Review: 'The Witch'
Park City, UT – It’s finally here! Last night, I attended the legendary Volunteer and Staff party which did not disappoint. Within seconds of entering I had the privilege of meeting one of the festival’s Senior Programmers John Nein and it wasn’t too long before we were comparing our top 10 films of 2014. To put things in perspective, the programmers see every film that is screening here before the festival begins! That’s over 200 films, not to mention the ones that aren’t accepted to the festival. In other words, these people see a lot of movies, and the way in which they digest them must be completely different than any other moviegoer. Shortly after I bumped into a friend of my mom’s who I hadn’t expected to see, and over the course of the 4 hour event, I met countless other people who I will likely cross paths with again. I am continually impressed with the friendliness and outgoing nature of every volunteer. It is a great group to be surrounded by.
Today, the rest of the festival crowd slowly made their way in and tonight everything took off. I was thankful to part ways with my accommodation at the Chateaux Dorms, which is the most affordable place to stay in Park City, but definitely not somewhere ideal for the entire festival. I gave a ride to a volunteer at the Temple Theatre a ride to his job since the buses haven’t completely started running yet. Afterward, I ventured toward Main Street for the first time this year, and in typical Sundance fashion, I met three volunteers in the corporate section on the bus and joined them for lunch! With all the volunteers I meet, you never know if you’ll see them again, but in the meanwhile it is great company, and in the likelihood that we do see each other again, it will certainly be serendipitous.
After lunch, a group from Chapman University who I’ll be spending a lot of time with arrived so I met up with them and showed them around a bit. This place is certainly overwhelming at first but after you’ve gotten your bearings it’s fun to master.
Because Day 1 is nearly impossible to see movies at for non-ticket holders such as myself (and other volunteers), we volunteers were treated to another screening, this one in the US Dramatic competition: The Witch. My thoughts:
The Witch (US)
Director: Robert Eggers
Writers: Robert Eggers
Stars: Anya Taylor-Joy, Ralph Ineson, Kate Dickie
Set in 1600’s New England, a devout Christian family settles in the wilderness and slowly finds their lives torn apart by witchcraft coming from the nearby woods. If the description didn’t make it already clear, this is a horror film, and may be one of the scariest movie experiences I’ve ever been in. If I find myself saying, “It’s only a movie,” I know I’m really getting scared! Going into the movie we were told how much the first time director had painstakingly researched this time period in order to maximize historical accuracy. Sure enough, the film truly looks like it is that old, and the time period makes the movie what it is. These characters are devout Christians and their strong sense of duty toward God and belief that He is doing what is right is brought to the test when a witch may be among them. It seems like every horror film has to bring in some religious element, but never before has it felt so essential to the storyline than here. While the story itself is a little confusing at times (it is taken from an old New England tale), everything the film does to set up the fear and suspense is beyond effective. Almost the entire film takes place with just the family members, and no character is left undeveloped or underutilized. There are two technical standouts. First, the cinematography, which often lingers on shots but never loses interest and delivers some really powerfully composed imagery. Secondly is the musical score, which isn’t even in a lot of the film but maximizes its potential every time it is used. It is my understanding that all of the instruments that were used on this film were from the time period or older, another example of the powerful measures the filmmaker took to ensure a sense of historical accuracy.
Again, this is a film that I would only recommend to someone looking for a horror film, and it is without question one of the most effective horror films in recent memory. But for those who get scared easily, stay far away from this picture. The film officially premieres next week, and I look forward to seeing how it gets released (I have no doubt it will). This is the type of film that generates buzz at Sundance because it evokes such a visceral reaction from the audience (I may or may not have said ‘What the f*ck?’ out loud during one scene). Therefore, it was a great choice for a volunteer screening and I am grateful to have seen it.
Immediately following the film screening, I finally took my first shift as a Sundance volunteer! One word: cold. Admittedly I’ve been spoiled the last couple days with indoor training and screenings, but I will definitely be earning every film I see with standing in the cold. I love when people are there and I can actually help them, but there is a lot of time in between screenings and buses when people aren’t around. After my phone died, I had to start being creative, and that meant reading the film guide thoroughly. Fortunately, from here on out all of my shifts are in the morning, meaning my friend the sun will be there to keep me company. Tomorrow will be the first full day of the festival, so sleep will be imperative and slowly will become more difficult to acquire. The best still lies ahead!
