This small Belgian film was the unexpected winner of the Palme d'Or at Cannes during the year when David Cronenberg and his panel of contrarians ruled. Because other, more popular films ("All About My Mother," "L'Humanité," "The Straight Story") were passed over, "Rosetta" has received a reputation as an undeserved winner. I am here to proclaim it a great film and a worthy addition to anyone's Best list. I have not researched whether or not the director of "Rosetta" set out adhere to Dogma 93 principles, but many of them are present no movie makeup, natural light, natural locations, no soundtrack music, and hand held cameras. The camera follows one person the title character so that just about every shot is either of her or from her point of view. Rosetta lives with her alcoholic prostitute mother in a camping trailer at a run down campground called The Grand Canyon. She is in her late teens, doesn't have any friends (except one she meets during the course of the story) or even communicates much with other people, and is only interested in getting a regular job and living a normal life. In a remarkable episode, we see her in bed just before going to sleep. She is having a conversation with herself that goes, "You have a job. I have a job. You have a friend. I have a friend. You have a normal life. I have a normal life. Good night. Good night." Rosetta is played by Émilie Dequenne (who won Best Actress at Cannes). She is so good, so natural, so much *Rosetta* that, along with the photographic technique, she gives the material a documentary feel. One reviewer even called her a "non-actor" as if she were not a professional actress (this is her first movie role) and had been picked right out of that campground to play her own life. The film goes by quickly even as the plot unfolds slowly. We follow Rosetta as she travels her city by foot and bus looking for work, catching fish to eat from an urban river, and tentatively letting one other person into her routines. Sometimes character motivation may seem murky, but it is a thrill, later, when you realize what was really going on. If I remember correctly, there is only one brief dialog exchange near the end where one person explains plot points to another for the audience's benefit. The ending is a tender moment that may indicate a new stage in Rosetta growth. Highly recommended. A beautiful and deeply felt film.
98 Reviews
Crash Dive
tieman6431 August 2011
Warning: Spoilers
One time Palme d'Or winner, now forgotten, the Dardenne brothers' "Rosetta" stars Emilie Dequenne as Rosetta, a teenage girl trying to escape an alcoholic mother, her decaying trailer park (ironically titled "Grand Canyon", an abyss which sucks in an entire underclass) and her apparently dead-end existence. The film recalls Robert Bresson's "Mouchette", but is shot with fierce, angry hand-held camera work, which mirrors Rosetta's own bottled up rage and desperation. One passage, in which the seventeen year old Rosetta is virtually exploited by a company for cheap labour, led to Belgium changing several laws, banning employers from paying teenage workers less than the minimum wage. It's a tiny, condescending, almost insignificant real-life gesture, but the kind of little gestures which keep today's Rosettas alive nevertheless.
The film isn't only about Rosetta's daily struggles for survival, but the blind eyed turned toward an entire stratum of society. Rosetta is a member of a socio-economic class which the world refuses to deal with, let alone acknowledge. Like a disease, she finds herself being pushed further and further out.
"Rosetta" is heavily influenced by Bresson's "Mouchette", another film which revolved around a marginalised girl who cares for a burdensome mother. And like Bresson, the Dardennes focus on their heroine's own private rituals: the taking off of muddy boots, the scrounging for and preparing of food, the tending to an alcoholic mother etc. And all the while, Rosetta's plotting: how do I escape this? What future will I be allowed?
At the end of "Mouchette", Bresson's heroine seemed to resort to suicide, rolling into a muddy pond. The pond features in "Rosetta" as well, though here it is both a source of life and death. Rosetta goes to it for fish, for food, for escape, while later, when a friend falls inside it, she initially refuses to save him. After-all, with him dead, she can inherit his business and perhaps make some money. It is in her best interest to ignore him, to discard his body and turn away as society does to her. But of course she doesn't. She fishes him out. Unlike the world, she views him, if only for a moment, as a kindred spirit rather than a competitor.
Still, suicide factors into "Rosetta" as well, for our hero does eventually regard it as her only mode of escape. Ironically, like Bresson's "The Devil Probably", she must pay for her own suicide. Even her death has been commodified. In this way, the film not only exposes the indifference of contemporary capitalism, in which economic disparities grow by the day, in which class has become a bigger distinction than nationality, language, religion etc, but highlights a certain impossibility of morality. Rosetta saves a life, but in doing so may have destroyed her own future.
8/10 – Not as aesthetically strong as similar modern movies in its field ("Wendy and Lucy", "Mouchette", "Land of Plenty" etc), or the Italian neo-realist, British kitchen-sink and French new-wave films which inspire it. Worth one viewing.
The film isn't only about Rosetta's daily struggles for survival, but the blind eyed turned toward an entire stratum of society. Rosetta is a member of a socio-economic class which the world refuses to deal with, let alone acknowledge. Like a disease, she finds herself being pushed further and further out.
"Rosetta" is heavily influenced by Bresson's "Mouchette", another film which revolved around a marginalised girl who cares for a burdensome mother. And like Bresson, the Dardennes focus on their heroine's own private rituals: the taking off of muddy boots, the scrounging for and preparing of food, the tending to an alcoholic mother etc. And all the while, Rosetta's plotting: how do I escape this? What future will I be allowed?
At the end of "Mouchette", Bresson's heroine seemed to resort to suicide, rolling into a muddy pond. The pond features in "Rosetta" as well, though here it is both a source of life and death. Rosetta goes to it for fish, for food, for escape, while later, when a friend falls inside it, she initially refuses to save him. After-all, with him dead, she can inherit his business and perhaps make some money. It is in her best interest to ignore him, to discard his body and turn away as society does to her. But of course she doesn't. She fishes him out. Unlike the world, she views him, if only for a moment, as a kindred spirit rather than a competitor.
Still, suicide factors into "Rosetta" as well, for our hero does eventually regard it as her only mode of escape. Ironically, like Bresson's "The Devil Probably", she must pay for her own suicide. Even her death has been commodified. In this way, the film not only exposes the indifference of contemporary capitalism, in which economic disparities grow by the day, in which class has become a bigger distinction than nationality, language, religion etc, but highlights a certain impossibility of morality. Rosetta saves a life, but in doing so may have destroyed her own future.
8/10 – Not as aesthetically strong as similar modern movies in its field ("Wendy and Lucy", "Mouchette", "Land of Plenty" etc), or the Italian neo-realist, British kitchen-sink and French new-wave films which inspire it. Worth one viewing.
It's a hard life -- crude and bitter medicine: harsh poverty unabashedly delivered and desperation complete
ruby_fff2 January 2000
This is beyond the intensity of Gary Oldman's "Nil By Mouth", and Tim Roth's "The War Zone", while Erick Zonca's "Dreamlife of Angels" seems heavenly compared to the conditions presented in "Rosetta" by Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne.
