Not knowing anything about this film before viewing, I thought it was a comedy because the opening pillaging sequences and sword play reminded me of Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
As the film progressed, I realized Bresson was serious. This film is a huge departure from Pick Pocket, A Man Escaped, and Balthazar etc etc. It's far from perfect. This film had the worst sound design and cinematography in any film I've seen and I've sat through Andy Warhol art house.
I honestly think people who praise this film do it out of respect for Bresson's reputation. If he had not made those masterpieces, people would more readily scoff at this film like Tommy Wiseau's The Room. From the poorly lit cinematography, to the bad construction of a scene, it does not redeem itself but for a line or two of good dialogue in the whole movie.
One example is a sequence where the knights run in one direction, Gawain is killed, and then they run in another direction. We can't really make out what is going on except for the tin-can sound they used to represent the clunking of their armor. This sound is drastically annoying and devastatingly takes you out of every scene.
Another example, are the crappy jousting scenes shot from a dwarf's perspective (you can only see the sequence from the horse's chest and below). I got the gag about the "footfalls," but that doesn't mean it makes shooting the jousting sequences badly acceptable. I don't care if Bresson meant it to be a tongue in cheek, it didn't come across very well.
Perhaps Bresson didn't know how to shoot action sequences? I remember in the film A Man Escaped, Bresson chose not to show the audience how Fontaine killed the Nazi guard. What stood out was how awkward the character of Fontaine looked right as he was making his attack. It was really fake looking, but because Bresson cut away, I forgave this mistake due to how moving the rest of the film was.
As usual Bresson chose actors with no experience. In this case, I think it backfired. One example is the silly scene where Lancelot is in bed and the old woman is trying to convince him not to go. His expression was comical for all the wrong reasons. This isn't the only scene where I'm completely underwhelmed. And it's not because it's supposed to be an art house film that I feel this way. It's because it was a bad film. It was badly acted/structured. The chess pieces Mordred was moving around were more interesting to look at than the actors themselves - I've never seen such tiny pawns on a chess board in my life.
All joking aside, I can only assume this film has good standing because people are afraid to admit Bresson made a bad film. Or they can't see how bad the acting is because they don't understand French - I'm only guessing of course.
It's OK if it's a bad film. Even Kubrick made Fear and Desire - but in Kubrick's defense, that was his first feature film. I wish I could blame it on Bresson's age, but Akira Kurosawa made great films like Ran and Dreams as he was advancing in years.
How did Bresson lose touch and somehow get critical praise and an award at Cannes for this film?
Well he doesn't get this reviewers praises. If we call this a masterpiece, we may as well call Argento's Dracula a masterpiece as well. Whereas Python achieved greatness by not taking the Arthurian legend too seriously, I feel Bresson achieved greatness in this film due to his reputation alone. What a lucky guy.
As the film progressed, I realized Bresson was serious. This film is a huge departure from Pick Pocket, A Man Escaped, and Balthazar etc etc. It's far from perfect. This film had the worst sound design and cinematography in any film I've seen and I've sat through Andy Warhol art house.
I honestly think people who praise this film do it out of respect for Bresson's reputation. If he had not made those masterpieces, people would more readily scoff at this film like Tommy Wiseau's The Room. From the poorly lit cinematography, to the bad construction of a scene, it does not redeem itself but for a line or two of good dialogue in the whole movie.
One example is a sequence where the knights run in one direction, Gawain is killed, and then they run in another direction. We can't really make out what is going on except for the tin-can sound they used to represent the clunking of their armor. This sound is drastically annoying and devastatingly takes you out of every scene.
Another example, are the crappy jousting scenes shot from a dwarf's perspective (you can only see the sequence from the horse's chest and below). I got the gag about the "footfalls," but that doesn't mean it makes shooting the jousting sequences badly acceptable. I don't care if Bresson meant it to be a tongue in cheek, it didn't come across very well.
Perhaps Bresson didn't know how to shoot action sequences? I remember in the film A Man Escaped, Bresson chose not to show the audience how Fontaine killed the Nazi guard. What stood out was how awkward the character of Fontaine looked right as he was making his attack. It was really fake looking, but because Bresson cut away, I forgave this mistake due to how moving the rest of the film was.
As usual Bresson chose actors with no experience. In this case, I think it backfired. One example is the silly scene where Lancelot is in bed and the old woman is trying to convince him not to go. His expression was comical for all the wrong reasons. This isn't the only scene where I'm completely underwhelmed. And it's not because it's supposed to be an art house film that I feel this way. It's because it was a bad film. It was badly acted/structured. The chess pieces Mordred was moving around were more interesting to look at than the actors themselves - I've never seen such tiny pawns on a chess board in my life.
All joking aside, I can only assume this film has good standing because people are afraid to admit Bresson made a bad film. Or they can't see how bad the acting is because they don't understand French - I'm only guessing of course.
It's OK if it's a bad film. Even Kubrick made Fear and Desire - but in Kubrick's defense, that was his first feature film. I wish I could blame it on Bresson's age, but Akira Kurosawa made great films like Ran and Dreams as he was advancing in years.
How did Bresson lose touch and somehow get critical praise and an award at Cannes for this film?
Well he doesn't get this reviewers praises. If we call this a masterpiece, we may as well call Argento's Dracula a masterpiece as well. Whereas Python achieved greatness by not taking the Arthurian legend too seriously, I feel Bresson achieved greatness in this film due to his reputation alone. What a lucky guy.