Review: 'Digging for Fire', '71'
Park City, UT – Festival volunteers arrive at Sundance two days before Opening Night, so yesterday, I embarked on a 700-mile road trip from Southern California to Park City. What a drive it was – I could easily write a blog post just on the drive itself. But alas, that isn’t what you’re here to read about. After making great time and settling into my accommodation, I headed over to festival headquarters to get geared up with a Sundance volunteer coat and festival pass. If one thing is persistently true about the festival, it is the abundance of free stuff! For volunteers like myself, this stuff is currency for the next twelve days.
As the first night's evening began, I was already enjoying what drew me to the festival in the first place: the movies. When asked how many volunteers were passionate about independent film, everyone present raised their hands. Like everyone else I am in company with, working in exchange for seeing movies is an offer too good for any of us to pass up. While I still do not know what I will be seeing once the festival is underway, they programmed a double feature for volunteers, much to my delight!
Digging for Fire (US)
Director: Joe Swanberg
Writers: Jake Johnson, Joe Swanberg
Stars: Jane Adams, Steve Berg, Mike Birbiglia
First up was the briskly lengthed mumblecore-comedy from director Joe Swanberg. Having seen Swanberg’s last two films (Drinking Buddies and Happy Christmas), I had a very good idea of what I was in for with this film. Love it or hate it, his films are easily identifiable in their simplistic filmmaking and heavy reliance on improvisation. He also has a returning cast of actors who appear in all these films: Jake Johnson, Anna Kendrick, Melanie Lynsky, and Ron Livingston. The simple style of all his films seems a little under-ambitious for film and personally makes me wonder what kind of audience these films are made for. I am happy to say that Swanberg’s latest, Digging For Fire, is actually his most successful to date, in that it has the most-clear story without losing his trademark style. The primary concept explored here is the marriage of two people (played by Johnson and Rosemare Dewitt) and how they keep their relationship strong even after having children and beginning the slow descent into domestication. Again, although this is the most structured of Swanberg’s films, it still retains its trademark looseness, letting improvisation and antics drive the movie forward as opposed to conventional narrative. In this regard, it works well, but still asks the question of “Is this a strong voice in independent film?” Not only does Swanberg’s film premiere at Sundance but his wife, Kris Swanberg, also has a film in the US Narrative competition (Unexpected). Digging for Fire officially premieres on January 26th.
‘71 (UK)
Director: Yann Demange
Writer: Gregory Burke
Stars: Jack O’Connell, Sam Reid, Sean Harris
The second film is ’71, taking its title from the year in which its' story takes place. Jack O’Connell, the recognizable young star from Unbroken, stars as Gary Hook, a young solider deployed into Belfast, Northern Ireland, at the height of the “troubles” and the horrific violent riots that were happening then. Taking place almost entirely in one day, ‘71 is a film built around suspense and never lets the audience get too comfortable once it gets underway. It aspires to be at the level of Black Hawk Down or even Saving Private Ryan, and for a film of its size it never feels constricted by budget. The camera work is a primary highlight, featuring rich color and composition in nearly every shot, and one ambitious and effective continuous take midway through the film. O’Connell still has a long way to go on the road to becoming a movie star, and neither of his high profile films so far have shown much range. I hope in his next projects he is able to show some more variety in performance. While the film’s action and high tension moments are effective, the storyline is often difficult to follow (partially due to Irish accents so thick that I would’ve used subtitles had I been watching at home), and also due to a lot of similar looking characters (with no hope of remembering any of their names), the film also has multiple false endings which detract from the eventual final shot. It is a directorial debut from Yann Demange whose previous work is in television, and based on this project, it appears he has the potential for even better material ahead.
After a 10 hour drive then a double feature, I embraced having a low key day today as excitement builds with the festival starting tomorrow. After volunteer training this afternoon, tonight I will be attending a volunteer and staff party, which has had hype building since the moment I’ve arrived. I’ll be writing about more of the festival and the films as it unfolds, and for quick reactions follow @DrivingNelson on twitter.
Oscar Nominations 2015: Snubs and Surprises
There is a lot to take in this year, as is the case usually, and Oscar nominations are proof that you never know exactly what to expect from this morning, no matter how much thought goes into predictions. Here goes:
-The best surprise far and away was Marion Cotillard getting nominated. Talk about an incredible performance worthy of recognition that I'm stoked got in. A great film (Two Days, One Night) and a great performance being recognized.
Read our interview with Marion Cotillard and our review of Two Days, One Night (Deux Jours, Une Nuit).
