This is the scene we left on at the end of class. It captures so well how the Dardenne brothers have approached the film. I found it powerful. Finally, someone wants to help Sandra.
Two Days, One Night brought Marion Cotillard an Oscar nomination in 2014. Look here at the end of the article for the accolades it received. This is the 9th of the 10 films the Dardennes have written and directed together. Here is the information for the film.
1. So 30 minutes into the film...what do you think? Like? Dislike? And why? Additionally: are you drawn into Sandra's journey to save her job? Do you care? Explain your response.
2. The Dardenne Brothers are known for their hyper-realistic approach to making films. Yet it's not all that far from what Barry Jenkins and Ava DuVernay do in their films. What strikes you about the look of the film and the technical approach to the film: setting. editing, sound, shots, costumes? Focus on two of the categories I listed. Does the movie remind you in any way of either or both of the last two movies we've watched in its look and the technical aspects of it that you just wrote about? How so or how not?
200 words. See you all tomorrow.
1) I like the movie so far. It’s interesting because all her coworkers have different reactions to her trying to save her job and so we don’t know what to expect next. Its still very unclear if she will save her job because all of her coworkers seem to be financially struggling and her boss could lay her off anyways. I’m interested in the journey but I’m not wildly attached. I’m concerned for her metal health and relapse, but the plot itself isn’t gripping me or keeping me very passionate. Of course, I don’t want her to lose her job but it wouldn’t be as upsetting to me as Chiron’s assault or the struggle of Ruby’s mother.
ReplyDelete2) The shots and the costumes remind me of Moonlight and Middle of Nowhere. Like the shots of Ruby travelling or Chiron on the beach, there are a lot of long draw out shots focusing on Sandra. Shots of her alone looking around or in deep thought without dialogue are common. These shots emphasis the realism of the films and how real people experience their days. The costumes are simple and appropriate. In TV shows, its not uncommon for high schoolers to rock elaborate, designer ensembles. It’s the weekend and Sandra has depression so she wears tank tops. The woman who was starting over with her new boy friend had a youthful haphazard hair do. Chiron’s clothing color reflected his journey to define his sexuality and other’s impact on who he was. The clothing in all three films is clean and reflects the characters without being overdone and unrealistic.
1. Iam enjoying the film so far because it is unlike any I have ever seen. Its really unique, and it is showing Sandra struggling in so many aspects of her life. It does not romanticize any of her struggles, which I find exceptionally great about the film. She's clearly dealing with depression and being laid off, but also supporting her family and having to convince people to give up their bonus in order to help her. I'm compelled by her journey because, to the people she is trying to convince she puts on a front to seem strong, but the watcher knows her underlaying worries and how broken she is. It's interesting to see those conflicting emotions within her character. I care because she is trying so hard and not just giving up. It speaks to me and connects because there have been so many times where I know everyone has felt like they needed to give up but kept persisting to achieve an end goal, which is what I think she's trying to do.
ReplyDelete2. I found myself noticing the costumes a lot during the movie: how Sandra and her family seem to wear roughly the same thing every day and how Sandra looks exhausted and hopeless. The costumes in the movie really show the situation her and her family are in. I'd also say the lack of music was something worth noting, because it made the film more real and more dramatic. It intensified the sadness and desperation Sandra was feeling during her search and also when she figured out about her situation. I know during moonlight I noticed their clothing, but music was a large part of the movie, so I don't think they're similar in that sense. In Middle of Nowhere, I wasn't observant of either the clothing or the music, so clearly neither aspect stood out to me. Although all three films share the overarching theme of self discovery (in my opinion) they're not similar in the technical sense.
1. I like how the characters in this movie seem like real people. It makes it more relatable and it makes me feel for the characters. I am drawn to Sandra’s journey and I do care because I think it’s a great dilemma for a movie. By this I mean that I understand people are struggling and need their bonus, but then I also want Sandra to have this job. I like how the movie is bringing up her mental health issues from the past, and I think it’s interesting that she was the one chosen to be fired which could be a commentary on how people with mental illnesses are treated unfairly in the workforce. I also like her kids and how her husband is trying to support her but also trying to get her to go out and fight for her job even though it’s hard for her (and hard for him to see her distraught).
