*By submitting your contribution, you agree to TCM's Terms of Use. TCM will use your personal information consistent with our Privacy Policy

• Surely you jest

  • Brad
  • 11/10/12

  I watch Breathless after hearing Robert Osborne talk about it. I'm not adverse to black and white or foreign films with subtitles, but I must say this is among the worst movies I have ever watched. It had no social redeeming value, the plot seemed like they made it up on the fly, and the only thing worse than the acting was the music. I've read why everyone thinks this is a classic. Sorry, I couldn't disagree more.

• style over substance

  • Arbogast
  • 11/8/12

  Agree with Dean to an extent. The dialogue is improvised (sometimes pretentious), set ups are random, but here is Godard breaking the rules of classic cinema, re-inventing the language of film, spitting in the face of conventionalism, and inspiring a new generation of filmmakers. Not bad for a first film.

• Breathless

  • Jim
  • 11/8/12

  Outstanding film. Jean Seberg certainly has a presence about her. Would like to see this again.

• Classicly bad; amateurish example of a genre

  • Dean444
  • 11/8/12

  It completely astonishes me that anyone could find this movie entertaining, or that anyone would ever recommend this French film. I suspect it's because some Americans have an innate need to glorify anything French. What some people try to call "new wave" actually translates to amateurish and clumsy efforts at everything, from the direction to the dialog. New wave must mean "film class project" en francais, because that is the quality of production in this movie. I have seen nearly every American, and several French, film noirs, and a good film noir this is NOT. A bad movie is just a bad movie, in any language. First of all, the dialog is boring and frequently pointless. Conversations are seemingly random and unconnected. Did I mention it was boring? There is no tension in the movie, nothing to keep your interest. The cinematography is a joke. The scene in the street where the two stars first meet (Seberg & Belmondo) looks like it was filmed by a dad on vacation. Everything about this film screams cheaply made. Scenes are poorly edited. The lunch between Seberg and her editor looks more like it was filmed in claymation than using live actors. A good film is supposed to tell a story, and this one doesn't, not until perhaps the end. But then it's more of a moral to the story as is typical of French films, more than anything else. There are also major gaps in the film: too many things are never explained but yet are central to the motivation of the characters. If this is a classic film, then it is a classic of a bad example of a genre.

• Classic amateurism

  • Dean444
  • 11/8/12

  It completely astonishes me that anyone could find this movie entertaining, or that anyone would ever recommend this French film. I suspect it's because some Americans have an innate need to glorify anything French. What some people try to call "new wave" actually translates to amateurish and clumsy efforts at everything, from the direction to the dialog. New wave must mean "film class project" en francais, because that is the quality of production in this movie. I have seen nearly every American, and several French, film noirs, and a good film noir this is NOT. A bad movie is just a bad movie, in any language. First of all, the dialog is boring and frequently pointless. Conversations are seemingly random and unconnected. Did I mention it was boring? There is no tension in the movie, nothing to keep your interest. The cinematography is a joke. The scene in the street where the two stars first meet (Seberg & Belmondo) looks like it was filmed by a dad on vacation. Everything about this film screams cheaply made. Scenes are poorly edited. The lunch between Seberg and her editor looks more like it was filmed in claymation than using live actors. A good film is supposed to tell a story, and this one doesn't, not until perhaps the end. But then it's more of a moral to the story as is typical of French films, more than anything else. There are also major gaps in the film: too many things are never explained but yet are central to the motivation of the characters. If this is a classic film, then it is a classic of a bad example of a genre.

• Breathless

  • Dashiell Barnes
  • 10/20/12

  The film that sparked the French New wave. Humphrey Bogart- like hood, Belmando, steals a car & shoots a cop, hoping to leave the country with his girlfriend, Seberg. The two leads treat love like a joke and posses both affection & angst towards each other. This is a free-form, romantic thriller that spoke with the postwar youths. A terrific, unforgettable picture that set the standards for "modern movies." I give it a 5/5.

• A Bout de Souffle

  • Mike
  • 2/10/11

  In the Monogram style of a movie as a living organism, this revived the theatrical medium after its eclipse by TV. ------------------------------------ Submitted by: Mike

• More Reviews