A down right harsh film. Unsparingly direct depiction of a young girl's poverty struggle. She is as tough as she can be. She fights vigorously to hang on to a job. She cares for her mother, a helpless alcoholic, and a seamstress when not drunk. Rosetta (Emilie Dequenne) is unrelentingly stubborn about receiving kindness, or food unsolicited. She has her dignity. A young person with so much burden on her shoulder and a heavy heart.
Things may be seemingly repetitive: again and again we see her crossing that traffic roadway, jumping into the bush trail; we hear the rustling leaves, the thumping of her footsteps; we watch her stopping by the hideout where she kept her rubber boots, changing her only good pair of working shoes; we follow her as she crawls through the wire fence loophole, arriving at the campers -- feels like a mindless routine. Yet, she's intensely single-minded on getting "a real job" (vs. moonlighting) and to have "a normal life", not to "fell into a rut". At one point, we can almost be happy for her to have "found a friend" in Riquet (Fabrizio Rongione), a waffle street van vendor. She actually was able to peacefully sleep that night. Only to wake up and report at work to be told she's again out of a job. A devastating blow. Out of desperation, she did something that most of us viewers may not be able to comprehend -- but what do we know of her travails, who are we to judge her action?
It was not easy for her to have done what she did -- she did hesitate and took the risk. She risked her newfound friendship -- she desperately needed "to have a job". In a way, she has lack tenderness, love and warmth for so long that she's numb to human kindness -- she needs to be thawed! One has to be patient with her, to give her time and see through her tough surface and rekindle her heart. Trust needs to be rebuilt for her to continue living and tackle difficulties afresh!
This is no Hollywood fare. Dialogs are few. No exploitative, explosive, abusive scenes. We're given the bare structure of the story, and Rosetta, plus the sparing few supporting characters, held the movie steadily intact.
A down right harsh film. Unsparingly direct depiction of a young girl's poverty struggle. She is as tough as she can be. She fights vigorously to hang on to a job. She cares for her mother, a helpless alcoholic, and a seamstress when not drunk. Rosetta (Emilie Dequenne) is unrelentingly stubborn about receiving kindness, or food unsolicited. She has her dignity. A young person with so much burden on her shoulder and a heavy heart.
Things may be seemingly repetitive: again and again we see her crossing that traffic roadway, jumping into the bush trail; we hear the rustling leaves, the thumping of her footsteps; we watch her stopping by the hideout where she kept her rubber boots, changing her only good pair of working shoes; we follow her as she crawls through the wire fence loophole, arriving at the campers -- feels like a mindless routine. Yet, she's intensely single-minded on getting "a real job" (vs. moonlighting) and to have "a normal life", not to "fell into a rut". At one point, we can almost be happy for her to have "found a friend" in Riquet (Fabrizio Rongione), a waffle street van vendor. She actually was able to peacefully sleep that night. Only to wake up and report at work to be told she's again out of a job. A devastating blow. Out of desperation, she did something that most of us viewers may not be able to comprehend -- but what do we know of her travails, who are we to judge her action?
It was not easy for her to have done what she did -- she did hesitate and took the risk. She risked her newfound friendship -- she desperately needed "to have a job". In a way, she has lack tenderness, love and warmth for so long that she's numb to human kindness -- she needs to be thawed! One has to be patient with her, to give her time and see through her tough surface and rekindle her heart. Trust needs to be rebuilt for her to continue living and tackle difficulties afresh!
This is no Hollywood fare. Dialogs are few. No exploitative, explosive, abusive scenes. We're given the bare structure of the story, and Rosetta, plus the sparing few supporting characters, held the movie steadily intact.
Dispassionate fury
p_reavy13 June 2000
I saw Rosetta 3 or 4 months ago and it has stayed vividly in my mind. I would like to respond to two other commentaries here which compare Rosetta to earlier films.
One commentary compares it to Nights of Cabiria. But this is no pastoral fantasy like the Fellini. Another contributor calls Rosetta a fake Bresson. Presumably the point of comparison is with Bresson's Mouchette, and it's a good comparison to make, but I don't think it is one that diminishes Rosetta. Both Mouchette and Rosetta capture the flow of time and the characters' interior worlds realistically, but with realisms which are quite different. Mouchette's struggle is a spiritual one; Rosetta's struggle is with her physical conditions.
To make a comparison of my own, albeit an off-the-wall one, Rosetta's determination is strangely like the pure will-power that Lee Marvin demonstrates, barging into the Organisation's HQ in Point Blank. Maybe this forceful quality is what makes it a "war film".
The film-makers do the opposite of sentimentalising Rosetta's conditions as Fellini would have done. Arguably, they even go past Bresson, if you tend to a materialist rather than a religious point of view. They argue how poverty operates, how surviving it involves anger.
There is one moment when Rosetta slips in a lake and we understand exactly at the moment she does, that she may in fact drown. Not a moment that's easy to forget.
One commentary compares it to Nights of Cabiria. But this is no pastoral fantasy like the Fellini. Another contributor calls Rosetta a fake Bresson. Presumably the point of comparison is with Bresson's Mouchette, and it's a good comparison to make, but I don't think it is one that diminishes Rosetta. Both Mouchette and Rosetta capture the flow of time and the characters' interior worlds realistically, but with realisms which are quite different. Mouchette's struggle is a spiritual one; Rosetta's struggle is with her physical conditions.
To make a comparison of my own, albeit an off-the-wall one, Rosetta's determination is strangely like the pure will-power that Lee Marvin demonstrates, barging into the Organisation's HQ in Point Blank. Maybe this forceful quality is what makes it a "war film".
The film-makers do the opposite of sentimentalising Rosetta's conditions as Fellini would have done. Arguably, they even go past Bresson, if you tend to a materialist rather than a religious point of view. They argue how poverty operates, how surviving it involves anger.
There is one moment when Rosetta slips in a lake and we understand exactly at the moment she does, that she may in fact drown. Not a moment that's easy to forget.
Not a feelgood movie
gtran6 October 1999
Most movies try to make you feel good. Even in the most violent or despairing films the writers always provide some sort of relief, usually a character you can identify with. "Rosetta" doesn't not offer this kind of relief. It's not violent in the usual movie fashion, and it's not even as bleak or extreme or hopeless as many social films (after all, it's only the story of a teenage girl who is looking for work), it's just that there is no "this is just a movie after all" escapism. Rosetta is a brute force in motion, obsessive, relentless, and her horizon, made of concrete or muddy Belgian suburbs, is also the movie's horizon (the camera is always focused on her or on what she sees, most of the times in close-up). The war movie comparison is really accurate : "Rosetta" is shot like the first 20 minutes of "Saving Private Ryan" and she spends her time running, attacking, retreating, attacking again, followed by an omnipresent hand-held camera. At the same time, and in spite of (or because of) its reality, her character is also elliptical, hard to pity and you're not likely to love her as you can love Ken Loach's characters, for instance. This is where the movie is a tour-de-force and truly original, but obviously some viewers will have trouble to enter Rosetta's world.
