Before Midnight (Richard Linklater)

[Derek]

IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2209418/?ref_=sr_1)

http://www.movienewz.com/img/gallery/before-midnight/posters/before_midnight_international_ poster_1.jpg

[Qrazy]

Meh, I'll wait for After Breakfast.

[Lucky]

I'm lacking the closure I once had. It's the realistic next step to take these characters, but one that won't be fully appreciated as a closing piece--like a minor chord in the trilogy that still needs to be resolved. Gender roles play a larger focus with each passing film and come to a head here with Celine's reluctance of her increasing femininity. Her character is by far the more dynamic one in the pair, and as her gender roles shift, conflict arises. Meanwhile, Jesse is beginning to awaken from his unfazed dreamer daze of twenty years and allowing guilt to sweep in. It emits a toxic air that is difficult to watch these beloved characters inhabit at times, but the reality is ever-present. The first half hour contains an unusual change of pace with multiple characters discussing an amalgamation of relationships at different stages in life, but it's a little heavy handed. Once Jesse and Celine breakaway it's just as effortless and flowing as we expect from the other entries. Doesn't quite reach the highs of Sunset, but I anticipate it aging well with me over the next nine years. For the first time in this trilogy, I feel a little young to grasp the film entirely.

I felt like I caught up with old friends tonight. Ones that I need to call again soon to see how things are going. I hope this isn't the last I hear of Jesse and Celine.

[plain]

finally seeing this tomorrow.

[plain]

First, the shock of seeing one of these in the actual theater is something that won't wear off for a while, but this is just about as bruising and honest as we've come to expect. On first viewing, I don't think it's as pressing or as urgent as Before Sunset, but it's really not trying to be and I'm not sure that it needs to be; although, I'm sure some would argue that the trajectory that this goes in is the most urgent of the series (I'm fine with this notion for obvious reasons). Having avoided all clips/trailers beforehand, I didn't quite know what I was in for, though, what the film gracefully builds and escalates to is something that triggers all sorts of emotion. It was odd seeing other actual characters this time around as well; not just the near inaudible limo driver from Sunset or the poem guy from Sunrise, but some tangible substance outside of Celine and Jesse. Also, Delpy is fine, but Hawke's work here may be the best of the series. In terms of individual scenes, the hotel scene here takes the cake by far -- just edging out the final 10 minutes of Sunset; a couple's entire relationship and all of the built up frustrations and emotion conveyed solely through a span of 15 minutes.

Also: "I fucked up my whole life because of the way you sing," will be a line that lingers for quite a while.

[Mr. Pink]

Damn it. I didn't realize this was already out. I just checked the somewhat local indie theater, and saw they're playing Before Sunset and Before Sunrise - but they end Thursday and I won't be able to make it.

I saw Before Sunset there when it first came out, so that's not too big of a deal, but I'd kill to see Before Sunrise on the big screen.

Either way, thanks for the reminder this was out. I will be watching it asap.

[D_Davis]

I need to see this, but I'll probably wait and do all three at home.

I saw the first one in the theater - man, living in SoCal during the indie-90s was a blast. Hard to believe they used to show a lot of movies in which a couple of people just talked, in the theaters, at the multiplexes.

[Lucky]

As the dust settles, I've come to realize that I'm satisfied if this is truly the end. I have no doubt they could fill another installment plot and character wise, but the themes have already come full circle. I fear that further efforts would
retread beaten paths.

[Watashi]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxwlccYuYx1qzh96v.gif

I think it's superior to Sunset.

[dreamdead]

Not sure about it being superior to Before Sunset--still need another 3 or 4 viewings to arrive at that kind of decision--but I love how committed this film was to exploring the collateral damage set in motion by Jesse and Celine's decisions from the last film. That was one my of biggest fears about this film--that it'd paint such a rosy image of their present that it gloss how different a career path Jesse's actions put them on. The two main motifs throughout this one are definitely perception and blindness (i.e. indeed, that's why the church scene isn't superfluous beyond Delpy's ultra-sexy lips gesture), and the integration of other perspectives at the lunch table only heightens this sense of perception.

Love the naturalness of how the film fleshes out the preceding nine years throughout its course, and the gender commentary (liberating/castigating?) about women having less influences to match themselves against before they turn 50.

The discomfort in the hotel room scene by my audience was palpable, and I was squirming when they were only halfway through their battle. Lovely closing line. Can't wait to let it revolve in my mind for the next few months.

