[Children] is the same as their previous films, with a realistic style, neat editing, and true actors. There are dozens of minutes in it, I will be so immersed in it, and I will be moved. In fact, any kind of film analysis is not applicable to Dardenne, it is like you are pointing fingers at other people's lives. From the unemployed girls in [Rosetta], to the ordinary workers in [Son], to the young and illegal parents in this [Child], they always pay attention to the living people around them, and how ordinary they are But life.
Take a simple example. After being driven out by Sonia, Bruno returned to the "small room" where he often connected with his accomplices, wrapped his whole body with a large piece of cardboard, and lay down on the ground. At that time, Bruno was not much different from the common street beggars or people living in so-called shelters, but his actual identity was much more complicated. He was a thief, a homeless man, the boyfriend of a teenage girl, and the father of his newborn child. Focusing on such a common and rare, pitiful and hateful person, Dardenne's intention is to better demonstrate the simplicity and complexity inherent in society and people.
Bruno in the previous part is more of a youthful spirit that has not been tempered by the world. He didn't dare to hug his son for fear of waking him up; he used the extra money to buy his girlfriend Sonia a shirt the same as his own; he rented a convertible just to take them for a ride and have fun with Sonia. However, this happiness did not last long. When he found that there was not much money left, he almost hesitated for a while, and then made a heinous act - he sold his child like a commodity. Just like the jewelry, video cameras, etc. he sold before. His motive is actually very simple, for money. Especially when he held a thick stack of banknotes in front of Sonia and said, "We can have another one" with a little disdain, probably everyone couldn't help but have the urge to slap their mouths.
In fact, the whole story is more focused on Bruno. As mentioned earlier, he himself is just an older child whose mind is not yet fully mature, who can't even tell the difference between children and objects, and who wants to enjoy more than he can bear. Since the day his own child came into the world, he has focused all the contradictions on the father. The sudden loss and loss of control are somewhat understandable. What's more, he was soon met with retribution - the decisive departure of his girlfriend, the provocation of black market people, the failure of stealing, and the homelessness. You can say that he is purely self-inflicted, but if his depravity is just personal, it seems that the origin of the title is too thin and boring.
Bruno, like the babbling baby in the swaddle, must have been a pure and simple child at first, which can be seen from his play with Sonia. It's just that there are many factors that contributed to him today. As for what it was, Dardenne didn't give any more clues. They don't have the history of blood and tears like a cheap film of the bottom-tier youth who made tears. They just showed the process of things to everyone, of course, with a bit of subtle emotions, so at the end, Bruno and Sonia rubbed their heads. The crying scene. I always feel that there is a little bit here, not as well-rounded as [Rosetta] and [Son], with a bit of stance, you can see that there is compassion. But to restore the initial state of life, and use DV, it is better not to put anything.
I've always believed that there are two highest forms of expression in cinema. One is the genius type. Many masters we are familiar with can be classified into this category, from the earliest Griffith, Eisenstein, to the very famous Bergman, Fellini, Antonioni, etc. , of course, the personal favorite is Tarkovsky. There is another kind, that is derived from life and can truly reflect life. The appearance of dogma95 really inspired me for a while, but Lars von Trier, who was once highly respected and loved, has gone more and more extreme under the watchful eyes of all, and has lost more and more of his most precious things. In today's system, it may be almost impossible for a master or genius director to appear again, and those who dare to describe reality are even more precious. At this time, the Darden brothers did not go far, nor did they forget their motives for picking up DV in the first place.
So no matter if [the children] are inferior or backward compared to their previous works, I still want to give them full confidence. It is a very simple truth, and the proof given by the artist who still has a conscience with persistence, even if it is just a small beam of light in the darkness, it is still enough to surprise us.
View more about The Child reviews