A Subtle Masterpiece
coy_dog024 December 2003
An example of a true drama, as opposed to a melodrama (Saving Private Ryan is a popular example of a melodrama that passes itself off as a drama). It's been a few years since I've seen it, so I'm fuzzy on the names, but the finest scene in the movie occurs as Rosetta serves customers at a kind of snack food stand. She had just recently 'stole' the job from her only friend in the film. Customer after customer is served, as we wait in suspense for a certain person to arrive--the very man who's job she took. He arrives...off-screen (!), but we know exactly who it is. The camera painfully lingers on Rosetta as we beg for it to pan right, or (even better) to look away. Excellent.
Well acted and painfully sad one camera film
cogency125 May 2004
This film relies mainly on one camera to capture every little action and detail of the lead character, Rosetta, especially in her reactions to the despair she suffers throughout the film. I caught this one on IFC on May 23rd. The acting is so realistic, it is hard to imagine that the story is fictional and is shot in a documentary type style, where the hand held camera follows the actors, sneaks glimpses of their world in much the same way an ENG crew would on a story about poverty in a small European town where the economy is so bad there is little one can do to survive outside of desperate acts. In this case, Rosetta, the young girl with an alcoholic mother, lives in a trailer with no heat, has to sell re-sewn clothes to make a meager existence until she finally sees an opportunity open up for a job selling waffles at a small stand in a high traffic part of town. A young man who works there is smitten with her and offers to split some earnings from selling waffles he makes outside of his boss's knowledge. To tell you what happens next would give away the rest, but suffice to say this film is bitterly realistic, terribly sad and the ending is rather sudden but it shows some promise for the characters. The movie is shot with almost no budget, but some great camera work, some scenes a little long but edited fairly well, no music, and subtitles under the French dialog. It deserves awards for telling a very credible story demonstrating hardship of the poor in Europe and what measures one has to take to survive. I was deeply moved and driven to weep during painful scenes of the lead character's despair and what seems to be a hopeless situation. The character is genuinely portrayed by a young actress from Belgium performing extremely well for her first film role. Fine work by director and cast.
Loneliness of one who longs to belong.
hodo6814 May 2002
I found this film quite effecting without ever straying into crass sentimentality. Rosetta is a young girl who is full of anger and yearning. She lives with a dysfunctional alcoholic mother in a caravan park. Little is given about her past but we can understand that due to her upbringing she has limited options available to her. Her desire to be find a job (any job) is both desperate and touching. For Rosetta the prospect of a job, even a job that many in middle class society (indeed the average art house cinema goer!) might regard as mundane and without prospects, represents to her a chance to escape the existence on the outskirts of society. Her drive however raises her above the mere status of victim, and it is a credit to the lead that she conveys so much of this, without it having to be spelt out.
One thing I did find a little disconcerting was the wobbly camera technique, don't see if you are feeling a little nauseous as I was however this is only a minor criticism. Its around 90 minutes and I think well worth the investment if you like a good character based movie.
One thing I did find a little disconcerting was the wobbly camera technique, don't see if you are feeling a little nauseous as I was however this is only a minor criticism. Its around 90 minutes and I think well worth the investment if you like a good character based movie.
A harsh but superb portrayal of the brutalising effect of human hardship.
Ruvi Simmons22 January 2001
The Dardenne brothers were not incorrect when they called their Palme D'Or winning work "a war film.". It is an unremitting portrayal of the most dire hardships, centred around Rosetta (Emilie Dequenne), a young, spirited girl who battles with desperate tenacity to find a job and not so much escape as merely survive in her surroundings. Her life is a bleak struggle for subsistence in a world devoid of tenderness, in which her mother (Anne Yernaux), a quasi-prostitute more concerned with the source of her next drink than her daughter, stands as an example of the potential results of such continued deprivation. When she is befriended by a waffle vendor (Fabrizio Rongione), her prior existence leaves her unsure of how to act in the presence of an affectionate, concerned face, and when he attempts to teach her to dance, she can do no more than move jerkily without rhythm, uncomfortable in the arms of another human. The arisal of an opportunity to take his job forces Rosetta to confront whether physical necessity can ever be an excuse for the betrayal of others.
What follows is a superbly wrought piece of social realism, unsentimental in its examination of the dehumanising effects of poverty. For Rosetta and many others in analogous situations of the most dire physical hardship, their material deprivation leads to an erosion emotional and mental qualities. The Dardenne brothers' ruthless directional style, laced with close-ups and unpleasant details, tangibly conveys the dirt and drudgery of Rosetta's impoverished life. Indeed, the film is palpably cold, almost painfully explicit in its depiction of an uncaring world. In addition, Dardenne's performance, for which she won the Best Actress Award at Cannes, brings to life with understated excellence her fight, not to live well, but simply to survive by any means in a world that, for her, contains few hopes and no love.
The Dardenne brothers make no excuses or apologies for their presentation of Rosetta's base strivings, delivering a film that charts how far individuals can fall. Consistently raw and at times brutal, the film nevertheless proposes no answers, expects no sympathy, it merely conveys and evokes with a clear, uncompromising eye the bleak struggle for existence that is, for some, the total of what life has to offer. Harsh, but utterly compelling viewing.
What follows is a superbly wrought piece of social realism, unsentimental in its examination of the dehumanising effects of poverty. For Rosetta and many others in analogous situations of the most dire physical hardship, their material deprivation leads to an erosion emotional and mental qualities. The Dardenne brothers' ruthless directional style, laced with close-ups and unpleasant details, tangibly conveys the dirt and drudgery of Rosetta's impoverished life. Indeed, the film is palpably cold, almost painfully explicit in its depiction of an uncaring world. In addition, Dardenne's performance, for which she won the Best Actress Award at Cannes, brings to life with understated excellence her fight, not to live well, but simply to survive by any means in a world that, for her, contains few hopes and no love.
The Dardenne brothers make no excuses or apologies for their presentation of Rosetta's base strivings, delivering a film that charts how far individuals can fall. Consistently raw and at times brutal, the film nevertheless proposes no answers, expects no sympathy, it merely conveys and evokes with a clear, uncompromising eye the bleak struggle for existence that is, for some, the total of what life has to offer. Harsh, but utterly compelling viewing.
Does Rosetta Find a Way Out?
js-smith23 September 2000
The test of some performances is how much empathy you feel for an exasperating character you would normally not care for. The actress Emilie Dequenne, especially in the final scene of "Rosetta," really makes you glimpse why desperation drives some people to do the things they do -- although you may not totally understand. All the disgust and anger you feel toward her evaporates when you glimpse the soul of the character through her face.
