In a sense, this film illustrates a logical continuation of Godard’s cinema and is no less radical than some of his early New Wave masterpieces, such as Pierrot le Fou or La Chinoise.  Over the 1970s and 1980s, the Swiss director’s approach becomes increasingly attracted towards an abstract concept of the cinematographic art, and the necessity to adhere to the principle of narrative form becomes less and less important – at least in Godard’s mind.  What Godard appears to be seeking is something akin to the Impressionist movement of late nineteenth century art – to capture the essence of life with imagery and form, without having to tell a story.

Unfortunately, however noble this objective might appear, it just doesn’t seem to work – and certainly not in the cinema of the 1980s.  Unlike another medium, film places very severe limitations on what can be achieved and what an audience will tolerate.  This is because film, like a novel, is a medium which requires a great investment, in terms of time and concentration, from its intended target.  If a film-maker strays too far into the abstract, he risks alienating himself from his audience – which is more or less what happened to Jean-Luc Godard in the 1980s.  The great director was so overwhelmed by his creative impulse that he lost the ability to communicate to his audience – a tragic mistake.

Passion is a film that illustrates this point very well, and it is interesting how self-conscious Godard is about what he is doing. Jerzy’s thoughts about the necessity to tell a coherent story are clearly Godard’s own thoughts, and the film is really nothing more than an overly self-indulgent examination of Godard’s philosophy about film-making at the time.