I am not a fan of looking for any sort of meaning if art. I like it if it hit’s me, sure. I also like to know what an artist is intentionally setting out to do in their work’s. I am less interested in discussion due to the fact that interpretation is such an individual and vast beast.
I fell in love with the movie because of the donkey. That’s it. The fact that the donkey, to me, was a main character and one that had more complexity then the rest.
…super cute too.
I suppose on a deeper level, there is the notion of abuse of power and all that jazz.
I don’t think you necessarily need to look for meaning in art. And I’m not looking for interpretations, either. I just feel like I’m missing something from the bigger picture of this movie. I’m missing something that makes it a masterpiece of cinema, instead of just a simple story about a donkey that gets used and abused by several different owners.
Instead of looking for fault in the movie, I’m looking for fault within myself for not “getting” it. Obviously, it’s a beloved picture. I’m not docking it any points for quality. I’m hoping that there are people on here that’ll be able to explain their viewing experiences and justify their love for this picture, and show/tell me what I’m not taking away from Au hasard Balthazar.
It’s a tricky film, like all Bresson, because much of you doesn’t want to trust the images at face value, but the images are all that’s there
I will give you my interpretation but mind you it is my own and you may see something different. Also I want to see the film again and reserve the right to change my mind completely.
At its most basic level it seems to me to be a film that outlines the problems with the Christian sense of morality. That is, if one believes in God, and good and evil, and heaven and hell, one usually assumes that the wicked will be punished, the good will be rewarded. This really comes together in the end of the film, when Maria’s father, throughout the entire film shown to be a good, noble person, is struck by a disease and dies. The priest can offer no consolation. Gerard, shown to be on all accounts an asshole, is only rewarded for his crimes. Maria and Balthazar suffer equally throughout the entire film but are never rewarded in any way, only hurt more. It is a contrast to romantic Hollywood films (or even the Bible) where perhaps Maria’s young lover will fight Gerard and win her heart and they’ll all ride Balthazar into the sunset. But “reality is different,” as Maria says. Instead Maria is raped and Balthazar killed. Things like this test the limits of the Christian philosophy, “turn the other cheek.” I suppose it depends on your own view of spirituality/philosophy what you take from that. But in my mind it is a Christian parable for the real world. You suffer, and in the end there are no clear answers.
Christine,
If you haven’t already read it, this might help
you’ll probably find a lot of bresson’s films perplexing – developing the psychological motivations in his characters was one of his least concerns. i wrote an essay called ‘bresson and the anti-film’ – it might give you some context for analyzing his films: http://moveease.blogspot.com/2009/07/bresson-and-anti-film.html
“I suppose on a deeper level, there is the notion of abuse of power and all that jazz.”
Well we don’t wanna o near all that DEPTH now do we. Makes you think, and when you think your head hurts. Thank goodness we’ve got the Coens to do all our thinking for us!
In 2007 Anne Wiazemsky wrote a memoir about the shooting of “Au Hasard Balthazar” entitled “Jeune Fille.”
I’ve writtena piece about this rather amazing book (the best account of Bresson’s shooting methods and personal character to date) that will be coming out in “Film Comment” before the year is out.
Christine
Today I watched Au hasard Balthazar, and the only word I can use to describe my feelings is “perplexed.” The film, on the surface level, is not a complicated one. A donkey changes hands and experiences hardship. The donkey’s owners and the people surrounding the donkey have their own life stories to contribute. At the same time, I feel as if this was one of the more complicated films I’ve watched in quite some time. I feel like most of it went over my head.
I get the religious symbolism (perhaps the most base level of all the things going on in this film). I understood the narrative techniques and use of ellipses (I’ve encountered these before in my film studies in movies like Tokyo Story. The two films use them to different effect, but I wasn’t surprised that the Balthazar was skipping moments and important key events in time). I guess what’s eating away at me is the unexplained. Arnold and the murder. Gerard’s inherent evilness. What was eating away at Marie, and what her internal strife was. These people, these scenes, only half-explained.
What are your feelings on Au hasard Balthazar? What am I missing? Maybe as a community we can share thoughts and peel back the layers of this celebrated film.