Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Senteur As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Slime-3 Nothing is every straight-forward in a Godard movie and MADE IN USA is probably as baffling as they get! It's a bizarre tale that confounds logical dissection but if the weirdness of the story and structure sometimes make it a trial to watch, the beautiful late 60s colour photography and the dazzling Anna Karina offer considerable compensation! Quite why Godard wastes so much screen time on a tape recording of left- wing rhetoric can only be imagined. If it was to make a political point, that simply gets lost by overkill and makes one reach for the fast- forward button.The often curious soundtrack features a passing jet aircraft (or is it an express train?) which always obscures the surname of Karina's mysterious, deceased lover in a fashion that Tarrentino late used to obscure the name of the'The Bride' in KILL BILL. What's it all about? No idea! But the film, or maybe the style, certainly the luminous Karina, does somehow get under your skin and even though I found it hard to endure on a first viewing I'm increasingly keen to watch it once again . Amongst the mind-boggling strangeness I'm sure I must have missed something vital....now, where is that DVD?

Andy (film-critic) There is no questioning the power of Godard. His cinematic talent reaches much farther than my mind could even begin to escape, and upon watching some of his lesser known films these days - his sheer imagination was something that is decidedly missed in today's film experience. Watching "Pierrot Le Fou", the vivid color, the uncontrollable ability to combine any genre into one frame, and the dedication of his actors was demonstrated. A less-fan of his "Breathless" film and more into his experimental work, "Fou" was right up my alley - yet, watching "Made in USA", I was completely flabbergasted. This film was confusing, colorful, intelligent, philosophical, brutal, and a slice of what America was producing at the time, while all the while being completely Godard. Destined never to be a favorite among purists, "Made in USA" requires more than one viewing and an accompanying owner's manual to navigate, but the final destination is worth all the work. Using Anna Karina as our guide, this spy-thriller (if I could say that) takes off with a huge step and never looks back. Do not watch this movie late at night or while doing anything that will cause you to glance away from the screen. Every moment in this film is necessary, every word that Godard has our actors speak - while at times confusing and thought provoking - is needed to tell this dis-narrative story. Godard is a master behind the camera for this film - giving us an early glimpse as to what was in store with "Pierrot Le Fou", his bold color and well read characters (each one is always holding a book - Bravo!), are just the crust. What made "Made in USA" stand out was the obvious connections to Walt Disney, the "Big Sleep", and nearly everything coming out of the 60s in America, but what makes Godard impressive, is that one needs to search to see it. He doesn't spoon feed you a narrative that makes your heart gush at the end, Godard creates challenging cinema that will not be enjoyed by all, but if developed - if watched over time - if studied, remains important even 43 years later. "Made in USA" is another Criterion release that looks and sounds perfectly, but - even with my discussion on how great Godard's work is - isn't the greatest release from the master. Yep, I am a Godard fan, but I am picky. I didn't enjoy "Breathless", but "Pierrot Le Fou" I hold very highly - and this - well, "Made in USA" is intelligent, but perhaps a bit too pretentious. The idea behind this film is solid, but it is the execution that had me nervous. Godard is eloquent in introducing us to certain characters and elements, but gives them names of his favorites like McNamara and Nixon that just feels weighted by symbolism and inside jokes. The viewing took place over the course of three days, not due to the diminishing subject, but because a rewind was needed to ensure that parts didn't go missing or lost. Crafting one part puzzle, one part social commentary, one part comedy is difficult - and for the beginning film watcher - this probably isn't the best film to first experience Godard. Here is what I liked - I loved not knowing. What was exhilarating about this feature was the unknown. The confusing dialogue, the menacing tape voice, the constant barrage of planes flying overhead (if that IS what that noise was), and the possible hope of knowing Richard's last name - keeps one wanting to finish, but getting there is a battle. The dialogue is either a love or hate moment. As there is no linear story, from the spoken perspective, and it is easy to get lost in Godard's cluttered words. For myself, it was at times refreshing - and at other times a disaster. Without a linear narrative, it was difficult to understand how one character fit within the scheme of events. What was happening between Paula and Mr. Typhus? Just thinking about it gives me a headache.The scenes that stood out in this film were the bartender moments (where you could call him Paul or Bartender, but not "sir"), the pinball machine in the garage, and the billboard store room characters. These made me chuckle and see the humor that Godard was demonstrating, but the others just felt murky and disjointed. Again, I would like to state that every scene was necessary, but were they great? The imagery was spectacular - giving us the color palette that he would later use in "Pierrot Le Fou" - and the cinematography followed suit. For me, it was just the language the bogged me down. I wanted to know these characters further, I wanted to further know the story of the skulled man, and who was double crossing who. "Made in USA" is an important film, I am glad to see it within the Criterion catalogue, but it is an advanced film. The average film watcher will not like this movie, even I felt lost sometimes - but I am so very happy that I watched it.In another review, this film was quoted as a "B-side" to the Godard cannon, and I couldn't agree more. Could I watch this movie again? Absolutely, but not right away. I look forward to re-exploring this piece of cinema, understanding what I missed, and seeing the inside moments that may have slipped by me the first time. "Made in America" isn't perfect, and I don't know anyone that can take a ten minutes of a tape playing discussing politics, but this self-proclaimed "B-side" finally has a release it deserves. Grade: *** 1/2 out of *****