She does not know how to lift herself out of her circumstances. Does she grow as a person or remain trapped like an animal? You hope that her decision to leave the prize was made out of remorse for the betrayal of a friend. After the sudden ending, you pray she gets a new attitude and finds a way out.
But I don't think she will. The character is caught like a bird flapping around a cage and can't get out of the film's stoic vision.
She does not know how to lift herself out of her circumstances. Does she grow as a person or remain trapped like an animal? You hope that her decision to leave the prize was made out of remorse for the betrayal of a friend. After the sudden ending, you pray she gets a new attitude and finds a way out.
But I don't think she will. The character is caught like a bird flapping around a cage and can't get out of the film's stoic vision.
Utterly remarkable
vierevee14 January 2000
Sometimes you see a work of art and it knocks you out - it's all you can do for days and days to come to get it out of your mind. And you try to find a way in your mind to bring yourself closer to it, immerse yourself in it. You'll read everything about it that you can, try to find some more of the artist's work, find everything you can to do with it. All this to try and replicate the feeling that you experienced when you first encountered the piece. This is the effect that I've been trying to achieve since I saw Rosetta at 1999's London Film Festival.
Though some have attributed Rosetta's success at Cannes to the last-day syndrome; whereby the film that stays freshest in the panel's minds is the one that wins, it smacks of cavilling to suggest that this is the reason behind Rosetta's success - the simple fact is that it's a remarkable film which was only seriously rivalled this year by Almodovar's All About My Mother. Ignorance and snobbery have constantly been at work when Rosetta has been considered by critics, since it's a film which has divided the critics.
Top of the list of things-to-hate about Rosetta is the Dardennes' decision to shoot hand-held, an objection which I can understand but barely comprehend. Rosetta is a film which follows its heroine. Therefore, by mounting the camera almost on her shoulders, we see the world as she sees it, just as we see the world as she thinks it throughout the rest of the film. Most perfect is a scene when she is lying in bed at the house of Ricquet, her (only) friend, when she reassures herself that she's normal, she's found a friend, a *true* job and that she won't fall into the hole. Seldom is a more perfect and more touching marriage and explanation of the inner-self and its outer-conflicts achieved? - it's just magnificent cinema.
Rosetta is a fighter, but although her conflicts are with individuals, in a literal, physical sense, the metaphorical struggle is with the societal brick wall which she comes up against when trying to forge 'une vie normale' for herself. She's fighting against society for the right to live a life; she's fighting against society for a modicum of dignity. In this way, Rosetta is both existentialist and political, though never overtly, much to the credit of the Dardenne Brothers, since Rosetta is a 'universal' film.
The question which Rosetta poses is how we can release ourselves from the trouble we are in. Rosetta believes, and has been taught to believe (ironically, by society) that the way that she can achieve this dignity is by getting a 'true' job - so much so that she phones her boss to tell him that she won't be at work before her suicide attempt. She doesn't see that it's through Ricquet, not through having a job (his job) that she stands the best chance of forging a true identity, a true life and true dignity.
Rosetta is, in effect, just a proletarian hero, fighting society for the right to live and the right to work. However, to see the film in this way is reductionist in the extreme and is self-defeating. Rosetta is, above all, an individual. Her victory is to see that she has a friend who was there all along, and this gives us a remarkable ending that is full of drama; packs a considerable emotional punch and is unforgettable, thanks especially to a stunningly naturalistic performance by Emilie Dequenne, who won an award at Cannes for her portrayal of Rosetta. Her interpretation of the eponymous heroine lends so much to the film that she is as much responsible for the brilliance of the film as the directors are.
This film will never be a hit with middle-class and middle-class, middle-brow critics it in the same way that Schindler's List and The English Patient were; the bourgeoisie never want to get their hands dirty. It's their loss; Rosetta is quite simply one of the most wonderful films you'll ever see.
Though some have attributed Rosetta's success at Cannes to the last-day syndrome; whereby the film that stays freshest in the panel's minds is the one that wins, it smacks of cavilling to suggest that this is the reason behind Rosetta's success - the simple fact is that it's a remarkable film which was only seriously rivalled this year by Almodovar's All About My Mother. Ignorance and snobbery have constantly been at work when Rosetta has been considered by critics, since it's a film which has divided the critics.
Top of the list of things-to-hate about Rosetta is the Dardennes' decision to shoot hand-held, an objection which I can understand but barely comprehend. Rosetta is a film which follows its heroine. Therefore, by mounting the camera almost on her shoulders, we see the world as she sees it, just as we see the world as she thinks it throughout the rest of the film. Most perfect is a scene when she is lying in bed at the house of Ricquet, her (only) friend, when she reassures herself that she's normal, she's found a friend, a *true* job and that she won't fall into the hole. Seldom is a more perfect and more touching marriage and explanation of the inner-self and its outer-conflicts achieved? - it's just magnificent cinema.
Rosetta is a fighter, but although her conflicts are with individuals, in a literal, physical sense, the metaphorical struggle is with the societal brick wall which she comes up against when trying to forge 'une vie normale' for herself. She's fighting against society for the right to live a life; she's fighting against society for a modicum of dignity. In this way, Rosetta is both existentialist and political, though never overtly, much to the credit of the Dardenne Brothers, since Rosetta is a 'universal' film.
The question which Rosetta poses is how we can release ourselves from the trouble we are in. Rosetta believes, and has been taught to believe (ironically, by society) that the way that she can achieve this dignity is by getting a 'true' job - so much so that she phones her boss to tell him that she won't be at work before her suicide attempt. She doesn't see that it's through Ricquet, not through having a job (his job) that she stands the best chance of forging a true identity, a true life and true dignity.
Rosetta is, in effect, just a proletarian hero, fighting society for the right to live and the right to work. However, to see the film in this way is reductionist in the extreme and is self-defeating. Rosetta is, above all, an individual. Her victory is to see that she has a friend who was there all along, and this gives us a remarkable ending that is full of drama; packs a considerable emotional punch and is unforgettable, thanks especially to a stunningly naturalistic performance by Emilie Dequenne, who won an award at Cannes for her portrayal of Rosetta. Her interpretation of the eponymous heroine lends so much to the film that she is as much responsible for the brilliance of the film as the directors are.