-Foxcatcher becomes the first film since they expanded the number of nominees to get a Best Director nomination without a Best Picture nod. Very interesting, kudos to Bennett Miller for being so well respected. I am very excited that both Steve Carell and Mark Ruffalo found their way toward nominations. It’s clear that this film was incredibly well received, and it is surprising that it didn’t land Best Picture considering this.
Read our interview with director Bennett Miller, Steve Carell, Channing Tatum, and screenwriters Max E. Frye and Dan Futterman, as well as our review of Foxcatcher.
-With that in mind, this is the first time since the Academy changed their rules that there are 8 nominees. All the past years have 9. The films that suffered: Nightcrawler and Foxcatcher
Read our interview with Jake Gyllenhaal and our review of Nightcrawler.
-Best Actor shook things up by bringing in Bradley Cooper for his 3rd straight nomination. Considering it was only a few years ago that The Hangover surged his career, the guy has done quite well for himself. While it’s his gain, unfortunately David Oyelowo and Jake Gyllenhaal really missed out as a result, leading up to the next point…
-Selma managed to only get a Best Song nomination and Best Picture. That's pretty insane objectively. I am very happy the film got recognized, but it definitely should've made its way into other categories. If anything, this is an indication of how important the screeners are and long term campaigning. If Selma had joined the party earlier, it may have been looking at a few more. But it’s also not worth ignoring that controversy hindered its success as well, which for anyone who enjoyed it (like myself), is a real shame. We still live in a world where no non-white female director has ever been nominated (and this year, Ava Duvernay really deserved it).
-The Lego Movie got snubbed big time for Best Animated feature. That is so disappointing on a multitude of levels. It did manage Best Song, but that’s hardly compensation. Personally, this is the biggest snub.
-Looking further afield however, the Documentary category really let a lot of people down. Overlooking Life Itself and The Overnighters is pretty unforgivable. I’m not even a huge Life Itself fan, but overlooking a Roger Ebert tribute is a really sad decision. A strong year of documentaries is not well reflected in the movies they selected.
Read our reviews of The Overnighters and Life Itself.
-A quick rundown of all the other surprise nom's: Laura Dern for Wild, Beyond the Lights for Song, and Inherent Vice for Screenplay and Costume Design. These are all nominations that few people actually saw coming, and it has to be quite exciting for all of those represented films.
-Lastly, I’ll talk about who can win. There is an unbroken rule that no film has ever won Best Picture without an Editing nomination, and Birdman missed that one. Admittedly, the film is an exception in that its style masked the editing, but that certainly didn’t mean there wasn’t any. With that being said, I don’t see any film winning at this point other than Boyhood, with The Grand Budapest Hotel and The Imitation Game being the only major vote stealers.
Read our review of Boyhood.
Much more discussion lies ahead. Awards season Phase 1 is officially over–bring on Phase 2!
trace102@mail.chapman.edu
Review: 'American Sniper'
At the ripe old age of 84, director Clint Eastwood still managed to pump out two movies this year (including June's Jersey Boys). American Sniper, the second of the two, was finished at breakneck speed to qualify for Oscars awards consideration. Eastwood’s last few movies have tarnished his once flawless reputation, so he is no longer guaranteed the critical acclaim that he was just a few years back. Despite some of the usual pro-American themes, American Sniper doesn’t feel as reminiscent of Eastwood’s previous work, and, therefore, it is easier to forget any baggage that may come with it and see it as its own project.
Bradley Cooper plays Chris Kyle, or “Legend” as he becomes known shortly into his career. As the title suggest, he is an all-American hero (from Texas I might add) who, over the course of the War in Iraq, becomes the most utilized sniper in the military. The film does take the more conventional biography approach to depicting his life, but, fortunately, the time span is short enough that it works well, and more importantly, there is enough of a recurring plot that my attention was held through the entire film.
What the film does best are the action sequences, which immerse the viewer into the war. The film is also completely dependent on Bradley Cooper, who is truly at the top of his game here. He can and does immerse himself without being showy or attention-grabbing. Eastwood knows that Cooper is the strength of the picture, so we get a lot of focus on him (maybe one too many slow zoom-ins), leaving the rest of the characters not as well developed.
Eastwood knows that Cooper is the strength of the picture, so we get a lot of focus on him, leaving the rest of the characters not as well developed.
While the first two-thirds of the movie focus on Kyle’s tours of duty, in the end it transitions to grappling with coming home, and his inability to reintegrate into society. I would say that the film perfectly balances the amount of time spent in both places. The PTSD elements are solid, but I can still remember The Hurt Locker achieving an even more powerful effect with even less.