ReplyDelete2. For the look my favorite thing is the setting of the movie and for the technical approach I like the costumes. I agree that it is hyper-realistic. I love the scenery of Europe and all the little apartments, it keeps it interesting for me. I especially loved the soccer fields and thought that was a good choice. I kept noticing her outfit because it didn’t match at all, and it was a normal outfit that someone would actually wear. It wasn’t an everyday outfit according to Hollywood, it was an actual everyday outfit of a working mom. I haven’t finished Middle of Nowhere yet, but it does remind me of the beginning because she is a working wife who is always traveling and moving to keep up. The look feels similar to Middle of Nowhere to me as it is set in everyday settings like Ruby’s house and her on the bus. this isn’t as fast paced or intense as Creed with the filming, so It doesn’t really remind of Creed. But then again, when the story is stripped down, it is a person who has to keep moving to keep their life so the camera is following their journey and following their movement.
1. So far this movie has definitely caught my attention. I think its very interesting how real the movie seems. The acting, the simple dialogue, and the plot itself are very minimalistic but also very realistic and give the feel that you are watching real lives. I am drawn into Sandra’s story because many things are very unclear that i am interacting in finding out throughout the course of the movie. For example, it isn't clear why exactly Sandra had left work and what exactly she is referring to when she says things like ‘its happening again’ or ‘i’m loosing it again.’ This aspect of the film keeps me engaged in Sandra’s job and story, wanting to know her whole back story and how it affects this simple plot of her fight for her job.
ReplyDelete2. The simple realistic nature is part of the reason the movie is interesting. I feel as though it seems so realistic because it is so simple and it isn't doing anything crazy with the plot or dialogue. Also just the little details make it seem very real such as her messy hair or the kids toothbrushes in the bathroom or the takeout pizza they warm up for dinner. Little details of everyday life that are included in the film give it a realistic feel. I see a lot of similarities between this movie and The Middle of Nowhere because they both were not very plot or dialogue based and both gave me the same everyday life vibe. Both these movies follow a single women throughout her struggle with emotion and family/ money issues in particular.
1. I like the film so far. I was really drawn into it. I think I was most attracted to the way the characters were developed. It felt as if I was suddenly thrust into her life with her, trying to save my job while also balancing being a parent. I also liked the pace of the movie. It felt similar to The Middle of Nowhere, very slow, very in the moment. I think this aspect makes the film seem more realistic and makes each moment of her day seem even more crucial. I was also drawn to the scenery and the places she went to. They were all so regular and I feel like this added to the realism. I definitely care about Sandra's journey and I have a lot of sympathy for her. She portrays that sense of hopelessness very well and it makes you care.
ReplyDelete2. I talked about this in the response above, but I was drawn to the settings and what the characters were wearing. Everything and everyone just looked so ordinary and regular. I could imagine this family living in my neighborhood or something. And they all do such normal things. Like when the daughter spoke out of turn and was chastised by the dad. I liked those kinds of details and I think that added to the realism. This movie reminds me more so of Moonlight than The Middle of Nowhere. The movie seems to be less of that dream-like feel but the cinematography is somewhat similar. I can't really draw any parallels in terms of the settings or the costumes because this movie seems a lot different from both of the other films. It focuses more on the everyday tasks and the things that happen that nobody really notices.
1. I actually really like this movie. I care for Sandra, but its hard to pinpoint why I do. I really like the cinematography, three dimensional characters, and the plot. Maybe because of how real this movie feels. The camera is never still, its alway moving along with the characters, which gives the feeling that you are in the space with the characters. That feeling, along with the realistic dialogue and characters, are probably why I care for Sandra's plight.
ReplyDelete2. What strikes me most about this movie? Probably the cinematography and setting. The cinematography isn't super flashy, because it fits this realistic world. I love how the camera moves around with the characters, and (how I mentioned earlier) the unstable shots, which could represent how unstable her life is, and helps build a fragile atmosphere. I can sort of predict how each person is going to react to her plea with the cinematography. When she visits that metal working guy, the Dardenne brothers frame the shot so part of a shelf is separating Sandra from the husband and wife within the frame. When she visits that one lady who's in a hurry, the lady is standing in a doorway (and also, she's already gone through the doorway when Sandra catches her, she goes back out to Sandra for a second, then reenters the doorway. This could all represent her decision to help her, and how she's already made up her mind and sticks to where she already stands). Then, in the next conversation, Sandra is literally talking to a wall. Showing how unwilling that character is (along with the whole not even talking to her thing). It's only when we get to that helpful guy coaching soccer, that she finally gets a positive answer. The Dardenne's also allow the camera to move between the two characters in one shot, physically showing the distant between them and drawing a line that shows their connection. The only thing between them in that scene was the fence, but that wasn't even in the frame. So ... basically, I really like the cinematography. Also, I didn't notice anything special about the setting. Which is good, because that means it felt so natural. Almost every place is something similar to where I've been, adding to the realistic feeling, creating the exact real life atmosphere that the Dardenne brothers were going for (I assume).