This film will never be a hit with middle-class and middle-class, middle-brow critics it in the same way that Schindler's List and The English Patient were; the bourgeoisie never want to get their hands dirty. It's their loss; Rosetta is quite simply one of the most wonderful films you'll ever see.
superb acting is not enough for a great film
dromasca25 September 2004
Jean-Pierre Dardenne, one of the two brothers who authored 'Rosetta' was co-director a couple of years before this film of a strong documentary describing the life of the homeless orphan children in post-Communist Romania. That film which became a repeated item on some European TV channels like Arte-TV when they need to say something about Romania seems to have inspired the Dardenne brothers in making 'Rosetta'. The difference is that Rosetta is not a documentary, but a low-budget art film. The focus however is the same - the desperate life of a teenager who is forced to fight for her basic survival in a world and within a system which does not seem to offer her any help. She fights not only to survive but also to keep some dignity, although the lack of a proper childhood left her without tools to manage basic human relations, to understand and receive friendship.
There is a strong moral and social message in this film. Most of the time the camera focuses on the actress Emilie Dequenne who won a Cannes prize for her performance. The problem is that the lack of action and events in the film, although keeping it simple and direct, cannot sustain the movie as a piece of art. It takes more than a strong message and good acting for a great film . What works well in a documentary is not good enough for a full length feature film. 'Rosetta' lacks complexity and the direct approach eventually gives the perception of simplicity, decreasing the overall impact. 6 out of 10 on my personal scale.
There is a strong moral and social message in this film. Most of the time the camera focuses on the actress Emilie Dequenne who won a Cannes prize for her performance. The problem is that the lack of action and events in the film, although keeping it simple and direct, cannot sustain the movie as a piece of art. It takes more than a strong message and good acting for a great film . What works well in a documentary is not good enough for a full length feature film. 'Rosetta' lacks complexity and the direct approach eventually gives the perception of simplicity, decreasing the overall impact. 6 out of 10 on my personal scale.
Le fabuleux destin de Rosetta.
dbdumonteil28 December 2001
Simply,"Rosetta" is the best fin de decade European movie.I have to search my memories to find something vaguely recalling Dardenne's work:maybe Robert Bresson's "Mouchette" or Kenneth Loach's darkest hour.
French cinema generally does not like those who have been left out of economic growth.Rosetta and the boy are on the wrong side of town.She lives in a seedy trailer with her alcoholic mother who's always ready to sleep with the first to come if he provides her with a bottle.She refuses charity,she claims dignity and dignity means work.To get a job ,Rosetta would do anything.Desperate,she tries to steal the boy's one:he sells waffles in a van.When he nearly gets drowned,she is tempted to abandon him to his fate!Later she becomes an informer and exposes his little swindles to his boss.
Dardenne does not judge.He knows we are able to understand that,in this world,conventional moral has got no sense.Besides ,Rosetta confesses to the bewildered boy she wishes he had sunk.The form is absolutely stunning and fits the content like a glove:close shots,at best medium,but no panoramics at all,a tight editing:the director does not want us to take pity on this place where human beings feed themselves with waffles , hard-boiled eggs,or French bread (luxury),where they carry heavy gas bottles without even a wheelbarrow,where they fish in the river to get something to eat without even a fishing rod.Actually we know nothing about Rosetta but her first name.She is the embodiment of poverty as Victor Hugo's Cosette was in "les misérables" during the nineteenth century(the two names almost sound the same).
"Rosetta" is the cries of the oppressed.A disturbing overwhelming movie.
French cinema generally does not like those who have been left out of economic growth.Rosetta and the boy are on the wrong side of town.She lives in a seedy trailer with her alcoholic mother who's always ready to sleep with the first to come if he provides her with a bottle.She refuses charity,she claims dignity and dignity means work.To get a job ,Rosetta would do anything.Desperate,she tries to steal the boy's one:he sells waffles in a van.When he nearly gets drowned,she is tempted to abandon him to his fate!Later she becomes an informer and exposes his little swindles to his boss.
Dardenne does not judge.He knows we are able to understand that,in this world,conventional moral has got no sense.Besides ,Rosetta confesses to the bewildered boy she wishes he had sunk.The form is absolutely stunning and fits the content like a glove:close shots,at best medium,but no panoramics at all,a tight editing:the director does not want us to take pity on this place where human beings feed themselves with waffles , hard-boiled eggs,or French bread (luxury),where they carry heavy gas bottles without even a wheelbarrow,where they fish in the river to get something to eat without even a fishing rod.Actually we know nothing about Rosetta but her first name.She is the embodiment of poverty as Victor Hugo's Cosette was in "les misérables" during the nineteenth century(the two names almost sound the same).
"Rosetta" is the cries of the oppressed.A disturbing overwhelming movie.
admirable but flawed film
Buddy-5121 August 2000
Those who were made queasy by the corybantic visual style of `The Blair Witch Project' had best have an air sickness bag handy for `Rosetta,' a film whose nonstop bobbing-and-weaving camera technique makes `Blair Witch' seem positively staid in comparison.
`Rosetta' won a best actress award at the 1999 Cannes Film Festival for the stunning performance of Emilie Dequenne in the leading role. It is safe to say that, not only is this fine actress present in virtually every frame of this 95-minute film, but the camera always seems to be shoved to within six inches of her face. This technique, which shatters the illusion of privacy we all like to feel we have in our lives, is obviously designed to make the audience become more fully a part of Rosetta's drearily dysfunctional world and life. And dreary it is as we follow her through her daily and seemingly insurmountable struggles to maintain employment, to cope with a slovenly alcoholic mother and to eke out some sort of respectable life without having to resort to either crime or welfare. Yet, the most admirable aspect of the film is the way in which it refuses to sentimentalize the character one iota to make her more palatable to the audience. Even though at one point we see her having a schizophrenic pep talk with herself as she is falling asleep convincing herself that she will one day be able to lead a `normal life' Rosetta is so emotionally cut off from the world and the people around her that we actually begin to question her mental health at times. Even at the moments of greatest potential tenderness i.e. a scene in which a young man tries to teach her to dance -she never once cracks a smile. Life for her has become a joyless chore that she must somehow get through, even though continued existence only brings the promise of more days like it. We sense that Rosetta is not a `bad' person (she obviously both loves and hates her mother at the same time). She has simply been driven to acts of desperation by the exigencies of her bitter life. Indeed, the single most admirable aspect of the character from a dramatic standpoint is her least admirable from a humanistic one. She is so desperate for a job that she cruelly betrays, without a single qualm or moment's hesitation, the one person in the film who has ever reached out to her as either a helper or a friend. This is a gutsy tack on the part of the filmmakers, as is the open-ended, inconclusive ending. Wisely, the moviemakers know that, in a film whose very essence is raw-boned truth, a phony ending either too upbeat or too melodramatic would violate the spirit of the enterprise. The filmmakers Jean-Pierre Dardenne and Luc Dardenne wrote and directed it - also demonstrate the utter faith they have in their material by allowing the action of the film to unfold completely without the benefit of background music of any kind. Indeed, in another sign of cinematic bravery, much of the running time of the film is actually spent merely observing and recording `activity,' much of it the dreary day-to-day drudgery of Rosetta's chore-filled life.