[Izzy Black]

I'm lacking the closure I once had. It's the realistic next step to take these characters, but one that won't be fully appreciated as a closing piece--like a minor chord in the trilogy that still needs to be resolved.

Why? This film had perfect closure to me. I hope they don't make another one. I want it all to end right here. A pefect trilogy.

[Izzy Black]

The discomfort in the hotel room scene by my audience was palpable, and I was squirming when they were only halfway through their battle. Lovely closing line. Can't wait to let it revolve in my mind for the next few months.

I felt that too, but I'd say the average age of people in my theater was well over 60, so it's understandable. I remember one lady behind me blurted out very audibly, "I thought they weren't going do anything like that in a movie like this." It's interesting how older people start talking and ruffling with their stuff to drown out the dialogue and cause a distraction when they start feeling uncomfortable. It was a pretty interesting experience.

[Lucky]

Why? This film had perfect closure to me. I hope they don't make another one. I want it all to end right here. A pefect trilogy.

I made an addendum to that post. Initially I felt a strong air of uncertainty regarding Celine's mindset at the end.

[Izzy Black]

I made an addendum to that post. Initially I felt a strong air of uncertainty regarding Celine's mindset at the end.

I see. Well, I think there is some air of uncertainty, I wouldn't exactly say it's strong for me. But for me, that's closure, because it suggests that as long as they're talking, they'll be OK, and it's only fitting that this film ends with Jesse and Celine doing the very thing that defines their relationship. Talking...

[DavidSeven]

This was perfect. It hit me so hard. I'm honestly having trouble recalling a film that left such an immediate and powerful emotional impact on me. I've often wondered if I had overrated the previous installments of this series due to either immature sensibilities or just having greater tolerance for soapboxing in my earlier years. That might still be true, but damn if these movies don't seem to come out at just the right moments in my life.

Love how these things are handled in the film: the embracement of these characters' flaws, the revelation of Jessie's potential to be endearingly manipulative and Celine's potential to be abruptly ruthless, the glimmers of idealism and romance that are the hallmarks of the trilogy, the evolution of an argument, the widow recounting memories of her husband, the pacing, the ending, the everything.

Best of the series.



Totally random: on my way out, I noticed Minka Kelly was coming out of the same screening I was in. She ran into Diablo Cody in the theater hallway and stopped to greet her. Just a surreal moment as I was walking out feeling emotionally shook from the film.

[Watashi]

Only in LA.

[Bosco B Thug]

Watching all three of these within the week was such an obscenely pleasurable experience. I essentially fell in love with Before Sunset as the ending reduced my bearings to those of a 12-year-old girl. Perhaps its jumping from that into the more immediate, worldly, critical Before Midnight that makes me reluctantly the relative naysayer. Don't worry, I essentially loved it, but I am somewhat dissatisfied with it as an apparent "trilogy-closer." I wanted its scope to be bigger, its arc more poetically rounded out, its portrait more naive and enlightened, instead of the rough-and-tumble descent into the reality of people or issues like gender roles; these two, as we've sort of always suspected throughout the movies, not being particularly "special" in any way: Jesse is simultaneously a man capable of deep, enlightened connections, but also something of a lightweight; Celine is less compelling, less textured a thinker, but passionate, emotional to a fault as we see so clearly here. As they have niggling flaws like all us normal people, they have many the fuck-ups. Before Midnight is a plunge, and indeed, it's great as that. That ending scene, though... didn't do it for me.

Jesse gets to save the day. Meh, I guess I'm a feminist.

[Grouchy]

This was wonderful. A perfect trilogy.

I got nothing else.

[transmogrifier]

73/100


The conversations are a little more stilted and stagey but that's all of a piece - nine years on, even these two most loquacious of lovers will struggle to fill in every moment with fresh lively banter, unless of course an argument/misunderstanding spurs them on.

Unlike some, I liked the dinner scene the best because it's the first time we've seen the two characters in traditional couple mode, really, no longer putting on and taking off masks for each other, but now for other people as their relationship ceases to be just their own; it now has significance in the lives of others, especially their children.
In the hotel, as a guy I was firmly on Jesse's side - I honestly could not see what Celine was going on about. This threw the movie a little out of whack for me, as I struggled to see the POV of a character up to this point I have followed merrily for 18 years. Still, nine years from now......

