Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
anything that, by my personal standards, is elegant on account of its simplicity. Why the
notion of ‘simplicity’ in popular thinking has often been associated with – and at times,
notion of simplicity does not – and should not – always be associated with adjectives
evoking deficiency; after all, ostentation does not always add sophistication – or value –
to something. In literature, simplicity can even be considered a virtue. The writing style
of Ernest Hemingway, which observes economy in the use of words, is a case in point.
Though it provides only the bare essentials in telling a story, it manages to tell as good a
story as one written, say, in a Tolstoy-esque fashion, which is filled with details and
images. The beauty of simplicity, however, can apply even to film-making: A film that
tells a story – and an engaging one for that matter – without resorting to special effects
and digital wizardry, to melodrama, to a surfeit of action sequences and plot twists, and to
various other contrivances is definitely one that is simple. And at a time when overly-
produced films abound, a film that is simple is a welcome relief and a spectacular feat at
that.
Directed by Richard Linklater (Slacker and Dazed And Confused), Before Sunset
is one such film that embodies the simplicity – the elegance – that makes for good film-
making (at least, in the traditional way). Basically, it is a love story (that is, a classic case
lovers (Jesse and Celine) meet in Paris after nine long years, get re-acquainted, and
3
discover that the passion that they had felt for each other that fateful night in Austria nine
years earlier had not yet died. In the course of their conversion, interspersed with
meaningful gestures and silences, they give vent to their quest for a sense of closure: All
this time, they had been bedeviled by thoughts of what could have been – of how their
lives would have turned out had they managed to meet, as they committed to do, exactly
six months after their tearful parting in Austria. Having been reunited fortuitously, they
now had to make a life-altering choice. Should they pick up where they left off nine
years ago? That is to say, should they make use of the present to rekindle the past and
give it a future? Would they, despite their involvements (Jessie was already married and
had a son whereas Celine, though still single, had a boyfriend) transform their affair into
a relationship?… All this is told well, using merely long, uninterrupted takes (van Hoeij
2); sparing use of flashbacks (Ibid.); and a beautifully photographed Parisian setting that
“articulated in the broken, fractured style of real conversations” (El Topo 2) and
credibly empathetic characterization (courtesy of Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy) drove
the plot forward and kept it crackling gaily like a bonfire up to its uncertain end. It did
help that the 80-minute plot unfolded in real-time, which accounted for the semblance of
In comparison to many other films in the same genre that I have already viewed,
Before Sunset is truly remarkable for being, as it were, “lean and mean”. What it did
fashion – the well-calibrated yet unsettling disclosure of sentiments of the characters and
4
to share their palpable ambivalence as they wrestled against the temptation to revive their
passion for one another. Even without the aforementioned contrivances that defined the
overly-produced films of our age, it even managed to leave a lingering, if not lasting,
impression long after one had watched it: It gave one a fairly accurate idea of what could
happen to those who fell from the dizzying heights of intimacy – they became severely
disillusioned; they became utterly cynical; romantic happiness eluded them, for they
chose to dwell on what could have been rather than on what could be; and burdened by
the weight of disappointment, they could hardly move on and will themselves to start
anew.
Despite its narrative simplicity, Before Sunset has been praised for its
sufficient depth to the characters. As the characters engaged each other in a long-running
conversation, they made revelations about themselves – about how their affair in Austria
nine years ago had affected them, about how they mourned the loss of their youthful faith
in the promise of everlasting love, about how they wormed in and out of unsatisfying
relationships, and about a thousand other things that, for one reason or another, ultimately
led them to acknowledge that they still had feelings for each other despite the passage of
time and that they had to square with the necessity of making a choice about what should
happen next. Consequently, they emerged as though they were real people with real
sentiments, with real personal histories, facing a real situation that could change the
course of their lives. This largely explains, I believe, why the film was, as I have noted
5
earlier, engaging; while viewing it, one could forget that it was a work of cinematic
The complexity of the film, however, is not limited to the realm of the
psychological; as it is, it even extends to the realm of the philosophical on account of its
provocative reflections on certain matters of the heart. For one thing, the film dealt with
the concept of ‘soul-mates,’ with which most people are particularly enamored. This
notion that there could only be one ‘perfect’ partner in the whole wide world for one is
giving the characters a reason to seek each other out across time and space after their
aborted second meeting in Austria. Sure, they both wanted to have a sense of closure –
along with the peace of mind that went with it, and that was perfectly understandable; but
they also had to be sufficiently motivated to want to prove their presumptively perfect
compatibility as lovers (That is, to prove that they still belonged to each other, that they
For another thing, the film dealt with the peril of failing to ‘let go’. As explained
earlier, the characters invested too much emotional significance into their affair in
Austria nine years ago. As far as they were concerned, their passion for each other was
what they had to live for to experience romantic fulfillment, which was their common
and deepest aspiration in life. Small wonder then why they tried to cling to it with the
tenacity of a leech – even if their efforts resulted only in their acute embitterment.
Letting go, in reality, is never easy – that much I know from personal experience; but it is
6
a necessity, for it allows us to grieve over the loss of a cherished affair (or relationship).
Trying to hold on only prolongs the process of mourning unnecessarily, and is, therefore,
short of expectations; compared to what we had before, they could never be as good. The
characters, it may be noted, both found their relationships unsatisfying, and it is not
And still for another thing, the film, in being open-ended, gave a facile idea of the
moral dilemma confronting the characters. Again, it should be noted that they both were
already involved with others, and on account of these involvements, it would be quite
immoral for them to re-kindle their romance. Would it be that easy to extricate
themselves from their involvements? Would expediency justify their potentially illicit
relationship? These would be only two of the many hard questions that they would have
to ask themselves should they decide to take the second chance that Fate had apparently
given them. Though the film merely hinted at the moral impediment that they had to
square with at the end, it effectively underscored the gravity – the difficulty – of the
By and large, Before Sunset is a happy mixture of simplicity and complexity. Its
psychological and philosophical – on the other hand is what made it a living, fictionalized
the heart. Though the film never managed to get an award, it was hailed as a modern
masterpiece of good film-making – and deservedly so, I hasted to add, in view of its
Bibiliography