For all its undeniable virtues, `Rosetta' might have had more impact had it been made 40 or 50 years ago. Back in that era, cinema-verite first emerged as a fresh and exciting antithesis to the bland slickness of commercial moviemaking via filmic movements such as Italian Neorealism and the New Waves of nations like France and Czechoslovakia. Now, with that style having been done to death by filmmakers from all over the world, the hand-held camera acrobatics of films like `Rosetta' serve more as a distraction and distancing device than the approximation of reality that the filmmakers seem to want to capture. Do we really see the world in this jumbled, bouncy way or does this camera-conscious style, paradoxically, achieve the unintended effect of actually heightening the artificiality of the film experience? `Rosetta' could have retained its admirable tone of uncompromising objectivity and still emerged as a more potent, powerful and moving film by toning down the visual style somewhat. Rosetta's personality and life are interesting enough without all this visual flamboyance. We find ourselves wanting to step back and observe this intriguing world from a fuller, more comprehensive vantage point. Still, this hectic, claustrophobic style may be just what the artists need to crystallize the desperation of poor Rosetta's mental and emotional plight. `Rosetta' is, certainly, a fine, brave and intriguing film experience; it just might have had a bit more impact filmed in a different way.
`Rosetta' won a best actress award at the 1999 Cannes Film Festival for the stunning performance of Emilie Dequenne in the leading role. It is safe to say that, not only is this fine actress present in virtually every frame of this 95-minute film, but the camera always seems to be shoved to within six inches of her face. This technique, which shatters the illusion of privacy we all like to feel we have in our lives, is obviously designed to make the audience become more fully a part of Rosetta's drearily dysfunctional world and life. And dreary it is as we follow her through her daily and seemingly insurmountable struggles to maintain employment, to cope with a slovenly alcoholic mother and to eke out some sort of respectable life without having to resort to either crime or welfare. Yet, the most admirable aspect of the film is the way in which it refuses to sentimentalize the character one iota to make her more palatable to the audience. Even though at one point we see her having a schizophrenic pep talk with herself as she is falling asleep convincing herself that she will one day be able to lead a `normal life' Rosetta is so emotionally cut off from the world and the people around her that we actually begin to question her mental health at times. Even at the moments of greatest potential tenderness i.e. a scene in which a young man tries to teach her to dance -she never once cracks a smile. Life for her has become a joyless chore that she must somehow get through, even though continued existence only brings the promise of more days like it. We sense that Rosetta is not a `bad' person (she obviously both loves and hates her mother at the same time). She has simply been driven to acts of desperation by the exigencies of her bitter life. Indeed, the single most admirable aspect of the character from a dramatic standpoint is her least admirable from a humanistic one. She is so desperate for a job that she cruelly betrays, without a single qualm or moment's hesitation, the one person in the film who has ever reached out to her as either a helper or a friend. This is a gutsy tack on the part of the filmmakers, as is the open-ended, inconclusive ending. Wisely, the moviemakers know that, in a film whose very essence is raw-boned truth, a phony ending either too upbeat or too melodramatic would violate the spirit of the enterprise. The filmmakers Jean-Pierre Dardenne and Luc Dardenne wrote and directed it - also demonstrate the utter faith they have in their material by allowing the action of the film to unfold completely without the benefit of background music of any kind. Indeed, in another sign of cinematic bravery, much of the running time of the film is actually spent merely observing and recording `activity,' much of it the dreary day-to-day drudgery of Rosetta's chore-filled life.
For all its undeniable virtues, `Rosetta' might have had more impact had it been made 40 or 50 years ago. Back in that era, cinema-verite first emerged as a fresh and exciting antithesis to the bland slickness of commercial moviemaking via filmic movements such as Italian Neorealism and the New Waves of nations like France and Czechoslovakia. Now, with that style having been done to death by filmmakers from all over the world, the hand-held camera acrobatics of films like `Rosetta' serve more as a distraction and distancing device than the approximation of reality that the filmmakers seem to want to capture. Do we really see the world in this jumbled, bouncy way or does this camera-conscious style, paradoxically, achieve the unintended effect of actually heightening the artificiality of the film experience? `Rosetta' could have retained its admirable tone of uncompromising objectivity and still emerged as a more potent, powerful and moving film by toning down the visual style somewhat. Rosetta's personality and life are interesting enough without all this visual flamboyance. We find ourselves wanting to step back and observe this intriguing world from a fuller, more comprehensive vantage point. Still, this hectic, claustrophobic style may be just what the artists need to crystallize the desperation of poor Rosetta's mental and emotional plight. `Rosetta' is, certainly, a fine, brave and intriguing film experience; it just might have had a bit more impact filmed in a different way.
You are entering The Real Zone
rooprect10 August 2021
Have you seen the 1948 Italian classic "Bicycle Thieves"? Yeah think that, pumped up on crack. This is "Italian neorealism" but set in Belgium a half century later.
The character "Rosetta" is a 16-year-old girl who lives in a camper with her nearly catatonic, alcoholic mother and is, as the filmmakers say, "a thin aluminum wall away from living on the streets". The fact that Rosetta is barely an adolescent who is thrust into the role of provider and responsible adult is a clever twist that further turns this social statement upside down. It becomes not just a tale of survival but terrifyingly a coming-of-age flick. Rosetta is socially and emotionally stunted, unfinished and handicapped. It's fascinating to see Rosetta (excellently played by Émilie Dequenne who won Best Actress at Cannes) attempting to grasp concepts of morality and ethics even though she has clearly had no guidance. There is a certain wild animal quality to her which you will immediately feel, and though she is tough and headstrong, she is still just a teenager who doesn't know how to dance, doesn't know what a "friend" is, and whose only reality consists of obsessively trying to find a legitimate job because she feels that's the coveted symbol of having a normal life.
In that respect, this film provides something we can all apply to our lives whether we're 16-year-old homeless kids or rising corporate execs. It's the idea that an obsessive pursuit of some type of social status, or social achievement, or even a relationship, is what we cling to as proof that we have a "normal life".
In a memorable scene our protagonist Rosetta talks herself to sleep by whispering, "Your name is Rosetta. My name is Rosetta. You found a job. I found a job. You've got a friend. I've got a friend. You have a normal life. I have a normal life. You won't fall into the abyss. I won't fall into the abyss. Good night. Good night."
The camera remains very tight, almost claustrophobically so, on Rosetta throughout the entire film which exaggerates the microscopic world she lives in. She repeats routines and engages in trivial labors which are shown to us in almost tedious repetition, but the effect is powerful in conveying a sense of quiet, lonely desperation.
Throughout the history of cinema, there have been many films that document "how the other half lives" but most of them approach the subject as if we are spectators, almost in a patronizing or voyeuristic way that leaves us thinking after the credits roll "phew I'm glad that's not me" but here in "Rosetta" we get a sense that the bizarre life of this 16 year old outcast might very well be the story of the human race.