[transmogrifier]

Jesse gets to save the day. Meh, I guess I'm a feminist.

Well, if the day has to be saved, one of them needs to do it.

[Grouchy]

In the hotel, as a guy I was firmly on Jesse's side - I honestly could not see what Celine was going on about. This threw the movie a little out of whack for me, as I struggled to see the POV of a character up to this point I have followed merrily for 18 years.
Heh, I felt the same way, and my girlfriend didn't, which is how I know the movie's gender politics are spot on.

I mean, I can understand if a woman is frustrated by being relegated to "mom" status while her husband is the famous writer, but that's clearly not the guy's fault.

[Bosco B Thug]

Well, if the day has to be saved, one of them needs to do it. Rather than some ecstatic combination of both? Yes, realistic and mature, but man, if we're so committed to reality, someone make me forget the perfect equilibrium of grievances in Before Sunset.

[MarcusBrody]

I finally saw this last night. I'd gotten my wife caught up on the previous two movies over the last few weeks and those combined with this was one of our best movie experiences.

I loved the film. The table scene wasn't my absolute favorite as I felt one or two soliloquies rang less true than most of the exceptionally natural dialogue, but I did really enjoy seeing the two characters flesh themselves out a tiny bit by interacting with other people. Still, the essence of Before ___ is Jesse and Celine talking and walking around, so I was happy when the film got back to that.

The arguments that Jesse and Celine have really resonated with me as they have a similar basis to the few issues in my own relationship with my wife. I could see some of the same patterns developing (Jesse's excessive tendency to try to deflect seriousness back to manageable levels with jokes and quips is something I've been accused of) and I wanted to yell out advice to both characters at different times (My wife's family largely lives in India. Never do anything that could provoke a fight when they've just finished a visit. The emotional resonance is too strong). That made this film connect with me on an acutely personal level in a way that Before Sunset didn't. I loved that movie, but it was something a bit foreign to my life.

Overall I think my preference order would be:
1. Before Sunrise
2. Before Midnight
3. Before Sunset

I absolutely love all of them though and they combine to form one of my very favorite sets of films. Certainly my favorite set of romantic films. I remember showing Before Sunrise to an ex-girlfriend and re-evaluating things after she didn't see why I thought it was great or particularly romantic.

If this is the last film, well I wouldn't complain. It was wonderful. I wouldn't mind seeing more though. I think that the next one might be the hardest. I'd love to see Jesse and Celine in their 60s, but I'm not sure what the early 50s would bring. Given my faith in the series though, I'd be willing to find out.

[dreamdead]

Marcus, it's been about five years since I've seen Before Sunrise, but I'd be curious why you elevate it over its sequel. Just the ability to empathize with the characters and the ease of their dialogue? There's something about Midnight being decidedly adult in its coverage, whereas Sunset feels like the fluidity and freedom of Sunrise is slowly gentrifying, but that's something that I rather love about Sunset. They act as though they aren't burdened by the time that's transpired, and that itself is analyzed by Midnight in intriguing ways...

To me, Sunrise just feels like the most pedestrian of the series, even though I still like it.

[Qrazy]

Sunrise is a much better storyboarded film than Sunset. There's a visual flow to the former lacking in the latter. I haven't seen Midnight yet.

[Ezee E]

I wasn't hit nearly as much as you all were.

There's no need for a sequel. The dinner scene gave it for us. If there isn't a sequel, well, then we know what happened. For me, they're not going to work out.

[Bosco B Thug]

Sunrise is a much better storyboarded film than Sunset. There's a visual flow to the former lacking in the latter. I haven't seen Midnight yet. 'Sunrise' is the most Slacker-ish, so yeah, it has the most narrative ingenuity and verve. I think 'Midnight' is the most visually beautiful, though.


There's no need for a sequel. The dinner scene gave it for us. If there isn't a sequel, well, then we know what happened. For me, they're not going to work out. Um, boo! ;) Though I don't remember, what's given away in the dinner scene?

[Ezee E]

Um, boo! ;) Though I don't remember, what's given away in the dinner scene?

Nothing is given away in the dinner scene. We just see the couple that is 10 years older with them interacting, and the other couple that's 30 years (?) older?

So uh... maybe in 20 years? Ha.

We even got the prequel.