I don’t necessarily think that American Sniper is Eastwood back in his groove. I am also left unsure about how pro-war the film intends to be: Chris Kyle certainly is, but the message of the film itself may vary depending on the viewer. In telling a compelling action-biography rooted in a great performance, the film is a success. My last thoughts: like this year's Foxcatcher and other movies based on true stories, you will enjoy the film more not knowing how the true events unfolded. So go see the movie without any knowledge, then do your research afterward for maximum enjoyment!
American Sniper is in theaters today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99k3u9ay1gs
Review: 'Unbroken'
An extended opening sequence launches the journey that is Unbroken. Rather than starting from the beginning, we are dropped right in the middle of a WWII air battle, and while this technique certainly isn’t new, thanks to stunning craftsmanship, this opening scene is a reminder of what makes movies great.
Even going into the film without seeing the trailer, it’s household knowledge that this is a true story of survival. Olympic runner turned solider Louis Zamperini (Jack O’Connell) lived an incredible life, and the movie is a sincere tribute to his spirit, which carried him through some truly grueling experiences. It cannot be ignored that World War II movies are churned out nearly every year, and, therefore, finding original spins on the subject is a daunting challenge. We see glimpses of true originality in Unbroken, especially in the visual and sound elements, but overall, the result is underwhelming.
Is it awful and inhumane? Yes. Can the human spirit overcome it? Yes. Did anyone need to watch this film to discover this? No.
Because this is a true story and one about survival, the film is not plot driven. Instead, it explores the entirety of his experience. We’ve seen this type of film dozens of times (including last year’s masterpiece 12 Years a Slave), but in order to pull it off there needs to be something for the audience to learn or take away. The latter half of the film involves Zamperini’s experience as a prisoner of war, which is harrowing and brutal, and automatically brings out emotional reactions from everyone. At the same time though, I am left with no new revelation as to the POW experience. Is it awful and inhumane? Yes. Can the human spirit overcome it? Yes. Did anyone need to watch this film to discover this? No.
My frustration may stem from the fact that there are places where the movie has the opportunity to give us some kind of intriguing new revelation, but it doesn’t. The flashbacks are done extremely well (and there’s a brilliant decision as to when to stop using them), but they don’t give us enough information about any other important people in Zamperini’s life. Later, a major story element is the relationship between Zamperini and his cruel tormentor at the camp, nicknamed The Bird (Miyavi in a debut performance). Their relationship is compelling and Miyavi shows restrained brilliance, but he is not given enough material for us to fully understand his character. There are hints at the internal struggle that make The Bird sympathetic, but not nearly enough to get inside of him and wrench in his emotions the way we have in some of his comparable villainous roles. Personally, I see this as the biggest missed opportunity.
There are tangible places where this could have been a richer, more powerful film. I am excited that Angelina Jolie is moving into directing, this being her second picture behind the camera, and because the craftsmanship is so strong, this movie makes me excited for what will come next. For now, however, there is a lot left to be desired, and as I watched the film, my personal rating for it progressively declined. You will enjoy learning a story that you might not otherwise know, but when compared to iconic films dealing with similar material, Unbroken is comfortably in the middle and not outstanding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk1M_HwmFMM
Review: 'The Immortalists'
The New Yorker is known for articles that highlight unique individuals whose careers or life stories are bizarre and otherwise unknown to the general public. The subjects of the documentary The Immortalists are reminiscent of these eccentric characters: two scientists determined to find a cure for aging, or in other words, a way to stop death from being inevitable. As bizarre as it may seem, there is real science to back these guys up, and over the course of the film’s runtime, they’ll both make a compelling case for what they are doing.
As intriguing and as bizarre as these characters are, the film is little more than a series of episodes related to their lives and discoveries in anti-aging. Along the way we meet their lovers, doctors, and fellow scientists, and everyone in their circle is on board with their ambitious and bizarre aspirations. The film is challenging purely because of the topic manner, as immortality is something most would not want to believe is plausible. This documentary makes anti-aging seem so simple that everyone should be on board with it, yet while watching, every instinct tells you that something isn’t right. By the time a counter argument does make an appearance, a welcome relief, it needs only a little to convince you how ludicrous these people are.
This documentary makes anti-aging seem so simple that everyone should be on board with it, yet while watching, every instinct tells you that something isn’t right.