MisterWhiplash It's probably a given to note one of Jean-Luc Godard's notorious Godard-isms, likely the one that everyone knows even if they haven't seen a Godard picture: All you need to make a movie is a girl and a gun. While this is a pointed reference to the simplicity possible and/or inherent in the gangster picture or noir, and about how inexpensiveness should be taken usually into consideration. But at the same time, I think a picture like Made in USA or even something like Band of Outsiders or Vivre sa vie emphasizes that Godard was really the one to go for this in the only way that he could: all Godard needed to make a movie was a girl (his girl, pre Masculin Feminin which was immediately after Made in USA, Anna Karina), a gun (or sometimes more than one), and Jean-Luc Godard. Because, really, a girl and a gun is fine, but in the 1960s, with this man at the helm, it was just a little bit more.Called by the director himself as a "remake" of the Big Sleep, which perhaps makes the best sense of all, this was the hardest to find of the French New Wave wild-man-poet-anarchist's films not just with Anna Karina but in the 60s in general (pre-Criterion). Interesting, since this is, to my somewhat biased estimation (biased in that this was, to me, his absolute prime period before his very hit or miss period in the decades to follow), one of his most entertaining "B-movie" movies about movies. And not just about movies, but also about living with oneself, the politics of France, Walt Disney, and things pop culture flavored all around. This is another in a line of pictures Godard made that was very anti-capitalist while at the same time embracing to an extent (if only ironically) the images and names and attitudes of American pictures and pulp fiction and comic books and other things. There's such an array of references that at the theater I saw this film at, the Film Forum in NYC, they had to put up a glossary-key to fill people in.And as much as it's a love letter to wild quips, eccentric characters, guys in trench-coats and hats, Nick Ray and Sam Fuller (especially them as providing Godard's "love of sound and image" as noted at the start), bright colors filmed in wonderful Technicolor, stretches of time filled on a tape recorder about French politics, and to the dark and warmth of American B-movies, it's also a fine goodbye to Anna Karina. Here, as pretty and tough and contemplative as ever, going through some classic Godard scenes like when she and the detective who may have killer her character's lover explain to the camera what they are saying in a scene instead of playing it out, or just lying on the ground in a moment of existential upheaval, Karina shows how good she could actually be. While not her very best- I'd save that for Pierrot le fou and Vivre sa vie- it's a very memorable performance, and one that, like everyone else in Godard's films, knows so well about the performance as she's performing, that the "fiction" itself becomes wrapped around in the very documentary-like act of filming the movie.And that last part, I think, is the handle for this time period for Godard. What was essential to his craft, when it clicked just right, was that he could master together his love of quotations and pop-culture and movie references on top of a daring and sometimes wacky exploration of reality and fiction. Made in USA us based on a Donald Westlake crime book about a woman looking to find out who killer her man, but in Godard's hands the very act of this plot, joyously convoluted as the best possible homage/remake of Hawks' Big Sleep as could be outside of Coen brothers, is subjugated to scenes where actors talk to the camera about what they would normally just say to each other in a scene, or when they make point of, of course, that it's just a movie. It may be a "B-side" in the Godard 60s cannon as a NY Times review pointed out, but damn it all if it isn't one of the most enjoyable B-sides in all cinema.

LeRoyMarko A cinematographic experiment by Jean-Luc Godard! Not too accessible. Interesting opening credits with just the initials of the cast. The colors are bright, contrasting with the usual black and white movies that Godard made before this one. At some point, the movie reminded me of the hit series "Twin Peaks" by David Lynch. But this is way more incoherent. In fact, it's hard to figure if there's anything to be made of this film. Still, Godard get to explore the fascination of the French for everything that comes from the U.S.A. Another interesting fact: some of the talks exchanged by the characters (ex. in the bar scene). A linguist would probably have some fun analyzing this. Some scenes are just painful to watch if you're tired (ex. the political manifesto on tape)! Anna Karina is great to watch, as usual.Out of 100, I give it 71. That's good for ** out of ****.Seen at home, in Toronto, on November 26th, 2002.