[Bosco B Thug]

Nothing is given away in the dinner scene. We just see the couple that is 10 years older with them interacting, and the other couple that's 30 years (?) older?

So uh... maybe in 20 years? Ha.

We even got the prequel. Ah, I see. Interesting.

[MarcusBrody]

Marcus, it's been about five years since I've seen Before Sunrise, but I'd be curious why you elevate it over its sequel. Just the ability to empathize with the characters and the ease of their dialogue? There's something about Midnight being decidedly adult in its coverage, whereas Sunset feels like the fluidity and freedom of Sunrise is slowly gentrifying, but that's something that I rather love about Sunset. They act as though they aren't burdened by the time that's transpired, and that itself is analyzed by Midnight in intriguing ways...

To me, Sunrise just feels like the most pedestrian of the series, even though I still like it.

Sorry for taking so long to respond. I'd forgotten to check in on the thread.

I think my preference order for the films is largely based on how they connect with my own personal experiences. The feeling of extreme transience and the elevation of that transience into something that makes everything even more special is a theme that I could connect to. I've particularly felt that when traveling and when meeting folks who I really liked, but knew I probably wouldn't see again. Nothing as dramatic as what happens in the film, but still, it resonated with me and fit very well with my own personal view of what is romantic.

Structurally, I really enjoy the real time pacing that Before Sunset employs, especially because it's different from the other films. i think that Before Sunset's cutting and pacing lets it cover a bit more ground though. I like that.

And I love the scene where they meet the two guys who are going to be in the play. I don't find many scenes in all of film more amusing.

Ultimately, it's possible that I just like Before Sunset more because it was my introduction to the world and I'm still nostalgically attached to it.

Really, I love all three. It's hard for me to say I definitively like one more than the other.

[MarcusBrody]

Another thing that I liked about the movie occurred to me last night: I just really enjoyed watching Jesse enjoy being a writer. It showed a bit of a different side of him and it's not that often in movies you get a good portrayal of someone just really liking what they do professionally.

[dreamdead]

I concede that Sunrise covers more ground and is thus likely more expansive; it just feels more traditional of a narrative.

I did like seeing how multiple generations in Midnight are explored, though I worry that everyone is too fatalistic, refusing to believe that anything beyond short-term relationships is viable (or, alternately, death being the only other possibility).

[Boner M]

Sunrise is a much better storyboarded film than Sunset. There's a visual flow to the former lacking in the latter. I haven't seen Midnight yet.
Just you wait, the storyboarding in Midnight will blow you away.

[baby doll]

Another thing that I liked about the movie occurred to me last night: I just really enjoyed watching Jesse enjoy being a writer....while the ladies silently chopped vegetables in the kitchen.

[Raiders]

I can't help but hold it against this film that I never really wanted it. I didn't want to see the struggles of marriage among idealists, the struggle that occurs when the levels of success are different, when the tug of prior life interferes with present day. This film shows the inevitable, and I already knew the inevitable as the downside to Jesse's smile that faded out the last film. It seemed so perfect, the struggles you know these two will face, how incompatible their mutual attraction really is, how no romance based on "out of body" roamings and discussion can really be expected to stay rosy, yet this man and woman enraptured by the mere presence of the other. It was a perfect dichotomy of emotions. Now, I see it played out, right in front of me. And for all its perfect scene construction and exquisite ending, I just can't get away from having witnessed the literalization of my own fantasies for these two characters which were created by these filmmakers through the perfect restraint of showing the end-game. They cannot help but leave the film on a note of hope and fancy as the two perhaps reconcile over mockish visions of what could be. It's a beautiful moment that highlights how much fiction has really played out in their lives and how reality never is what we want it to be. I love it. I probably should have loved this film. But, I'm not there. Not yet anyway.

[Boner M]

That's how I felt about Sunset the first time I saw it.

[dreamdead]

On some level, it might not be as "necessary" a film, but I like the complications that it explores, even if it denies them the happily ever after that is woven through Sunset's close. Further, there's the material with Jesse and his son, and that dynamic did beg for some form of resolution. And it affirms that Jesse feels very much a double of his own parents' abandonment, and is trying to counteract that crisis that he felt in his life. And Celine is equally afraid that Jesse is going to privilege the remnants of his first marriage over everything they've started since--I like how this film focuses more on her perspective and examines her subjective reality more than any of the others. I'm still a bit hesitant on how to reconcile the more overt engagement with Celine with my own predilection to side with Jesse in almost all of the finale's fallout, though.