As fascinating as the subject matter is, the documentary’s linear construction does not enhance the topic in any particular way. Plot elements are thrown in casually as they come (polygamy makes a cameo about an hour in) without being developed properly. With this subject, the film could take an existential approach and defy convention to match the unconventional subject, but instead everything is played straightforward.
To make matters worse the characters do not progress or change in any way, so we just follow them around. Even in the ending, when there is an opportunity for some real discussion on the magnitude of death (the film’s looming antagonist) it is brushed over and hastily wraps up. The Immortalists is without a doubt intriguing, but it has a long way to go to achieve the levels that contemporary documentaries are reaching.
The Immortalists is in theaters this Friday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY4LL0UAZUg
Review: 'The Retrieval'
The best part about Netflix’s selection of streamable movies is that it allows for obscure, micro-budget films to find an audience that would otherwise unknowingly opt for something more commercial. This Cinemacy Select, The Retrieval, is a prime example of this phenomenon.
In an unspecified American South location in 1864, Will (Ashton Sanders), a free black child no older than 12, works with his Uncle Marcus (Keston John) to help a group of bounty hunters catch runaway slaves. Immediately, the staged moral conflict is immensely high since Will uses his race to catch the slaves, not by choice but with the hope of earning a decent living. Will and his uncle are assigned to hunt an especially dangerous runaway slave and lure him back under the false pretense that his brother is sick and needs his help. It doesn’t take them long to find the runaway, Nate (Tishuan Scott), but bringing him back without him catching on to their real objective is a much longer journey.
As their journey continues, Nate and Will form a father-son type bond as they learn to trust each other. This relationship puts Will in a morally impossible situation since the bounty hunters promise that if he doesn’t bring Nate back, they will kill him. Young actor Ashton Sanders carries most of the film in what he doesn’t say, and as the audience we see how much guilt he is internalizing. This internal conflict is much more fascinating than a typical slavery or Civil War film because it is about someone outside the system still being oppressed by it, and unlike Marcus, who attempts to justify their behavior, Will is young enough to not be corrupted.
Considering this is such a small movie, the fact that it can stand shoulder to shoulder with much grander period dramas is an accomplishment on its own.
The film’s scale is incredibly intimate, focusing mainly on the protagonists' conversations, and with just a few action sequences and subplots added into the mix. At times, the dialogue is a little direct, and characters expose themselves in a way that feels more written than authentic. That being said, the characters are developed well enough that their performances transcend the dialogue, and we believe them based on how well they are conveyed. Considering this is such a small movie, the fact that it can stand shoulder to shoulder with much grander period dramas is an accomplishment on its own. The last thing I will say is that because of the well established ticking clock that Will and Marcus are bound by in bringing Nate back, there is a continuous sense of doom and suspense on the journey to the inevitable climax that makes even the film’s smallest moments completely engaging.
It may not interest everyone, but the film’s path to release makes watching it all the more compelling. First, the film’s budget is minuscule, especially when compared to any other Civil War film that you’ve seen, yet it makes the absolute most of what it has. After debuting at South by Southwest in 2013, the film saw a tiny theatrical release but still managed to get recognized by the Independent Spirit Awards (announced earlier this week) with the “Someone to Watch Award,” given to a filmmaker whose work shows great promise. If writer/director Chris Eska can pull off the same intrigue and intimacy with a larger budget and a more nuanced script, then the future of cinema is definitely in good hands. The Retrieval is now available to stream on Netflix.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dDtnZvur8M
Review: 'White Shadow', 'Wrenched', 'Two Days, One Night (Deux Jours, Une Nuit)'
I was able to catch the last 2 days of the 10-day festival but still managed to see a great cross-section of festival movies. While Denver does not attract as massive of a crowd of industry folk, every film I saw had a full house of patrons, and there is interest here akin to the higher-profile festivals. Here are my thoughts on each one, as well as a bit on when their planned release is.
