Response IV- Pickpocket

Normally, films have a protagonist, and an antagonist and the viewers hope for the antagonist's downfall and for the protagonist's success in the accomplishment of his goals by the end of the film. This was not the case in Robert Bresson's film "Pickpocket." This film did a very good job of making me excited to see Michel, the pickpocket, be successful in his attempts to steathily steal from people. One does not simply choose to route for Michel, it just happens. Bresson forces us to identify with Michel by not including the reactions of the people who were victims of his pickpocketing. By not including reactions, I was not able to be sympathetic towards the victims; therefore it seems that there is nothing morally wrong with Michel's actions, and I inevitably came to like Michel and everything he did. Even now I wonder why I liked Michel so much. He did not really express any emotion and he usually had blank expressions on his face.

One could argue that the acting in this film was poor due to the fact that Michel and many other characters did exhibit a great deal of emotion in the expressions on their face and their dialogue. However, I believe that Bresson purposly excluded emotion since he casted non-professional actors to be in his film.

Of all the characters, it was Michel who demonstrated the least least emotion in his acting. When I really think about it, it made sense for the actor portraying Michel to be so passive and unanimated in his acting. Michel thinks himself to be a superior being. He steals from whoever he wants without caring about the consequences. Therefore, I would say that the acting in this film was appropriate. Emotion is a human trait; therefore, if I wanted to portray a character who believed himself to be a superior being, I would be sure he lacks emotion and to make him as indifferent and unanimated as possible.



This film reminds me of Raskolnikov from Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment." The reader of the novel is never really sure why Raskolnikov is motivated to kill; therefore, one can assume that he thinks he is a superior being. Like Raskolnikov, Michel's motivations to steal are not very clear. One can take a guess based on events in the film however. I believe that Michel just became addicted to stealing after he stole from his mother to play the horses and stole to pay her back. Although this sounds logical, there is not enough evidence to say that Michel simply became addicted to pickpocketing.

Although all the aspects of Michel's character are not clear, I enjoyed this film for the most part. I never though I could see myself empathizing with a character who is doing something immoral, but this film proved me wrong.