1. I like the film so far. I am drawn in by the vulnerability of Sandra's character, and the added factor of having to beg to peers. I care about her journey. I am not quite sure why, but I think its something about the way that she carries herself. You know that is she is barely keeping herself together, and her raw vulnerability is really interesting to watch. I would be devastated if she does not get all the votes for the job because I know from watching the film how hard it was for her to keep on persisting and asking her co-workers for help.
ReplyDelete2. The first thing I noticed cinematography wise was the slightly shaky camera. It never really stops moving but in a quite subtle way. This choice almost made me feel like I was a character in the movie. It definitely set the scene for the hyper realistic approach that the Dardene bothers use. The cinematography in the movie is not crazy or very noticeable like in Moonlight, but more of a realistic approach. Now that I am trying to focus on two of the categories the more I can't really remember anything specific about them. This is because so far in the movie everything is quite simple with cinematography which contrasts really nicely with the characters who stand out more when compared to the simple approach. The approach reminds me most of Middle of Nowhere which also has a more simple hyperrealistic approach.
1. I really like the movie. I find the movie very believable and I feel for the characters, especially Sandra. Watching the movie makes me feel like I have a connection with Sandra and her emotions. I think the directors show her emotions in a very powerful way by showing her taking the anti-depressant pills. Another reason I really like the film is because, despite its really simple plot, I view it as a sort of thriller. Even at the beginning of the film, when I did not fully understand why Sandra was so upset, I was drawn into the storyline and what would happen to her and her family.
ReplyDelete2. One thing I noticed in the cinematography is that there are not a lot of cuts and edits; most of the scenes are taken in one shot. I really enjoy this style because it makes the movie more realistic. Through this style we get to follow Sandra and her journey in a more realistic fashion, and I really feel like I am alongside Sandra while she is asking for her coworkers help. This approach is similar to many of the shots in Moonlight, like the scene of Chiron walking into school ready to beat up the kid who assaulted him. One thing I noticed about the sound in the film is that there is not much, if any, music played in the background. I actually like this lack of sound; I feel like there is more focus on the characters than the surroundings. This is different than Moonlight and Middle of Nowhere, where there was lots of music that made the movie feel almost dream-like.
1. I like the film so far. The plot hasn’t been thrilling or action packed but it has a clear direction I think and the pace is enough to keep me entertained without losing my attention. I also do care about her at this point and I’m curious to know why it’s her job at stake and no one else’s and also what the deal is with the pills she keeps taking. She is realistic enough to make me care.
ReplyDelete2. There’s not a lot of “special effects” in any of the movies. In Middle of Nowhere and Deux jour there’s not much it seems to the lighting and sound, it’s all very typical sounds, cars driving by, children playing, etc. I think the setting is probably the biggest thing I’ve noticed so far in Deux jour. The houses are set for a certain level of income family and it depicts the dilemma that the vote for a bonus or her job presents. I can see the realistic approach but it is very different from the realism in Moonlight and in Middle of Nowhere. I think that the realism is more similar in Middle of Nowhere and Deux jour though but the major difference for me is the pace.
1. I don't like this movie but it is very well done. I have never seen a foreign film before and this movie is very unique compared other movies I have seen. I am not drawn into Sandra's journey to save her job yet, I think this is mainly because I am not empathetic to any of the characters. The main reason I don't like Two Days, One Night is because I am not connected to the plot or the characters. I wouldn't care if Sandra looses her job. This movie is realistic and serious but I don't feel for the characters.
ReplyDelete2. Two Days, One Night was a realistic film depicted mainly in the setting, and costume. The film did a good job of portraying the social economic status of a lower income family. The wardrobe of Sandra powerfully illustrated what an average working class citizen would look like. They also managed to show little details to make the film even more realistic, for instance the character Sandra wore her short brown hair in a messy ponytail. This hairstyle clearly shows someone who doesn't have enough time to do her hair, or money for products. The film also had this female character with no makeup and with the appearance of being exhausted. The film was realistic in the setting as well. Two Days, One Night, payed close attention to little details making the house of Sandra and her family, messy, and small. Two Days, One Night is different because not many other movies pay such close attention to detail, making this film not only realistic but unique. This film mainly reminds me of Middle of Nowhere because they both involve a female character working extremely hard to provide for her family. Furthermore, Two Days, One Night is an artistic film like Middle of Nowhere.
