All Dardenne brothers' movies have a central character but all these characters don't necessarily have a character's arc. As my immersion into the sibling's unique but strangely flawless body of work progresses, I find these two storytelling devices equally fascinating, in the way they convey the real 'flavor' of life, living a day without knowing what the next one will be... a grimmer look on Forrest Gump's iconic 'box of chocolates' metaphor.
In movies like "The Promise" (their 1996 breakthrough), a young teenager is confronted to a moral dilemma after the tragic death of an illegal immigrant and chooses to help his widow and son instead of pursuing the same criminal path than his father, in "Two Days, One Night"; that earned Marion Cotillard an Oscar-nomination, the actress played a depressed factory worker confronting each workmate during a weekend to ask them to renounce an 1000 euros bonus to avoid her dismissal. These two movies consisted of long harrowing journeys where their protagonists managed to transcend their initial conditions, proving that even in a crisis-stricken society, there's still a glimmer of hope and reasons to have faith in humanity.
Other Dardennes' movies didn't share the same optimism, and both happen to be their Golden Palm winners. "Rosetta" featured a young girl determined to work and not to end like her depraved alcoholic mother that she would do anything to get a job, even the most unethical actions. But when she could work, she seemed to have lost the ability to be happy, as if she had already entrapped herself in an existential dead-end. In "The Child", we find Jeremy Renier, the kid in "The Promise", in his early twenties, as Bruno, the father of the titular child, along with Sonia (Deborah François) a girl in her late teens. Despite the title, the film is pretty much centered on the 'father', but the word father is to be kept between crosses. I was misled by the synopsis and the premise that 'Bruno would learn to become a father'... there is no journey in "The Child" despite some bits of remorse expressed by Bruno.
Still, the only identifiable pattern in his behavior is that he never thinks of the consequences and is so eager to make quick cash through begging or petty crimes that he never questions his ethics. Some people don't have scruples, some have, some don't even think about it. Are they dangerous? Potentially, yes. But they're a danger for themselves first because once you stop thinking of the consequences, your life can't have any purpose anymore. The irony is that Sonia, who's as immature and childish as Bruno, does have one and it happens to be her son. Although it's implied it was an accidental pregnancy, the couple is genuinely in love and love is actually an understatement, in two consecutive scenes, the Dardennes exposed the love on-going between the couple in a way that both captures their innocence and foreshadows the upcoming incident.
Indeed, this is intelligent filmmaking at best because it features the two sides of the coin, how innocence can be cute and corny only to raise an uglier and far more tragic head later. First, you see them playfully but recklessly teasing each other in the car and it's a miracle it doesn't end with an accident. Later, they play with food and end up embracing each other as if they were at the verge of making love once again without any care for their child... it's like we viewers are asked by the Dardennes to care for the kid because the parents obviously can't. But it's Bruno who crosses the line by doing the one thing not even the most experienced moviegoer could see coming: selling the child.
With an eerie attention to details and in their trademark documentary style, the Dardennes shoot the scene like a drug deal where a baby replaced the loot. But once again with the Dardennes, a scene never plays on its own, it's often a set-up to a more powerful moment. The pay-off comes when Bruno triumphantly shows a big bundle of euros to Sonia, announcing in the most matter-of-factly way that they sold their child. Sonia's reaction takes her back to a norm so severely lacking in the previous scenes, she faints and need immediate hospitalization. It's a dramatic moment but at least we know she is normal, and the fact that Bruno doesn't realize the gravity of his action that establishes his true character, one who has an uncommon lack of comprehension of the world, so wrapped up in immediacy that his soul lost itself in the process.
I compared the film with "Rosetta" but even she had a defining goal, she needed a job and that encompassed all her actions. Bruno spends the whole film needing money, and even when he manages to get the child back, he seems to be sliding in the same path, endangering the life of another child. For all his flaws, we're never put in a position to despise Bruno, we pity him but in the same way, we fail to admire him when he seems regretful or when he makes amends... the Dardennes never allow certitudes, as if we were allowed to trust our perceptions. At the end, when Bruno finally weeps, we might take it as redemption, but it can be despair. Who knows?
And "who knows?" is the question, "The Child" feels like a character study but there's an intellectual undertone behind that term, indicating a form of arc, an evolution, a coming-of-age. The Dardennes brothers could make such a film but I applaud the way they kept a shadow of doubt about the future of Bruno, by focusing so much on his actions that we're so close yet so far from his conscience, like Bruno who by getting so close to money let it get the worse from him...
3 out of 3 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
