It is necessary that the second film[1] -- and especially if it is rather "lyrical-subjective" -- has a very violently critical-political side (very subversive shocking). For example: on the horror of current society, its shameful poverty (living conditions, food, illusions and neuroses), on the executives, their declarations, their thought (something like "On the Poverty of the Executive Milieu," in the genre of the notes by Alice [Becker-Ho] . . .).

The passage can be this: how the time that passes has led us to another world: the "good" and "bad" of this;

1) the good: I transmit to my epoch the malady of subversion
2) the bad: how this world is disfigured (giving this as reason for our critique)

For example, to show: this is no longer a question of aesthetics.

The experts critique or reassure.

But their illusions: what they accept, believe, love. . . .

The spectators (proletarians in this, but ashamed) don't even have a past.

[1] Translator: The first full-length film for Simar Films being The Society of the Spectacle (1973).

(Not dated; must be circa 1976-78. Published in Autour des Films (Documents), the booklet accompanying Oeuvres Cinematographiques Completes, a three-DVD set released November 2005. Translated from the French by NOT BORED! January 2006.)