In this episode, Jim discusses Francois Truffaut’s Day For Night.
One thing I’ve read in a number of reviews which you didn’t cover is that “Meet Pamela” was never going to be more than a mediocre movie even if everything went right. That’s a significantly more cynical take, as after all the hard work & obstacles to be overcome the result is completely inessential.
I’d be curious to know precisely what Godard thought was dishonest about Day For Night. I’m inclined to prefer Truffaut to Godard and have no inside knowledge of the filmmaking process, but it’s possible he was correct.
At worst, I think that Meet Pamela being a mediocre movie is a moot point, but at best, I think it feeds into the idea of Truffaut being passionate and jovial about his craft. Even if a film he is working on will never be anything more than mediocre (and, let’s be honest – in the throws and stresses of making the film, how much insight would he have that it wouldn’t be any more than mediocre?), he still dedicates the same care, affection, and hard work that he would any other film. What’s dishonest about that?
© 2017 Battleship Pretension. All Rights Reserved.