Also, any chance of Upstream Color thoughts? I'm curious as to your take, given the rating...

[Raiders]

Also, any chance of Upstream Color thoughts? I'm curious as to your take, given the rating...

Yes, I'm still formulating them. My mind was blown, and picking up the pieces is taking a while.

[Bosco B Thug]

Yep, felt like Raiders. 'Midnight' is a change in trajectory for the trilogy. It doesn't end in realization of lofty ideal (romantic ideal, and quote unquote).

I do desire its existence, and it's perfect a conclusion, though.

[Mr. Pink]

Finally got around to this. When I saw Celine waiting for Jesse at the airport, I was thrilled to see they'd finally gotten together, but that was quickly dashed 'cause I knew it would likely turn ugly at some point. When it did, it was pretty tough to watch.

I kept having to remind myself that, despite the others being incredibly romantic, each movie sticks about as close to reality as any romance movie possibly can, and this is the sort of thing that happens in real life. Even still . . .

Then I thought that some people meet, get married, etc., without having half the feelings these two had, so even if it turns ugly, relationships still don't get much better than that.

Then I remembered this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuBXLlN3Wks

[Thirdmango]

I watched Sunset today and it was so good I immediately went to redbox and got this one. It was still great and almost as good as sunset. I'd agree with the concept that these movies hit more when you're feeling the same emotions. The chance encounter of a first moment, reliving that moment of loss, and then finally having what you want and real life coming back into it. In nine years I wouldn't be surprised granted if they're all alive that there is a fourth.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Hurt so good
Come on baby, make it hurt so good
Sometimes love don't feel like it should
You make it hurt so good

[Gizmo]

Just saw this, and it's a nice continuation of both the previous two, and relationships in general. We see the highs and lows of their life together, granted in quick succession which doesn't normally happen in life, but has to in a 2 hour movie. Not sure I like this one as much as the previous 2, but it's still as solid and as wonderful time spent with these two characters.

[Irish]

Good but stagey. Linklater demonstrates again that he's a playwright trapped in a filmmaking culture. (Ideally, this guy shoulda been born in 1925).

The first act, good god that car ride, is interesting but interminable. What says "I really don't want to be here" like slapping a camera down on a car hood and not moving it or cutting for ~ten minutes? This entire movie couldn't be more visually dull, and I wondered at times why they bothered with Greece at all. Given that the story is so domestic, the entire thing could have easily played out in a Parisian apartment over the course of a day. It might have even been better.

The second act dinner felt like a callback to the other movies, and to my terrible American ear, it was European, overeager and pretentious as all hell -- a bunch of people trying to outdo each other's shallow profundities with scurrilous observations about relationships and gender.

The third act redeems everything. This was just incredible. I admire Delpy for being willing to be so cold and unmoving and unlikeable for so long. Hawke was good (esp. note the look on his face when his son gets on that plane), but he also had the easier role. This entire bit made the movie worth watching. Fantastic payoff. Very real.

One uncharitable observation: I didn't like how closely the characters have come to resemble the actor's own lives. Delpy had children with a partner she never married, Hawke is a divorced quasi-novelist, etc. Feels a little shallow.

One more charitable observation: I did like how this was packed with tiny gestures, based on the characters and their relationship. Like the way Celine rolls her eyes at Jesse a couple of times. He doesn't see it but we do. And the way she gets him, at dinner, to tell their friends they'd rather decline the hotel stay.

[Izzy Black]

I totally agree with you about Linklater. My favorite plays from him are Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly, though. I love them because they feel so, I don't know, 1920ish. Like Arthur Miller meets Tennessee Williams. Or something.

The Before films would've been better though if they didn't have the on-location shooting and the long-takes. It kind of just gets in the way. They would've been much better if they were shot on a stage or a set. Or like in one room. Kind of like how he did with Tape, which was based on a play. Now that's a great Richard Linkater film. Vintage Linklater. It's his most purest play. Arguably even better than Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly.

Boyhood should also be a good play.

[Irish]

Yes!! Exactly what I was going for -- Williams, Miller. Small scope stories about family grief, essentially.

Agree about Waking Life. Also agree about Tape. The last act of Midnight reminded me of it a bit. Not because of content but because, hey, he's shooting a bunch of contentious stuff in a hotel room again!