1. I don't really know how I feel about this movie so far. I liked that the writers added in Sandra's mental health issue because it gives her more demension. However I don't really feel all that attached to her. I didn't really find the plot of her running around town all that interesting but I'm curious to see if she keeps her job or not. I find Sandra somewhat compelling but nothing compared to how I felt for other characters we have watched.
ReplyDelete2. I liked the setting of this movie. I enjoy watching movies and tv shows that are filmed in Europe because it's a whole new world and it's fun to see how people over there live. I don't think that there was any music in this movie and I kind of wish it had some because music is something that is very subtle but helps a lot in developing films. The movie is similar to Middle of Nowhere because of how some of the shot will zoom in on something particular like someone's face for example. Also it seems like the characters in Middle of Nowhere and Two Days One Night probably share equal financial struggles. Both movies depict nothing more than average everyday lie.
1 As of right now, I’m rather ambivalent to the story and its telling. Her story just doesn’t grab me. I’m sure that this is someone’s reality, but just because it’s real doesn’t make it interesting. There are plenty of people with plenty on plights I’m unaware of, and yes, their stories should, at times, be told, but I do also believe that some stories aren’t worth telling. The sad part is, I actually think this story IS worth telling, I’m just not fond of the way it’s being done. This is a slow movie. It takes place in two days and one night, yet the pacing leads me to believe it has been ages longer. Where “Middle of Nowhere” had a dreamlike quality, this film has a documentary like quality. I would never call this art. There is no beauty to it. Realism can only get you so far, and this story just isn’t compelling enough to make the lack of artistry go unnoticed. All that being said, if there is one thing this movie does well, it’s put in perspective the genius of “Middle of Nowhere”. I may have loved that movie before, but now I’m completely sold on really how spectacular it is, and how truly difficult it must have been to make it a movie about something real, someone’s day-to-day life while also making it beautiful and something people might actually want to see. The stark contrast between these two films is one that, while diminishing the credibility of one, illuminates the genius of the other. I may not like the movie, but I’m glad we’re watching it to give me some perspective on the limitations of most filmmakers.
ReplyDelete2 I think sound was what struck me the most in that it wasn’t always present and never did anything to enhance the emotion of the story. Was it ever there at all? Honestly, if you told me there was no music in the movie, I’d believe you. That’s not to say that music should be something you notice, but it really is an incredible tool to reach an audience in a subtle way, yet these filmmakers are opting for a realism that transcends music. Well, they are just not good enough for that yet. I don’t feel much for the characters, and I’m not saying music could have solved that, but it could have made scenes more memorable. In “Middle of Nowhere”, the scene that struck me most was the twenty second slot of her in a cab. Why? The music. The music made it clear how she was feeling in a way words could never have done justice to, yet this movie thinks it’s above music and script? Another aspect of the technical side to this movie that I noticed was the setting. It was basically the same in every scene: the same gray and brown. It was hard on the eyes. It may have added the realism of the story, but I think these filmmakers are neglecting the fact that just because a subject is dreary doesn’t mean the art has to be that way too. To wrap it up, this is a let-down after “Middle of Nowhere”, which used color and sound to make more appealing a story which isn’t my own, to make me care, but I’m glad we’re being exposed to a different, lesser way of telling a similarly unfamiliar story.
1.I'm not totally sure. Until close to the end of what we watched I was not too into it. I think I needed someone to agree to help. I couldn't really commit to her story when everyone kept just saying that they needed that bonus. While it was realistic, it wasn't very "fun" to watch, just as it wasn't fun for her to do. But when Timur agrees to vote for her, it gives us more of an idea of who she was when working, and gives us some hope that she'll be able to do it.
ReplyDelete2. This seems less meticulously planned and more frank than either Moonlight or Middle of Nowhere. It is clearly thought out, but the camera is not as smooth, and it doesn't have the dreamy quality of the other two. This is a more realistic look. The other two approach realism with slow but incredibly detailed cinematography. Two Days, One Night gives a more narrow window as well, with only one weekend, as opposed to a couple decades, like Moonlight. The costumes are normal, everyday clothes. The camera seems to be hand held and the filming is clearly thought out, but also meant to feel casual. This is more frankly created.