The character "Rosetta" is a 16-year-old girl who lives in a camper with her nearly catatonic, alcoholic mother and is, as the filmmakers say, "a thin aluminum wall away from living on the streets". The fact that Rosetta is barely an adolescent who is thrust into the role of provider and responsible adult is a clever twist that further turns this social statement upside down. It becomes not just a tale of survival but terrifyingly a coming-of-age flick. Rosetta is socially and emotionally stunted, unfinished and handicapped. It's fascinating to see Rosetta (excellently played by Émilie Dequenne who won Best Actress at Cannes) attempting to grasp concepts of morality and ethics even though she has clearly had no guidance. There is a certain wild animal quality to her which you will immediately feel, and though she is tough and headstrong, she is still just a teenager who doesn't know how to dance, doesn't know what a "friend" is, and whose only reality consists of obsessively trying to find a legitimate job because she feels that's the coveted symbol of having a normal life.
In that respect, this film provides something we can all apply to our lives whether we're 16-year-old homeless kids or rising corporate execs. It's the idea that an obsessive pursuit of some type of social status, or social achievement, or even a relationship, is what we cling to as proof that we have a "normal life".
In a memorable scene our protagonist Rosetta talks herself to sleep by whispering, "Your name is Rosetta. My name is Rosetta. You found a job. I found a job. You've got a friend. I've got a friend. You have a normal life. I have a normal life. You won't fall into the abyss. I won't fall into the abyss. Good night. Good night."
The camera remains very tight, almost claustrophobically so, on Rosetta throughout the entire film which exaggerates the microscopic world she lives in. She repeats routines and engages in trivial labors which are shown to us in almost tedious repetition, but the effect is powerful in conveying a sense of quiet, lonely desperation.
Throughout the history of cinema, there have been many films that document "how the other half lives" but most of them approach the subject as if we are spectators, almost in a patronizing or voyeuristic way that leaves us thinking after the credits roll "phew I'm glad that's not me" but here in "Rosetta" we get a sense that the bizarre life of this 16 year old outcast might very well be the story of the human race.
Walking, running and changing shoes?
PCC092113 October 2020
A strange character, who is about 19 years old, but looks about 14. She also has a drunk of a mother. Rosetta winds up being the sole provider of the household. The film-makers do show us throughout the film that she is the more mature of the two and that there is desperation to find work.
This tediousness shapes a very basic film, with a slow pace and don't even get me started about the bottle she keeps throwing into the pond. I tried to enjoy the interesting hand-held camera work, which gave it a voyeur feeling. The film looked like it was much older than 1999, which gave it a docu-drama feel, that I liked. There were some unique close-ups, which I found compelling, but these positive aspects couldn't save this pointless wreck. I felt exhausted after watching this.
shattering, absorbing study of the human spirit
peteh2218 October 2000
Rosetta breaks all of the rules of film making and comes up with an amazing drama of almost epic proportions. This is a heartbreaking film, in line with the Dogme 95 manifesto. No artificial lights, no music, shot on location, and with non professional actors. The best of these is inevitable- Rosetta herself, played by Emile Dequenne. Both film and actress won major prizes in Cannes. Just rewards for an astonishing peice of work.
Rosetta Stone
writers_reign23 November 2004
This is one that reels you in slowly. There's no wasted exposition. Like Clifford Odets 'Rocket To The Moon' we open right in the middle of a violent argument. The eponymous heroine is being fired and not taking it lying down. She feels she has a genuine beef but we never learn the real truth. What we DO learn is that Rosetta is, in all except name, a metaphor for the forgotten segment of large industrial societies. I can't speak for Belgium but in England there are thousands of teenagers of both sexes not only without work but not Interested in work so Rosetta, in her zealous, single-minded pursuit of even a menial job is almost too good to be true. The dramatic cards are stacked artfully against her, alcoholic mother, no father, not even a MENTION of a father, primitive home in a caravan park and, most unusual of all, not a SINGLE friend. The hand-held camera is content merely to follow her for long stretches of time punctuated by her enemies for in Rosetta's case every encounter is a battle. It remains an extraordinary chronicle with an extraordinary central performance.
Beauty
ruben mohe8 August 2000
In my opinion, the best movie of 1999.
Definitively, underlining the existence of a master-piece called "Mouchette" is a must. Though Dardene brothers are not changing the cinematographic language as Bresson did, their movie almost attains in a few moments both the beauty and the intensity of Bresson's master-piece. Only a true artist can repeat the suicide of Mouchette succesfully (and, without any doubt, the moving final sequence belongs to the history of cinema with all merits). I'd like to point out also the magnificent use of music in this film (you could hardly find two movies a year in which the music is not a nuisance nowadays, some directors should limit themselves to the music that comes from the scene itself -a radio, a piano...- ): it appears only once, and is a messy, distortioned home recording of drums, which serves the co-starring as an excuse to dance with Rosetta. To those who are looking for a contrast in the movie, it's precisely this boy and specially this scene the ones that offer a way out.
Do the people that need to know why Rosetta is like that also want to know why the birds attack the humans in Hitchcocks classic?
Is it possible to construct such a character without showing, by repetition of sequences, the redundance of Rosettas' life? Is it possible such a beauty in the final sequence without the proper patient use of time?
Definitively, underlining the existence of a master-piece called "Mouchette" is a must. Though Dardene brothers are not changing the cinematographic language as Bresson did, their movie almost attains in a few moments both the beauty and the intensity of Bresson's master-piece. Only a true artist can repeat the suicide of Mouchette succesfully (and, without any doubt, the moving final sequence belongs to the history of cinema with all merits). I'd like to point out also the magnificent use of music in this film (you could hardly find two movies a year in which the music is not a nuisance nowadays, some directors should limit themselves to the music that comes from the scene itself -a radio, a piano...- ): it appears only once, and is a messy, distortioned home recording of drums, which serves the co-starring as an excuse to dance with Rosetta. To those who are looking for a contrast in the movie, it's precisely this boy and specially this scene the ones that offer a way out.
Do the people that need to know why Rosetta is like that also want to know why the birds attack the humans in Hitchcocks classic?
Is it possible to construct such a character without showing, by repetition of sequences, the redundance of Rosettas' life? Is it possible such a beauty in the final sequence without the proper patient use of time?
Tough call
zetes16 June 2000
I can say I definitely did not like _Rosetta_. And I'm not saying that I didn't enjoy it. What, are you kidding? This movie is impossible to enjoy. I mean that I did not find it successful.
