Day Night Day Night

Caught this at an art theater last night, and the crowd afterward was split about 50/50 as to how they received the film.

One side admitted that the film was unique while avoiding any trace of pretentiousness and that Loktev was captivating. Still, these people felt that the film’s incredibly slow pace was too much to bear. I understand this sentiment, but I don't agree with it. Likewise, just about everyone thought the film was very creepy, and while this turned on many in the art-house crowd, it repelled nearly as many.

Personally, I like creepy movies, and I thought the creepiness was magnified wonderfully by the slow pace. It felt like a snuff film combined with soft-core child porn combined with _The Passion of Joan of Arc_. Seriously, it was that creepy. And that added creepiness greatly to the suspense—I literally jumped a little bit out of my chair at one point, and I can only remember doing that a handful of times in my history of movie-going.

Still, I don’t know whether or not the slow pace would hold up well to repeated viewings, and it's not like the pacing was perfect; shaving ten minutes overall probably would have helped. But I still think the film was effective and unique enough to deserve a high rating.

48 hours in the life of a young woman. Day, night, day and night. This is as much as you should know if you are to get the maximum thrill.

The first sixty minutes is set-up. Mysterious, claustrophobic and schematic. The hue is gray.

The last thirty minutes is execution. Questionably realistic (can't say why without a spoiler) and overly melodramatic. Bright colors.

The set-up half is mesmerizing. Conceived with a documentarian eye. The details of the exposition gotten out of the real world. It's all very instructional and scary in its cold-bloodedness.

I have two complains. First, miscasting of at least one of the secondary characters. For a narrative that makes a previous commitment to a clear political label, the ancillary woman is not credible.

Second, the execution half is drawn out. I can see the director fell in love with the situation and wanted to milk it to the last drop, but to an audience it goes on for too long. Cut this material in half and overall you have a great deal more impact.

I am disappointed to read that other viewers were bored. From the preview it was obvious to me that this would not be a popcorn-movie or summer blockbuster.

I enjoyed how minimal and deliberate the film is. If you are looking for an action movie, go rent 'True Lies'. If you are interested in a beautifully restrained, patient film that humanizes people on both sides of the conflict rather than than making a suicide bomber a one-dimensional villain, this movie is for you.

It takes skill and courage for a filmmaker to attempt to tell a story almost completely with images. Very little dialogue. No gun fights or car chases. Not that there's anything wrong with a fun, action-packed movie. This film is deliberately slow and was a welcome break from the usual pacing of mainstream films.

At first I thought this would be the bomb in the cafe scene from "The Battle Of Algiers" stretched out into whole movie. Even though it had some of the slowest pacing I've ever seen, I managed to watch it all the way through. It's a very subdued emotional portrait of a suicide bomber. Kinda like the passion of "Joan of Arc" but with less context. Minimilist and realist less is more, at least for me a lot of times get's old quick, but here it generates a good deal of suspense and tension. Not for everyone, due to the pacing. But patient viewers, more interested in human pathos than political exposition, might appreciate it.

at the first sigh, a film about nothing. at the second, portrait of the most powerful fear. because it is one of the most simple films about terrorism. and, maybe, this is the most important thing. because it propose a view in a large human aquarium. because it gives only the presence, look and steps of a young woman in the middle of Times Square. no details. no story. only suppositions. and this form of minimalism works. not as tool for an art film. but as the right form to define a slice of reality. to remind the voice of news. to give to yourself the right questions.