i don't disagree at all with some of what you've just said.

as philosophy and literature - i can't argue - i don't know most of the referenced text enough to even have a comment - i can barely remember Ulysses from high school - I'm sure you're right that Godard is excessive and indulgent and pretentious - it doesn't bother me. i am so magnanamous.

but i totally disagree in that i find 'paul' very sympathetic and i can very much relate to his situation. i myself was married to Brigitte Bardot and let me tell you it was definitely not easy going.

in my review of 'raiders' (which is short), J'accuse J Rosenbaum of not appreciating the film on its own merits - of applying the wrong set of critical tools - and therefore misjudging the film. i believe you are making the same mistake with 'contempt' - you're taking the screenplay too seriously and (it seems to me) criticizing it on literary/textual grounds rather than filmic ones. i will not defend godard's filmic genius to you at this time any more than i will apologize for his literary shallowness.

tenderly, i still want to move to boston. i still want to set some of your ideas into mini-films. and use you prominently in an acting role. for material which you may write or have written and which i may write or have written. i will just have to convince you that it's worth the time.

but let's just not talk about movies anymore, tragically.