This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Sadly Over-hyped

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

I watched this film forty years after it was made, in a theater in downtown New York City that plays only art films. Still, I was impressed by the audience's rapt attention over the 3 and 1/2 hours of the film. I too was sitting fascinated the entire time. We seemed to understand that a part of the experience of watching it was familiarizing ourselves with the details of the dignified Jeanne's existence. Every piece of furniture in her apartment is viewed over and over, and her daily routine is so minutely reviewed that it is imprinted in the mind; so, any tiny deviation jumps out as a sinister departure portending -- what? You wait worriedly to find out what it could mean. Mostly you feel a great sadness for someone who is clearly desperate to make ends meet financially, so she and her child will be okay. You see a perfectionist at work as she proceeds through the day, as though the great care she is taking shining and folding and washing will somehow result in safety for her and the child. There is a spirituality in this, and it begins to take hold of you, and you fervently hope for her survival.

Rare is it that a movie is so true to life that it crosses the line into "cinéma vérité", or rather reality movies. Jeanne Dielman (...) offers a perfect example of this phenomenon. Its namesake is a widow raising her young son, Sylvain. We see her go through her routine, implacably and relentlessly. She wakes up, makes coffee, prepares supper, takes care of another woman's child for a short time and breaks the drudgery by selling herself for a short time in the mid-day before her son returns from school.The camera stays in focus on Jeanne and her environment throughout the whole affair. Rarely do we see her out of her apartment and even more rarely do we hear her speak. The silence is nearly oppressive, filled with household noises and street noises but naught else. However, the keen observer will notice subtle differences during the second of three days presented in the film. After she takes her second caller, her behaviour changes, coming to a head on the morning of the third day. Is the milk at fault, is it the coffee or is it her? We find out only mid-day through, when we peek into the otherwise shut door that hid her encounters with her callers.Intertwined in all of this is her relationship with Sylvain, who reads during supper and speaks of sex in such a manner that is telling to us as we know what Jeanne does, but he does not. "I'd never sleep with a man I would not love if I were a woman." "But you are not a woman..." and there we have the power of truth exposing the lie, as her words about her former husband belie her current state.Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles is masterful, rewarding your attention and challenging you to pay attention to every detail as only then will your concentration be rewarded. The film clocks in at three hours and some, each hour being a day in Jeanne's life. Not an easy film to watch, but a must-see nonetheless.

Really, really wanted a slice of meatloaf while watching this. Just a few observations from someone with a huge Criterion library who enjoys "artsy" films:(1) This film might have appeal to students who want to see the results of static scenes. Or it might impress those who need to actually see boring routines play out to get the point (the pocketbook on the table gets my vote for best actor). Or it might be an opportunity for people to yell advice at the screen ("Sit down while polishing shoes!" "You're kneading the meatloaf wrong!" "Turn on the radio while you're working!"). Otherwise...meh.(2) For those who insist that the length is appropriate, I haven't noticed anyone saying that the film would be better at six hours. If she really wanted to make a point, why not film six days? Heck, who knows what exciting things she does the rest of the week...perhaps Ackerman just chose the three days when little happens other than routine (seemingly embraced by the protagonist with little effort to perk up her existence. Maybe she's enjoying herself, or maybe she has an active imagination that allows her to entertain herself).(3) Drying paint on walls has no choice in its banal existence. Humans do have choices. Anyone who doesn't understand that or doesn't know people who don't exercise their choices & live in ruts needs to volunteer to work with the public. Then Ackerman's film won't seem so much like a "masterpiece."(4) If this film is "brave" (whatever that is supposed to mean), here's an exercise in artistic courage: Take a blank sheet of paper to your local art gallery and insist that they display it (perhaps with a huge price tag) to demonstrate your minimalist talent. If they are the pretentious sort and comply, you'll be sure to be lauded by the same sort of snobbish viewers who love to chide others for calling out pretension.

This movie is deliberately different, all in the service of telling us something we didn't know.Movies are about movies. The borrow plot, character, lighting, sound editing and camera angles from what went before. Since "Birth of a Nation" introduced close-ups, cross cutting and cutaways in 1915 everyone has adopted that vocabulary for story telling. This movie throws all that out: The camera is fixed and stares at a scene for a very long time. Scenes had to be performed all the way through when they were filmed, because each was done in a single shot.Movies use telescoping of time to compress the happenings of a long period into two hours. This movie tries to avoid that, depicting mundane tasks in their entirety. We watch Jeanne Dielman prepare a meatloaf, step by step, wash the dishes (her back is to us!), smooth the bed, or go shopping.Movie use facial expressions to express feelings. Spoiler alert: When we get strong facial expressions from Jeanne Dielman there is a very good reason. And that only happens once in a three-hour, 21 minute film.Movies use broad strokes to carry the audience along. Spiderman supplements explosions with 3D to keep me occupied. By contrast, this film uses subtle changes. You must watch closely to see what happens.Most movies come to you. This movie requires you go to it. If there is dullness it is among those viewers who think that because they don't get something it's not there to get. There is plenty here but instead of being served to you it has to be harvested. And it is very fresh.