jbeall wrote:Re: Gary Tooze's calling Daisies Godardian. I think it's too facile and does a disservice to Daisies. This is not meant as an attack on Godard; rather, I think Chytilová is just a bit more aesthetically radical in her vision even as she's less overtly political). I suspect Tooze made the association both because of the chromatic filters in the film and b/c Chytilová is wearing sunglasses for most of the Cesta footage. Whatever the anarchy and destruction rampant in Daisies, it never feels as heavy-handed as similar content in Godard. Moreover, I think Daisies is so much more resistant to any narrative development. It's a difficult film, and while I'm not sure how much more accessible it will become with multiple viewings (this was only my second), I suspect it takes several just to start making all the associations in the film. Again, Hames' essay is very useful for getting through it the first time.
This is my opinion as well. Aesthetically and narratively (if such a word can even be brought up regarding this film), Daisies
is pure joyful anarchy. It thumbs its nose at the kind of formalist experimentation that Godard engages in. The film doesn't concern itself with genre, it detests politics, and it doesn't want to parse cinematic language in the least -- its a big fuck you
to dialectics in general. Its gluttony and abandon of the highest order, and Chytilova has a lot of fun with the idea of eating as being the Original Sin (as she would also in Fruit of Paradise
). I think the film was banned for wasting food.
I find few films as authentically and irreverantly nasty as Daisies
. Watching it is one of the most liberating experiences in cinema. Godard can be clever, incisive and radical in the most mean-spirited way, as in Weekend
, but he's miles away from Chytilova. I would liken her more to Rivette, if such a comparison were necessary.