![\"Two_days,_one_night\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/162\/2015\/10\/Two_days_one_night.jpg\")
<\/a>If a pair of writer\/directors exists that can rival Joel and Ethan Coen for a body of work with profound depictions of humanity, it is another set of brothers. The films of the Dardennes, Jean-Pierre and Luc, have consistently been among the best of modern offerings and were a main feature in an essay I wrote on European film for\u00a0Image\u00a0<\/em>a few years back (\u201cPortraits of the Sonata: Desire and Transformation in Modern European Cinema,\u201d No. 61, Spring 2009).<\/p>\nLa Promesse<\/em>,\u00a0L\u2019Enfant<\/em>, and especially\u00a0Le Fils<\/em>, match any expectations one could have with regard to artistic portrayals of humanity\u2019s struggle for decency and dignity, and one of the Dardennes\u2019 latest works, Deux Jours, Une Nuit<\/em>\u00a0(Two Days, One Night<\/em>) proves that their touch has not waned in the thirty-odd years they\u2019ve written and directed for the screen.<\/p>\n The film features the magnificent Marion Cotillard. In an Oscar-nominated performance, she plays Sandra, a Belgian mother of two children who has just learned that while she was absent, her employer offered her co-workers a choice: they could either have a one thousand euro bonus, or Sandra could keep her job.<\/p>\n Sandra has suffered intensely from a debilitating case of depression, which is intimated as the underlying reason that her supervisor wants her gone. He also told a set of lies to sway the vote. She gets the news on a Friday, and with the help of a friend is able to convince the boss to hold another vote on Monday, free of the supervisor\u2019s undue influence.<\/p>\n What follows is a journey through those two days and one night, a process by which the protagonist lobbies her co-workers to surrender their bonus so that she can keep her job. The plot line is simple, but that is part of the Dardenne brothers\u2019 genius: they know that miles of depth can be plumbed beneath a relatively short space. Complexity is more a matter of excavation, not necessarily traversal. And delving into the density of Sandra\u2019s dilemma involves a depiction of what she has at stake pitted against all that would defeat her\u2014not just her circumstances, but her own psyche as well.<\/p>\n Luckily, Sandra is not alone, but part of her problem is that she cannot acknowledge that fact. Her husband, Manu, provides a constant source of encouragement for her, as do a set of loyal friends. However, the vastness of her despair resists\u00a0the fortitude they offer. In this, the Dardennes touch upon a great truth about the enemies we face\u2014not just those clinically disposed to their vulnerability\u2014but all who labor against formidable foes.<\/p>\n For it is easier\u2014much, much easier\u2014simply to collapse rather than to fight. When faced with the daunting, it is practically a struggle against science, a battle against the rules of nature, to bow our backs and lift up our chins. It seems as foolish as it does fruitless, and those who push us on and pull us up, who towel us down, cauterize our cuts, and pour water down our throats, perversely become objects of resentment. They torture us with their encouragement.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s easy for you to say,\u201d we throw back at them. \u201cIt\u2019s not you who has to do this.\u201d<\/p>\n Sandra barks those words at Manu even though he is beside her every step of the way. He too has a great deal at stake: if Sandra fails, they could lose their house and be forced onto government assistance and into state housing. Manu\u2019s job at a diner simply can\u2019t sustain them. But when he won\u2019t let her submit to the circumstances, she ever so slightly begins to push him away. As he tries to keep her from taking too many Xanax, upon which she relies to contain her nerves and control her crying jags, she swallows the pills down with a fury.<\/p>\n Sandra treats her faithful friend Juliette the same way, refusing to speak to her though the woman\u2019s calls are meant to apprise of her the strategy she must undertake to win her job back. It is a constant battle to keep Sandra from slipping into sleep and defeat. Somehow, the two of them, Manu and Juliette, keep Sandra going. Gathering phone numbers, addresses, and means of transportation, Sandra sets about her task.<\/p>\n Another layer of complexity is added by the natural repulsion that one feels about the situation. It is hard for Sandra not to see herself both as a beggar and a thief. Dignity in such a circumstance is difficult to come by, though as she makes each of her co-workers admit, she did not force this choice upon them. Still, she is well aware that she is asking them to give up something that they\u2019ve been provided\u2014a bonus, a gift\u2014and to do so puts her in the position of stealing their happiness.<\/p>\n Worse yet, many of the workers need the bonus desperately. They too are on hard times. Among their number are the callous and the heartless: that\u2019s always the case. But most of her colleagues are troubled deeply about the devilish choice they must make. \u201cPut yourself in my shoes,\u201d they implore her, pointing to debts and expenses and problems. \u201cPut yourself in mine,\u201d is Sandra\u2019s answer.<\/p>\n What is best about the film is the portrayal of the herculean toil that goes into the living of everyday people. These are lower-middle-class workers, and yet their story is as deep as any Greek tragedy, and their triumphs as large as any Greek epic\u2019s. Sandra rivals any heroine of antiquity, and she does so in the working environs of suburbia, among the graceless and pedestrian and commonplace.<\/p>\n Etched upon Sandra\u2019s face is the strain of her species, and born in her smile is its honor. She runs the race we all run, and fights the fight we all fight. It is a wondrous and marvelous thing to behold, whether she wins in the end or not.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n