White Shadow (Germany)
Director: Noaz Deshe
Writers: Noaz Deshe, James Masson
Stars: Hamisi Bazili, Salum Abdallah, Riziki Ally
This is a festival thoroughbred, having already played at Venice and Sundance already, to name a few. A vérité style depiction of Alias, a young albino growing up in the outskirts of an unnamed city in Tanzania. The primary conflict is that as an albino, Alias is the prey of witch doctors, who cut up albinos and use them for outlandish potions and mysticism. His journey shows us all sorts of elements of a world that is completely foreign to us, but remains wholly individual and never tries to be the definitive “Africa story” that would be an easy route to take. Because of the film’s looser style, it requires extra attention from the viewer and doesn’t have a clear through line, but is compelling because of how otherworldly it feels. There isn’t a big takeaway or call to action, but the film’s expose cannot help but leave a mark. There are a few incredible sequences, including a betting scene and a sequence where the protagonists are digging through e-waste looking for salvageable electronics, but the collective whole still feels looser than it needs to be, and the stylistic elements of the film are not employed often enough to be the focus of the movie. White Shadow will most likely not be playing in US theaters anytime soon due to a depiction of animal cruelty that probably wasn’t fake (although is rather tame compared to any day at a US meat factory). However, as a festival film, it is intriguing and unlike anything else you will see, and for that alone it may be worth your time.
Wrenched (USA)
Director: MI Lincoln
Stars: Edward Abbey, Dave Foreman, Peg Millet
A small-scale environmental documentary with a big message, director ML Lincoln’s Wrenched is about the writer and radical conservationist Edward Abbey and how his message and legacy carried on after his death. Abbey is known for writing Desert Solitare and The Monkey Wrench Gang, both classic books for anyone who cares about wilderness and ecology, but also did some “night work” as he called it, involving tearing down billboards, destroying bulldozers, and other behavior all with the intention of stopping the destruction of the natural world. While neither are required reading, knowing the material will make the film that much more enjoyable, especially Monkey Wrench Gang, which turned out to be much less fiction than one would believe. The documentary has a great deal of archival footage which makes it easy to see the movement and get excited about what is going on, and the film chronicles from the 1970’s until present day but never feels like too broad of a scale to cover.
One of the key elements of Abbey’s work that made it so successful was that he made being an environmentalist fun and something that people should want to do instead of a chore or obligation. There is something truly special about the wilderness and its unfortunate that fewer people with each passing generation will have access to it, a message the film will not let you forget. There is no definitive villain shown here either: it is the mass corporations building dams and mines that permanently scar the natural world. It is hard not to see this movie and be moved to action, and Lincoln does a great job of inspiring young people today rather than seeing it as a lost cause. Edward Abbey had a spirit that continues to leave a legacy, and despite being labeled an “ecoterrorist,” his principles are about respecting the natural world and realizing how imperative it is for our long term survival, something often overlooked. Wrenched is not meant to be provocative, none of what has happened should be shocking, but is actually meant to be moving and entertaining, at which it succeeds. The film is still making the festival rounds so may not see distribution until next year, but if you are interested in learning more, check out the website and you may even be able to request a screening! http://wrenched-themovie.com/
Two Days One Night (Deux Jours, Une Nuit) (Belgium)
Director: Jean-Pierre Dardenne, Luc Dardenne
Writers: Jean-Pierre Dardenne, Luc Dardenne
Stars: Marion Cotillard, Fabrizio Rongione, Pili Groyne
Lastly Belguim’s official submission to the Academy Awards, Two Days One Night, which also screened at AFI Film Festival. The film centers around Sandra (Marion Cotillard), a married mother who is overworking to make ends meet, but has just been fired from her job. Her foreman has agreed she can get her job back if the majority of her co-workers vote yes to her return. But, there’s a catch: if she gets her job back, all of her 16 co-workers will lose their bonus. From there, the film is a depiction of Sandra’s journey of visiting all of her co-workers asking them to vote in her favor. What sounds simple enough turns out to be a fascinating display of the human spirit and the insidious affects money has on anyone who is working to make end’s meet. Every one of her co-workers has a different response to this Hobson’s choice that she presents them with, and the story builds extremely well throughout. What makes the film so effective is the style that is employed. Rather than favoring conventional coverage, with a mixture of close-ups and cuts between dialogue, every interaction Sandra has is an uninterrupted take, and the result is stunning. There is no flashy shot that draws attention to this effect – in fact, as a regular film viewer it would be easy to overlook this directing feat. There is no clear reason as to why this technique is used, but because it is so effective at drawing the viewer in, it doesn’t really matter. What matters is that when you strip the film down, it is about authenticity and human experience, and Cotillard brings that to the fullest. It is not an ostentatious showcase of acting range, so, unfortunately, she might be overlooked come awards season, but instead she is on point at displaying the emotional exhaustion of a person in her state. This is as relatable of a film as they come, and touches on experiences that everyone has had at some point. Without a doubt, this is one of the finest dramas of the year. Two Days One Night played at Cannes and Toronto earlier this year, and will get a limited release on December 24th.