I love them both but I’d agree there is a much more jaded middle aged cynical approach to the world in Sunset as opposed to the youthful Idealism of the Sunrise, brilliant films.
Before Sunrise I was never too big on. Those caricatured-ish side characters who show up damage the sense of realism for me, whilst Sunset avoids these silly distractions and also benefits from being told in real time making every moment count for so much more. Also having older, more damaged characters in Sunset makes it more interesting and moving than Before Sunrise, at least for me anyway.
Sunset is the experience to Sunrise’s innocence. I do love them both but Sunset wins out. Interestingly I saw it before Sunrise and didn’t feel lost and confused at all, the sheer simplicity and skill of the story makes it work as a stand alone story.
No way to choose. I’ll just take both, thanks very much.
So difficult. Both are amazing movies, excellent dialogues, but I think I prefer Sunset because of the maturity of them.
SUNSET. It feels exactly like two old friends rediscovering each other, and as each tries to make every last word count before Jesse must board the plane, their phrases lurch and spasm right along with their hearts. I think what elevates it above SUNRISE is the way the weight of years—on their lives, on their emotions, on their faces—deepens the context of Jesse and Celine’s conversation. While their first youthful encounter was about the bloodrush of spontaneous idealism, the second movie adds regret, frustration, the fearsome power of memory, and the betrayals of dreams to the conversation. It’s about something deeper than wide-eyed innocence; it’s about that most treacherous of questions: If I had turned different corners, who might I have been? Perhaps the best thing is that it depicts both the perils and the bliss of such speculation.
Sunset is a better movie, but Sunrise makes Sunset better.
I sort of see them as one film.
I despise Before Sunrise as much as I like Before Sunset. Never could quite reconcile that except my 90s allergy to Ethan Hawke and Gen X posturing.
@Ari
I’m intrigued. I’d be interested in hearing you flesh this out.
As an actor in the 90s, Ethan Hawke’s faux grunge philosopher-poet posturing just bugged the hell out of me, rendering films like Before Sunrise absolutely unwatchable. Only after Training Day could I start watching his films again. I think that’s because a) he got ugly and b) he learned to act. But notwithstanding my intense dislike for Hawke’s goateed musings, I thought that Before Sunset had this tinge of pathos that was quite surprising and even moving that Before Sunrise lacked entirely.
I love both but Before Sunset is better even though unlike @Ari I have grown to hate Ethan Hawke whereas I used to think he was cute and charming.
Yeah, I liked Ethan more when he became ugly and unattractive!
i hated Before Sunrise in the 90’s too, that’s why i never bothered with the ‘sequel’.
just seemed like more middle of the road nonsense to me.
@Ari
I know what you mean about the “faux grunge philosopher-poet posturing.” I was actually more bothered by by his delivery and mannerisms which seemed to be aping Woody Allen. (I got over it, thouhg.)
The pathos comment makes sense because it is a big difference between the films.
glad to see all the love out for these two flicks. I gotta admit that Before Sunrise has the better ending though.
One says potato, the other says potato.
Delpy has gone skinny in the second one.
Ethan needs to check out “2 Days in Paris,” to see what he’s getting into.
I like to think of them as one film. They go so well together.
before sunset, for sure.
I prefer the second one, for many reasons. Before Sunrise is a sincere and wonderful movie, but Before Sunset is even better. But I kinda think of them as one big movie and a full story.
And I agree with Jirin, good point.
Anyway, I love them both.
Sunset
The second one works without the first one! Ethan Hawke has had a great revival lately with great performances especially with Sydney Lumet!
Ok, finally got around to seeing Before Sunset last night. and re-watched Before Sunrise, the night before. I liked B.S a lot more than i did in 1995. It has some problems—-Hawke’s performance is uneven, and i don’t think the ending is quite as evocative as it ought to be—but it it’s a solid 3 star movie, and Delpy is sublime. Precious few foreign actresses are just as compelling in English speaking movies as they are in their own language, but Delpy certainly is one of them. She doesn’t come across as ackward or unsure at all. Language is just not a barrier for her.
As for Before Sunset, Eric summed up my own views well. at first i thought maybe it’s too talky, and that it needed a few quiet moments—a few would have been nice—BUT the real time strategy, combined with the 8 year gap between meetings, justifies the approach entirely. We are there with the characters, in the moment, and understand that time is once again desperately working against them and they have to make the most of it, because they may not get another chance. only in this film it’s more poignant as their exchanges become increasingly tinged with melancholy, regret, and even resentment. The scene where Delpy explodes in the car put a lump in my throat, as it’s quite similar to an experience i’ve had in my own life(although we had two weeks, not one day, and we were at a house party, not in a car, and had bumped into each other a few days earlier), and of course, i was blamed for everything ;-)
Linklater really pulled off a difficult task here. His work is much more accomplished than it was in Before Sunrise. The direction is confident and smooth, at all times, no hiccups. Everything flows organically from scene to scene, moment to moment, and even more impressive when you consider they only had 15 days to shoot it!! Hawke is much more wise and likeable here than he was in the first film, and i like the rough edges that Delpy’s character has after being so unlucky in love.
My only complaint is that the film is too short. whether that is the result of budget constraints or not, i just wanted to spend more time with these characters, but again, it’s probably by design.
Bring on the third film!!
Linklater really pulled off a difficult task here.
Absolutely—especially the ending, imo. The ending is great, imo, and not an easy one to find.
Bring on the third film!!
Really? That would really be pushing their luck, imo. If the script or concept is less than stellar, I say forget it. These two films are special, and I’m thankful to have them. We don’t really need a third film. (But if they have a really good idea for a third film, I’m all for it.)
Btw, have you heard the Fresh Air interview with Siskel and Ebert? (You can listen to it here.) Terry Gross asks both of them to bring in a favorite scene from films these films. You should check it out. (It’s a fun interview. Plus, there’s also a clip of Ebert interviewed Martin Scorsese, mostly about Raging Bull.)
Yeah, I’m excited about the third film as well. I hope they get it off the ground next year.
^^yeah the ending is something. it disappointed me at first, then i ended up appreciating it 10 seconds later.
love those kind of endings ;-)
as for the 3rd film, Hawke really wants to do it apparently. they could be pushing their luck but if the idea is good they should go for it.
The key word, fellas, is “if.” I have a hard time imagining where they’re going to go with this. It could get real ugly, too.
I’m gonna be the one guy…
I prefer Sunrise.
I think both are amazing, but I don’t see why jaded equals better. There’s something very beautiful, rare, and authentic about the romanticism of the first film.
peter smith
I was recently trying to decide which one I liked more. It’s a tough call and I sorta seem them both as one movie. But… I think I gotta give the edge to Sunset. Perhaps because there is so much more at stake.