Nuit et jour

I have seen this movie so many times that I remember the scenes and conversation even after many years...yes, I liked it that much..its another 10/10 movie in my list. Its a beautiful poetry of love affair between Julie, Jack and Joseph.

Joseph is truly a poet. Everything he says is a line of poetry. In fact, they should publish that as a work of poetry! Joesph came late in Julie's life. So what? Joseph doesn't believe in coming late is a sin. Joseph is ready to experiment with this triangle affair in a new dimension. He wants Julie to inform Jack about this relationship.

This breaks the conventional thinking about being honest in love affair, being able to love both at the same time without hesitation. However, its hard to continue this affair in a society dictated by moral value of ours.

Joesph is the character I like most when he says: "I love when streets are crowded. I love when its empty"..Joseph is a true lover of life, ambitious, confident! Jack on the other side looks sad, reads books, senses something wrong. Julie is the most interesting character and discovery of a new type: she is complex. Her smile makes you think about this moment of life; she loves to enjoy it, every moment of it. In fact, Joseph and Julie makes a perfect couple, I feel sorry for Jack though!

One of the most boring movies I've ever seen. Three immature young people have sex and talk about very little except their "love" of each other. They don't seem to be interested in much but each other, and only passively so. I was left feeling shut out. Most of the exterior scenes take place at night, so one can't even enjoy well-lit sights of Paris! I gave up after an hour and ten minutes.

Akerman's quiet love song to Paris surprises. Who would have thought that 90 minutes (almost) of tender moments, quiet pauses, and unhurried walks could be so riveting? The film does not so much move as breathe you into its trance. The eternal love triangle, played out here against the backdrop of a velvety Paris night, holds not through any real suspense but through the resonance of its unnamed predecessors: a gesture can speak because it calls up an entire film, or novel, or painting. Akerman motions, and then drops each gesture undeveloped to allow her audience to weave their own stories through the weft of the narrative. The ending, thus, leaves one unsatisfied but engaged as the process extends beyond the final credits (I have found myself mentally replaying it several times). For 90 minutes, you don't watch a film--you help create it.

This film is about a woman falling in love with a friend of her boyfriend. From then on, she has to divide her time for the two boyfriends: Jack during the day and Joseph during the night.

This film feels like as if it was made with minimum budget. The majority of the film is set in a flat with minimal furniture. There are only three main actors, all the other actors listed in the credits make only momentary appearances. The wardrobe designer doesn't seem to have much to do, as the actors wear very down to earth clothes, and actually most of the time they are naked anyway.

The film is very dialog heavy, which should have made up for the shortcomings described above. However, the dialogs sound too composed and awkward. In the beginning of the film, most of the dialog is a person saying a very long sentence, and then the person says 'Me too'. After the frenzy of agreement, the dialog descends into a mess of disjointed and confused word salad.

The only merit of this film I can think of is that it serves as a feminist outlet which conveys that it is not just men who can be unfaithful.

This film is a great disappointment.

I was looking forward to watching this film and was therefore extremely disappointed when I found it to be complete and utter rubbish. Akerman's direction is both heavy handed and cliched (how much more cliched can you get than Paris at night?). The male cast seems to have been chosen entirely for their resemberlance to Egon Schiele's angst ridden self portraits. Yet the themes of jealousy and betrayal which should have been the primary focus of a film of this type are left virtually unexplored. What is left is a turgid melodrama which takes an age to get started and even longer to finish. The only advantage with this sort of film is that it makes you realise how good Goddard and Truffaut really are.