[Izzy Black]

Now I feel bad.

Damn it.

[Irish]

Ah, I guess that was a joke and in my eagerness for a like mind, I missed it. Little surprised at you, Iz.

Serves me right, I suppose, for trying to engage on Match Cut.

[Izzy Black]

I really do feel like a cunt for that. I'm usually nicer.

But we still agree about American Hustle!

:sad:

[Irish]

It wasn't about agreement. It was about having a conversation.

If that's how you want to play it, no problem. Both the insult and the apology came a little too quickly. You feel bad? How nice for you.

[EvilShoe]

Great filmmaking. A movie that simultaneously destroys romanticism and embraces it. I'm kind of hoping for a fourth film that has Jesse and Céline's kids play a larger role, but this depends on what Boyhood ​ends up like.

[Izzy Black]

It wasn't about agreement. It was about having a conversation.

If that's how you want to play it, no problem. Both the insult and the apology came a little too quickly. You feel bad? How nice for you.

Wow. Are you serious? You're right. Maybe the apology did come too quickly. As in, maybe it shouldn't have came at all. It's one of those situations where you intend a joke and it's unexpectedly taken sincerely or the wrong way, then you immediately feel bad, so you apologize for it. Naturally, it comes quickly. But in hindsight, perhaps it was misplaced. How about this. Retract the apology. Let's talk.

But first, I find your self-righteous condescension here a bit obnoxious, so this deserves a little more context. I went for irony instead of a detailed response for a reason. I actually assumed you would immediately get the joke because you should know my position on Linklater and the "filmed plays" criticism by now. We've literally debated this very point at length in the past. Instead of attempting to go line by line and explain my position all over again, which I assumed you were already well aware of, I made a quip. Big deal.

But I'm going to try to be a little more charitable here. Perhaps you forgot or don't remember. Alright, fine. Let's have a discussion, but let me start with refreshing your memory on some of the points I've made on this score in the past (in a Before Midnight announcement thread (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?3707-Before-Sunrise-Tokyo-Drift&highlight=Sunset)no less). The first is a response to another poster.


Let me respond to this by giving two examples. The examples I will draw on are from Before Sunset.

(1) The opening segment of Before Sunset is various shots of Paris. The film spends several moments establishing the setting. It's clear that the city is to be taken as an important presence in the film. Significant is the use of the wide-angle lens. Like Antonioni's alienation trilogy, wide scope and large depth is emphasized rather than the 'flatness' effect of the telephoto lens he goes for later in his career. In Antonioni, the effect is to achieve the contrast of the overwhelming size of the city and the marginal insignificance of its inhabitants as willful agents; that is, we get the sense of "dwarfing" or eclipsing of the characters by the city. What's the reasoning for this technique in Sunset? On [C]eline and Jesse's trek to the coffee shop, the camera follows them primarily from their front, consisting mostly of long tracking-shots that capture the sense of the journey. They are front and center, but as they advance forward, we see a long path descend behind them. Most conversations in film are shot with close-ups, or longer lenses, in order to blur the events behind the characters out of focus, keeping the characters principally in focus. But here it's important for Linklater to establish the depth of the winding path behind them. This 'spatial realism' - along with the longer takes - helps capture the actual experience of their journey. More importantly, though, he consciously avoids the risk of obscuring the city behind them as they progress, ensuring that we never lose sight of its beauty and presence. The early look and feel of the city is established by these interconnected, closely arranged buildings and small stone paths that are clearly designed for pedestrians. The paths enclose them, but not in a claustrophobic way. Linklater's vision of the city is inviting, warm, and intimate, rather than corporate, invasive, and domineering, (pace Antonioni).

