is arguably the most advanced-engineered (multiformat) camera ever built (remember that some model could take 16mm & 35mm). I will never forget the moment when Costa-Gavras presented his personal one, mounted the magazine (which sounded as if a ship's hull rubbed against the walls of a dry-dock) as then switched it on - his gleaming was met with a certain gasplessness from the audience, I suppose. Like everthing Eclair made, however it's a milestone that changed cinematography forever.

 

Remember, that the "liberation" N.V.suggested was to combine various cine techniques (not diletantically, but thought-through in advance). So you could shoot a scene without sound at all, and do ADR or off-commentary and foley work in post. Then, another scene would be shot with sync-sound and sophisticated lighting, but nevertheless hand-held and hence unsteady. "A bout de souffle" by Godard is a very good showcase how these various techniques (including thinking about the frame composition and where to place the camera, like maybe outside a building, filming just the facade at night (!), while the actors, however, play a crucial scene in sync-sound with chimerical lighing and their reflections against the windows of that building from inside) integrate beautifully and do not let the audience know about the disintegrated filming techniques which would make every producer today shudder in angst! Having believable actors like Jean-Paul Belmondo or Alain Delon, even someone like Romy Schneider in "La piscine", helps, too!

 

Adam Thompson made a very good point, namely that you and your director should think about the following:

Do you want to shot a 1:1 Nouvelle Vague film, historically as they did it - which means alot of intellectual work in advance about shooting techniques and huge understanding of the cine tech gear involved (maybe using gear of that time, lenses etc), pushing it to the limit. It is feasable and works with open-minded audiences today. But you also run the danger that audiences who are into "Spidey III" will think you are all diletantic amateurish nutheads. Then, you would need to give us here some hints about story elements and locations and shooting conditions.

Are you shooting 16 or 35? Zoom or Prime? Available light outdoors, or plenty of indoor talkies? Do you want to combine B&W and colour neg? DI, which might help emulating older film stocks in grading? What's the output most likely to be, a theatrical print, or DigiBeta for festival submissions?

 

Or do you want to make a contemporary film that bears inspired resemblance to N.V. films but is nevertheless showcasing contemporary applications of cine gear, is something contemporary, something-of-its-own and will hence look like most other contemporary Euro art house movies (which are widely running on tv and screen in Switzerland, France and Spain, but I guess not at all in the USA outside the Super 8-using filmmaking scene - remember, I am not talking Sundance-level films here at all!)

Then I would just go with lighting and sound tech as Adam suggested, plus any T1.3 lens you can get and maybe an Aaton 35-III or X-series for the spirit of the 1960s (Arriflexes just don't ooze that atmosphere as they are very technocratic, but that's just my experience ;) that James finds so laughable, don't take my remark too serious)

[Jesse Cairnie]

Cameflex?!!....What a minute, I thought you could ONLY shoot a French New Wave film on an Aaton? Claude Lelouch must have not understood the Nouvelle Vague rules and that "A Man and a Woman" wasn't a true New Wave film, you'll have to scratch the whole project! :rolleyes:

 

-NOOO!!! MY DREAMS.. SMASHED YET AGAIN!!! HAHAA!!

-Dont tell the Nouvelle Vague Police that Im gonna shoot it on a Konvas.. it wont get accepted to Cannes for sure.. hahaa

 

-But seriously Michael that quote from the book is PERFECT... exactly answers my question.. and I think James "clouding this post" has given me good insight.. thank you James..

 

So we have Content, Editing, Sound, Camera, Philosophical, Verite vs Nouvelle Vague, Directors, Movies, Cinematographers and History.. thank you everyone for all of this information.. now for Lighting...

 

What Ive gathered from Michaels book quote is that "Nouvelle Vague" is the bastard child of "Neo-Realist" and "Cinema Verite" aka "Rosellini and Rouch" (who says men cant have children together..)

 

Which from my mathematical deductions.. Means "a properly lit 'documentary' with the occasional 'Movie Light', but mostly using bounce boards/cards and small unobtrusive 'grip' devices to control the lighting" and from the "but also 'tradition of quality' production norms." I gather they weren't too concerned with pushing/pulling the stock for a "specific feel" and as for lenses they used one of the three that were on the turret.. and the occasional "specific feeling" lens per the director.. with its "semi neo-political" undertones and its "typically un-cliched" stories.. and a Mise en Scene specific to each Director aka "Auteur".. Id say I have officially grasped the basic concept of "Nouvelle Vague" and its techinque..

 

With that its time to go shoot some test footage.. I'll keep you posted.. Thank you all..

