| Index | 5 reviews in total |
16 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
1967, 6 May 2002
Author:
carlospavan from New York
This is Chris Marker's three hour elegy to the New Left and the
contradictions that swept the world in 1967 and 68. Divided in two parts,
Marker covers Vietnam, Che's death, May 68, Prague, Chile and much more,
connecting these images with Marker's comments about the downfall of the
New
Left.
Each image is so powerful by itself. From a distorted Fidel giving a
speech
to a demonstration in Japan against a company that's poisoning the water.
A
true compilation of historical documents. It's three hours long, but it's
worth it.
7 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
A film that will force you to think about how you see political protest and violence, 24 May 2009
![]()
Author:
dbborroughs from Glen Cove, New York
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I saw the director's re-cut version that removed an hour of material
from the films original four hour running time (something Marker said
needed to be done).
The film opens with one of the most stunning things ever put on film
footage of political protest and violence inter-cut with the Odessa
Steps sequence from the Battleship Potemkin. As one comment I read
pondered, was Sergei Eisenstein that a head of the curve that he mapped
out what political violence would look like in the future or has that
always been the way its looked? I don't know. Next the film moves on to
show a US pilot describing in detail what he's doing and why its
"outstanding" to Napalm the people of Viet Nam. If that doesn't rattle
your cage little will. From there the film moves on to various
Political protests and wars around the world and we're left to ponder
what it all means. Marker plays no favorites and in a way every side
comes off looking less then perfect.Marker shows as the footage, lets
the people speak for themselves and uses various other voices for
narration. I'm still pondering what it all means. I know watching a
three hour movie around midnight was a bad thing to do, but this is a
film you fall into, it drags you along as you kick and scream at it
because you don't want to think at the level that this film asks you
to. I'm not sure what I make of it all, and I know that I'll need to go
through this a couple more times, but I'm glad I've seen it and have
been forced to confront its issues.
On a personal note- I watched Chicago 10, in the middle of watching the
parts of this film and I found that Marker's film changed the way I see
the anti-war protests of the 1960's. Chicago 10 is about the trial that
followed the riots during the Democratic Convention in 1968. Seeing
part of Grin before Chicago 10 it suddenly becomes clear that as much
as what happened in Chicago was important in that it started things
moving toward the end of Viet Nam and other things, it was also
something that in the scale of things didn't have huge stakes. You
didn't have the Soviet Army marching into retake control of Prague. You
didn't have the political violence that was going on in Bolivia or
Africa or elsewhere. Where elsewhere in the world you had people
dealing with the political ramifications of their actions on a one to
one level, here in the US you had Abbey Hoffman and several other
members of the Chicago Ten treating it all as if it was a joke on some
level. Yes there was injustice and violence, but not so many people
were dying and no one was tying Hoffman to a chair and torturing him
for the hell of it. I'm not one to take things seriously, but at the
same time in the face of what was going on elsewhere in the world the
jokes really come off as ill advised. For me, who was raised to see
Hoffman and many of the Chicago ten as heroes of a sort, seeing them in
action, especially in light of other political movements, kind of make
them seem like rich jerks.
Clearly Grin without a Cat has changed how I see the world.
7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Le fond de l'air est Marker..., 2 March 2008
![]()
Author:
carlitaantonini from Valencia, Spain
As always Marker give us a breathtaking beautiful movie to shake our minds and think about the world around us. Its sad to realize through the images that even when the movie is about the history of 50 years back now, the ideologies, the problems and the unfairness of the world remains pretty the same. The compilation of images, documents, videos, interviews is excellent. How can Marker be everywhere and always in the right moment? Just because is Marker I guess. Excellent movie for people of any age or nationality in the mood of caring about the society and enjoying Marker's mastery using the video as a real communicator of deep thoughts.
7 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
More captivating than insightful, 30 September 2002
![]()
Author:
palmiro from Chicago United States
I saw the English-language version, so I missed out on the wonderful voices of Yves Montand and Simone Signoret. Still, the film has provocative images (makes you think how difficult it really is to "make the revolution" in advanced capitalist countries) and my attention never flagged. But for someone who does not approach the film fully equipped with all of the political-cultural paraphernalia of the French left, the film is a bit bewildering. It's not at all clear what the director's point of view is, and this is unfortunate for a film that attempts to make sense of a relatively well-defined political phenomenon: the new left of 1968 and beyond. Is he simply trying to say that the movement strayed too far from its working class ally, and therefore was a superstructure without a base (hence, the title)? If so, the film is not organized in a sufficiently coherent way to bring that point home. And even so, one could hardly say that the French left really had a chance in '68 to "smash the bourgeois state," given that the violent instruments employed by the state to perpetuate in extremis the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie"(the army and the police) never showed signs of cracking. And even if there had been a "revolutionary socialist breakthrough" in France, the country would have been crushed first by the economic sanctions imposed by the other capitalist countries (a la Chile) and then militarily (had the "revolutionary government" sought to align itself with the USSR). Very humorous interlude involving Fidel's obsessive massaging of microphones, but on the whole not very flattering towards him (but neither towards Guevara and Regis Debray, for that matter). Maybe I missed something, but I thought Georges Marchais (PCF) came off the best--judge for yourself.
3 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
What's the point?, 2 June 2009
![]()
Author:
lastliberal from United States
I know that I am supposed to like this film. Unfortunately, as it is
almost strictly for the political converts, I didn't.
It is basically a collection of unused film footage from the late 60s
and early 70s, showing significant moments in the leftist revolution,
and how they dropped the ball, i.e. a "grin" without a cat. Yawn!
Watching home movies of a leftist movement that compromised itself out
of existence is not very satisfying.
Film students may find appreciation of this work, but after watching
Marker's most famous creation, "La Jetée", I expected more.
Despite the fact that it was reworked, it just didn't measure up to my
expectations.
| Ratings | Awards | Newsgroup reviews |
| External reviews | Plot keywords | Main details |
| Your user reviews | Your vote history |