1

A film critique of Before Sunset:

A happy mixture of simplicity and complexity in film-making
 2

Ostentation is the enemy of Elegance. So goes an adage, which, like clockwork,

springs out of the recesses of my memory whenever I, a patron of minimalism, encounter

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,

even believed to be synonymous to – plainness and bareness is rather unfortunate; the

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

of unconsummated romance) – albeit of the ‘off-beat’ variety: By chance, two former

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

gave an ‘unobtrusive sense of late spring’ (Blackwelder 3). A well-scripted dialogue

“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

immediacy that made it, at least in my case, a vicarious experience.

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

particularly well, I believe, was to entice the audience to witness – in a straightforward

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

psychological complexity (Blackwelder 2), as evidenced by the dialogue, which gave

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

fiction: indeed, everything about it had the authentic feel of realism.

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

downright preposterous – although, I must admit, the film managed to legitimate it by

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

went together like a mortise and a tenon).

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,

counter-productive. Apart from that, it prevents us from committing ourselves fully to

subsequent involvements: somehow, these subsequent involvements would always fall

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

difficult to understand why that was so.

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

choice that they both had to make.

By and large, Before Sunset is a happy mixture of simplicity and complexity. Its

simplicity is what enabled it to tell a story convincingly, engagingly. Its complexity –

psychological and philosophical – on the other hand is what made it a living, fictionalized

portrait of unconsummated romance that entailed provocative reflections on matters of

 7

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

simplicity and complexity.

Bibiliography

Blackwelder, Rob. “Real-Time, Real Chemistry, Reel Magic.” Splicedwire.

http://www.splicedwire.com/04reviews/beforesunset.html. 02 July 2004 24 June
2005.

El Topo. “Before Sunset” IOFilm.http://www.iofilm.co.uk/fm/b/

before_sunset_2004.shtml. 23 June 2005.

Van Hoeij, Boyd. “Before Sunset” Biblio. http://

www.biblio.com/performingarts/film/2004.before.html. November 2004 23 June
2005.