You’ve never been with someone you had genuine fun with? Someone you joked around and chased and just generally fucked around at every opportunity with? I hope you have because if you haven’t you’re missing quite a bit.
That was, for me, by far the best part of the film. There is a genuine beauty and joy even in the prospect of dire poverty and little opportunity for improvement. Those scenes were as gorgeous as the scene in the restaurant in Bicycle Thieves because of what they represented in the larger context of the situation. Beyond that I felt the film a little too predictable, but those scenes felt so spontaneous. From the first moment of the film we see Renier as an undesirable boyfriend, but those scenes really give you a sense of why this girl is with him; the genuine, simple fun she has with him and the love they’ve created in the toughest of situations.
I mean in reality couldn’t I just lay the criticism of “amateur”, or “lazy” against any film in which I hadn’t experienced the events told?
I have experienced that adolescent genuine fun… maybe I didn’t phrase myself correctly. What I meant was that the same act of chasing each other was overused to imply joy and happiness between them. It was as if: “ok, we have 30 minutes to show how happy you guys are before we throw this around to the hardships of reality, so just chase each other… ok , we still have 20 more minutes, chase him again but now bite him… ok, just to make sure everybody sees that you are genuinely happy why don’t you chase each other once more” (I’m not exaggerating, it was three times). That’s why I used “lazy” and “amateur” (maybe too harshly), as if watching a student’s film or a silent movie.
Comparing the power of those scenes with the one from Bicycle thieves is, in my opinion, stretching it too much. The “context of the situation” in L’enfant was in my opinion not satisfactorily developed in order for the finale to really have a punch, that’s why, for me, it seemed very “light”. A satisfactory “context of the situation” within the personal drama is exemplified in the great PUSHER trilogy (especially part II) which are thematically similar.
We have very contrasting perceptions, I thought those moments had not a bit of spontaneity and seemed very forced. But if we all had the same perception of things then this would be a boring world.
Canaletto
Having high expectations knowing L’enfant received the Palm d’Or (I still don’t know why) I felt, unfortunately, hugely disappointed.
The Dardennes had a very clear mind on how they wanted the story to evolve; however, they didn’t care to put the same effort to the first half of the film as they thought the end product would compensate for it. The first 30 minutes were, for me, frustrating to see how stupid and unreal the “joy and happiness” between the characters was portrayed, I’m aware that adolescent love can be stupid (most of the time), but that doesn’t justify the monkey-like behaviour of these two, chasing each other around each time they were together, for me that’s an example of lazy and amateur cinema.
On a positive note, the film is partly rescued but the terrific performance of Renier.
So due to this film’s credentials I was disappointed.
Several people/critics append the title of realistic film to L’Enfant, however, in my opinion, only a few people have mastered the difficult task of convincingly bringing realism to the screen. The Dardennes made a fairly good attempt but falling short.
I have Rosetta and two other films next to my DVD player and with limited time to watch them I wonder if I should give Rosetta a chance. I’m afraid the only redeeming quality will be a fine performance from the actress in an average film (just like in L’enfant). Any thoughts?