Edited October 12, 2007 by Jesse Cairnie

[James Steven Beverly]

By Jove I think he's got it!!!AND You're shooting on a KONVAS!!! Comrade, We make cinema, NOW!!! Whad I tell ya, forget Aaton, forget Eclair, When it comes to neo-Nouvelle Vague, Commiecams RULE!!! You should check out the hand held work in "The Cranes are Flying" if you haven't already, Konvas all the way, baby! You using a 1m, 2m or KSR-1? B)

[Jason Reimer]

Probably the best thing to do would be to post some frames from specific scenes in specific films that you and/or your director like the look of, and then we can all take turns disecting ways to light like those scenes. Then you can start to make decisions about what sort of lighting package you're going to want to use, ie- soft sources vs hard sources, etc.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

Cameflex?!!....What a minute, I thought you could ONLY shoot a French New Wave film on an Aaton? Claude Lelouch must have not understood the Nouvelle Vague rules and that "A Man and a Woman" wasn't a true New Wave film, you'll have to scratch the whole project! :rolleyes:

 

The NewWave had long past by the time first Aaton appeared.

[James Steven Beverly]

The NewWave had long past by the time first Aaton appeared.

 

I didn't say you HAD to shoot New Wave with an Aaton, Micheal's Polish guy did:

 

I discussed these (lacks of) politics of contemporary filmmaking and that important definer of Cinéma Vérité, Direct Cinema and Nouvelle Vague (cf. my earlier posts) with a friend in Poland, and he came up with this (provocative?) encapsulation:

 

"When someone understands that no matter what the shoot or docu film is all about, the chosen cameras for usage today must be from Aaton and shall never be an Arriflex, because that already is a fundamental decision of political art-making, then this person grasps the notion of what Cinéma Vérité, to some extent Direct Cinema, also Nouvelle Vague is fundamentally on about."

 

:rolleyes:

Edited October 14, 2007 by James Steven Beverly

[Jesse Cairnie]

Adam Thompson made a very good point, namely that you and your director should think about the following:

Do you want to shot a 1:1 Nouvelle Vague film, historically as they did it - which means alot of intellectual work in advance about shooting techniques and huge understanding of the cine tech gear involved (maybe using gear of that time, lenses etc), pushing it to the limit. It is feasable and works with open-minded audiences today. But you also run the danger that audiences who are into "Spidey III" will think you are all diletantic amateurish nutheads. Then, you would need to give us here some hints about story elements and locations and shooting conditions.

 

Are you shooting 16 or 35? Zoom or Prime? Available light outdoors, or plenty of indoor talkies? Do you want to combine B&W and colour neg? DI, which might help emulating older film stocks in grading? What's the output most likely to be, a theatrical print, or DigiBeta for festival submissions?

 

i some how didnt see your post right before my last... wierd.. anyway..

 

Yes.. the idea of our indepth research here is to make a film on a 1:1 or .9:1 (as we are not french and it is not 1958) N.V. film.. this script is a love story of vibrant youth with an excited view on the world, love and life only for everything to go to hell (ala Jules et Jim).. the director feels that is a very N.V. ideal and wants to tell that story in its original style.. She is more interested in reaching the open-minded audiences and is "willing to take a box office hit" to express her film in its "ideal form"...

 

We are shooting 35 on a Konvas as per then.. well, technology wise.. and Prime because its included in the package and so is a cinescope gate... It takes place 90% indoors of the house and workshop.. we would like to combine color and B&W (ala Un Homme et un Femme) with a DigiBeta for festivals with intent of a Theatrical print..

 

The only equipment we want to use "of the era" is the camera and maybe an older film stock.. for that reason we could shoot digital and "make it in post".. but i am never happy with results of the "make it look like film" using digital footage.. it always looks forced and cheezy (maybe my technique is poor).. but if we shoot 35 and then do some digital "aging".. that might be cool.. but then again.. we dont want to get too carried away and make it look like we found film in a vault somewhere.. but then that might mean we did a good job.. who knows..

 

We are definitely ready for all of the technical planning that is going to need to go into this for the N.V. feel.. I talked to her about sound and she wants to have a recordist.. but is not going to go full bore and get a "production sound mixer and Boom Op" more to just have a sound reference for each take and incase of ad lib... then we can ADR it all in post..

 

Thanks again for all of your help.. I feel like im going to be a Nouvelle Vague expert now.. I'll keep everyone posted..

[Jesse Cairnie]

apparently you cannot edit your posts.. wierd.. anyway..

 

by 90% Interior i really mean..

 

"70% Interior 20%Exterior and 10%"In the car" as for conditions.. the script doesnt call for anything specific.. but we are in Washington State, 'nough said... "