It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

The cinema movement know as the French New Wave (nouvelle vague) arose in the late 1950s. Leading the charge was François Truffaut, whose semi-autobiographical movie "The 400 Blows" shocked people with its intensity. But another major player was Jean-Luc Godard, whose "À bout de souffle" ("Breathless" in English) was a new kind of crime drama. Jean-Paul Belmondo's suave crook comes across as a nice guy but will stop at nothing to get what he wants, while Jean Seberg's naive journalist just wants to do what she thinks is the right thing.I understand that the movie is a tribute to some US movies that Godard liked. Apparently, he and Truffaut felt that a number of French movies were pleasing to the eye but otherwise empty (Truffaut later interviewed Alfred Hitchcock, whose clever storytelling techniques he admired; while writing for Cahiers du Cinema, Godard praised Otto Preminger's works). Just as important as "Breathless"'s plot is the soundtrack. The smooth jazz drives the movie as Michel goes from place to place, with or without Patricia. The jump cuts are distracting at times, but they don't subtract from the movie. Everything about this movie bears analyzing; you should see it at least once. Outstanding.

It's an absolute criticism like Godard's himself. It's unique and impressive. However, it's not a masterpiece. Just because it's different and experimental in some ways, doesn't make it a really good movie. The dialogues are natural, that's alright. But do they get you? Get you into the movie? Unfortunately, for me they are not working at this way. Jump-Cuts are revolutionary, admiring by many people. For me, it just looks it a bit amateur. Alright, may be that was the idea (it helps to make it unique) and it works in that way. However, it could be done in a more professionally way. I like the sarcasm in that movie. "You are the audience and it's a motion picture" is clearly defined. What about emotions? I have to say that, it's sentimental, the background music just make it better. The theme is great. All these powerful jazz instrumentals make me want to cry. Especially, New York Herald Tribune scene is just so deep and powerful. It gets you; actually the only scene gets me in that movie. As a personal statement by myself, A bout de soufflé will always have a sad way for me. It's because of the person who recommended to me. Unfortunately, there are no connections between us anymore. I didn't want to, it just happens sometimes. Like the relationship between Patricia and Michel. "But l can't do without you. Yes, you can. Maybe. But l don't want to"

Besides the fact that you will save $100,000 another reason to skip Film School is that you won't be required to sit through a screening of "Breathless" - a class that should be titled "How to Make a Self-Indulgent Home Movie Posing As Art" that examines what is essentially an exercise in cinematic masturbation.Okay, Godard did things differently. He not only ignored The Rules of filmmaking; he thumbed his nose at them. This may be enough to endear him to immature film students because of the rebellious nature of youth. This sentiment is usually reinforced when they learn that he is a life-long Communist, which is like, so cool! (No traditional bourgeois filmmaking principles like "Telling a Story" for Godard. How liberating!) Unfortunately, it is also the folly of youth to believe that New & Different is somehow synonymous with Innovative & Better - a notion has clouded the judgement of many seemingly rational people old enough to know better when it comes to their assessment of what constitutes Art. Watching early works of Godard like "À Bout de Soufflé" and "Pierrot le Fou" reminds me of a child exclaiming, Mommy, Daddy - look at me! Look at what I'm doing." Nonetheless there are actually two good reasons why you should bite the bullet (or take a stiff drink) and watch "Breathless." The first is the very 50s-ish jazzy score by Martial Solal, which totally fits the film and captures the atmosphere in the disjointed and somewhat crazy scenario (such as it is.) The second reason is the incomparable Jean Seberg. You will become captivated by her as soon as she appears on the screen, but then you will fall hopelessly in love with this utterly charming gamin Américaine when you see her slowly walking on the Champs-Elysees calling out, "New York Herald Tribune" with newspapers that she is trying to sell bundled in her arm.Godard famously said, "All that you need to make a good film is a girl and a gun." At least he was half right.

Since there have been a great many conventional reviews of this movie (far more positive than negative), I will address a criticism, that we often praise things that are groundbreaking, even when they are not that good. What, of course, is "that good"? This is by all accounts a simple story. A sociopathic young man kills a cop and feels nothing. This film pretty much made Jean-Paul Belmondo, who muscles his way through life, finding pleasure, while he is being pursued. His bad boy charm attracts the young female and she becomes embroiled in his impulsiveness. There is a love story here but there can be nothing but pain. Live fast, die young, leave a beautiful memory was created here. One could say that D. W. Griffith films are not as good as modern films on the same themes because they were silent and not in color. Even though the jump cuts and other fundamentals of filmmaking were introduced (or at least enhanced) in the French New Wave, there are those who criticize this film for being uninspired and repetitive. While it's hard to have sympathy with the two principles in this film, it does present a dizzying ride.