http://i.imgur.com/GJhDoTW.png

(2) In the coffee shop, a waitress interrupts Jesse and Celine's conversation. Jesse shifts the topic to the coffee shop itself, reflecting on how he wishes there were such café's in the U.S. It leads to the significant reveal that Celine spent time in New York while Jesse was there, but more notably, it turns [to] a conversation on the contrast between New York life and Parisian life, and in turn, American lifestyle and European lifestyle. This is one of many instances where the pervasive topic of conversation is given rise by observations of physical objects and events around them. The function is to show how conversation often starts from a seemingly superficial "external world" observational basis and gradually rises in level of meaning and depth, where hopefully, we might catch glimpses of each others true deeper selves and inner-life. This is what gives the 'impromptu' script-less feel of the dialogue. It's important because it shows how rooted in the moment these characters are (and how we ourselves can be). The fleeting moment and local place define their interactions. Their histories and identities are filtered through this give-and-take interpretation of events in the present, allowing them to occasionally spin small fictions about their lives, cherry-picking different parts of their life to discuss and personally tailor how they want to present themselves. In so little time, they must navigate complex layers of feeling, making spontaneous decisions about how vulnerable they are willing to let themselves be, as emotional insecurities, secrets, and private thoughts constantly bubble beneath the surface of conversation that otherwise has the appearance of complete confidence and control. You rarely get this level of attention on the fascinating complexities of conversation in cinema. It warrants interest.

(...)

I would also make a point about the importance of non-verbal interaction generally, but again, Raiders covered this point very nicely. I will only say that the technique here that makes this possible is that much of the dialogue is captured in a single frame of action. Rather than shot / reverse shot (which is occasioned), Linklater often let's us see how one character is reacting to the other all at once.

(...)

... I can't imagine anything more fundamentally cinematic than a film's whose main objects are motion and visual space. It's the kind of thing that separates a visual auteur (Antonioni) from a dramatist (Bergman - yeah I said it!). As Raiders already made insightful gestures at above, Linklater's films are a study of conversation not from a verbal standpoint, but from a decidedly visual, temporal, and behavioral standpoint. The semantics of the conversation are illustrated most often non-verbally, anchored in the moment and the subtleties of action, and the narrative conditions under which the conversation is guided is similarly non-verbal (spatial cues, i.e. the coffee shop stimulating conversation about emotional experiences, the city itself invoking conversation about truth, history, and time, etc). The action, the city, the camera, the framing, the duration - in all, the moving image - is fundamental to truly appreciating these films. None of which, of course, undermines the importance of dialogue, but only enriches it. It's film at its purest.

A previous response to you:


Here is what I can agree with. I can agree with the fact that Slackers, Waking Life, Sunrise, and Sunset all could have been produced as plays. I also think most of his films could have been produced as plays.

But this simply fails to address the issue. That they are dialogue driven is not evidence alone that nothing important and central would be lost by shifting it from film to play. In principal, the claim [that his films] 'don't try to depend on visuals and sound to tell a story' is patently false. I won't defend Waking Life or A Scanner Darkly here, since we have enough on our table at the moment, but if you take the visual out of Sunset, there's a lot you lose. Again, take at least two points.

1. On location shooting. You've conceded that location does much of the heavy-lifting for Linklater in these films. How, prey tell, can a mere staged play production capture and replace the central importance [and feeling] of actually filming in Paris or Vienna?

2. Technique, tracking shots, and framing. How can we capture the navigational journey of the protagonists without these features? How can we secure 'spatial realism' without depth-of-field, on location scenery, and unbroken takes?

(...)

What is his doctoral thesis? Several people in this thread - elixir, Lucky, and Raiders, to name a few - seem to grant that the dialogue and characters themselves do not seem to be the most appealing feature about these films. Indeed, it's rather the manner of their interactions, the way the camera brings our attention to nuances of expression and behavior, and how the conversation itself is grounded in the moment.

And to another poster:


I think they would work fine as plays, but I think a lot of good films would work fine as plays. I don't think it's an especially revealing claim on its own. The point is that I do think something distinctive and important about these films would be lost in the transfer from the cinema to the stage, and this quality is much of what makes these films valuable for me at least. I have made gestures at the unique cinematic quality of these films in my longer post. I will accept that we may simply differ on this score.

We can start from the above and go from there.

[dreamdead]

Found this piece (http://theweek.com/article/index/257050/girls-on-film-why-before-midnight-is-a-failure) interesting, looking at how Linklater's film is a failure in lieu of any focus on joyful dialogue--that is, conversation where men and women have connective understanding.

Monika Bartyzel:

Before Midnight changes the series from a film that turns the tables on real romantic passion and connection to one with the same old cinematic foibles — of women making food, men being lazy and calmly condescending, and sex being all that's needed to keep an unhappy marriage going. Complex, real emotion is now dealt with the same haphazard and uncommunicative indifference.

My thinking, though, is that, on some level, at least, Delpy is aware of this and doesn't feel the need to verbalize these sentiments, that Linklater's showing these instances itself indicts the male impulse towards this laziness.