It's the kind of movie that only exists to challenge its audience. I may not have been entirely up to that challenge. Watching a Dogma 95 film on four hours sleep and ten hours work was certainly not the best idea I've ever had. But I was certainly not the only one who felt that the final product was kind of a dud. I saw it in a theater with at least 90 other people, and there were a lot of moans and groans being uttered during the last ten minutes. And this wasn't just from a couple of people who may have accidentally wandered in an art theater by accident.
Here are my complaints: a film like this has to be saying something, and, in order to work, it has to make me think about the world around me, especially regarding our old friend, the Human Condition. _Rosetta_ only made me think about how exactly the film failed.
Basically the moral of the movie is: life sucks. It never questions why life sucks. Its conclusion, as far as I can tell, is that it just does. The major obstruction that arose in my mind during it were obvious similarities in theme, style, and character to The Dreamlife of Angles, which I regard as one of the best films of the 1990s. They are both about young women living in the lowlands (_Rosetta_ takes place in Belgium, _Dreamlife_ in Lille, France) who desperately need jobs to live, jobs which are extremely hard to come by. _Dreamlife_ has an edge over _Rosetta_, though. It shows us two different perspectives of this sort of life. One of the two main characters of that film cannot handle the life of poverty, whereas the other finds ways to deal with it. Their characters are well drawn, and we care about them. Heck, I think there are no other two characters from the 1990s (besides maybe Ben and Sera from Leaving Las Vegas) whom I know and love more.
Most of _Rosetta_ is just the camera operator following Rosetta as she stomps all over town. She has a personality, but it doesn't go to far. She lives to survive, if that even makes any sense. All of her personality traits arise from a very survival of the fittest attitude (and Rosetta knows that she is not the fittest). This is realistic, to be sure, but it is very hard to care for her. She is so closed off to the world that I could not care all that much about her. If you met her on the street and said hello, I would guess that she would punch you. But look at the bitter woman from _Dreamlife_. Her character generally resides in her bitterness, but she has extra depth. As people usually are when they are bitter, she is very vulnerable and is bitter to, at least partly, keep people from knowing her. Thus, I cared much for her, and I wept profusely for her all throughout the film. Rosetta did not make me feel a thing about her.
But here is what I like: While I may not have been the least bit compelled by the character Rosetta, the actress playing her was great. This seems paradoxical, but I'll try to explain it. The character as written by the screenwriter has little depth. But there is some depth, and all of it comes from the actress. Her constant stomping leaves her mainly with a sharp frown, but the scenes where she is actually doing something, that actress is amazing. Her face is very expressive, even though the directors seem not to have wanted her to use her facial repertoire during most of the film. There were a couple of scenes which elevated the film for brief periods. There are two very painful scenes where Rosetta tries to stay at her current job. And the very ending, while I was quite disappointed in what the plot was doing with the characters, shows us one of the saddest faces ever filmed.
I would never suggest that anyone watch this film, but in the future, if this actress gains any of the fame which she deserves, you may want to hunt this film down. You may dislike it, but it is worth seeing it just for her.
So I gave this movie a 7/10, which is a pretty big stretch.
ETA: My original review of this film, written in June of 2000, can be found on IMDb. I am frankly embrassed by it (written at age 21), but I'm not going to erase it. It is, indeed, a harsh movie, one that's very single minded and quite small in its scope. It is, though, an extraordinarily powerful film that I thoroughly loved this time around. Emilie Dequenne just floors me. I like a couple of Dardennes films more, but her performance may be the best thing they've ever captured. 9/10.
It's the kind of movie that only exists to challenge its audience. I may not have been entirely up to that challenge. Watching a Dogma 95 film on four hours sleep and ten hours work was certainly not the best idea I've ever had. But I was certainly not the only one who felt that the final product was kind of a dud. I saw it in a theater with at least 90 other people, and there were a lot of moans and groans being uttered during the last ten minutes. And this wasn't just from a couple of people who may have accidentally wandered in an art theater by accident.
Here are my complaints: a film like this has to be saying something, and, in order to work, it has to make me think about the world around me, especially regarding our old friend, the Human Condition. _Rosetta_ only made me think about how exactly the film failed.
Basically the moral of the movie is: life sucks. It never questions why life sucks. Its conclusion, as far as I can tell, is that it just does. The major obstruction that arose in my mind during it were obvious similarities in theme, style, and character to The Dreamlife of Angles, which I regard as one of the best films of the 1990s. They are both about young women living in the lowlands (_Rosetta_ takes place in Belgium, _Dreamlife_ in Lille, France) who desperately need jobs to live, jobs which are extremely hard to come by. _Dreamlife_ has an edge over _Rosetta_, though. It shows us two different perspectives of this sort of life. One of the two main characters of that film cannot handle the life of poverty, whereas the other finds ways to deal with it. Their characters are well drawn, and we care about them. Heck, I think there are no other two characters from the 1990s (besides maybe Ben and Sera from Leaving Las Vegas) whom I know and love more.
Most of _Rosetta_ is just the camera operator following Rosetta as she stomps all over town. She has a personality, but it doesn't go to far. She lives to survive, if that even makes any sense. All of her personality traits arise from a very survival of the fittest attitude (and Rosetta knows that she is not the fittest). This is realistic, to be sure, but it is very hard to care for her. She is so closed off to the world that I could not care all that much about her. If you met her on the street and said hello, I would guess that she would punch you. But look at the bitter woman from _Dreamlife_. Her character generally resides in her bitterness, but she has extra depth. As people usually are when they are bitter, she is very vulnerable and is bitter to, at least partly, keep people from knowing her. Thus, I cared much for her, and I wept profusely for her all throughout the film. Rosetta did not make me feel a thing about her.
But here is what I like: While I may not have been the least bit compelled by the character Rosetta, the actress playing her was great. This seems paradoxical, but I'll try to explain it. The character as written by the screenwriter has little depth. But there is some depth, and all of it comes from the actress. Her constant stomping leaves her mainly with a sharp frown, but the scenes where she is actually doing something, that actress is amazing. Her face is very expressive, even though the directors seem not to have wanted her to use her facial repertoire during most of the film. There were a couple of scenes which elevated the film for brief periods. There are two very painful scenes where Rosetta tries to stay at her current job. And the very ending, while I was quite disappointed in what the plot was doing with the characters, shows us one of the saddest faces ever filmed.
I would never suggest that anyone watch this film, but in the future, if this actress gains any of the fame which she deserves, you may want to hunt this film down. You may dislike it, but it is worth seeing it just for her.
So I gave this movie a 7/10, which is a pretty big stretch.
ETA: My original review of this film, written in June of 2000, can be found on IMDb. I am frankly embrassed by it (written at age 21), but I'm not going to erase it. It is, indeed, a harsh movie, one that's very single minded and quite small in its scope. It is, though, an extraordinarily powerful film that I thoroughly loved this time around. Emilie Dequenne just floors me. I like a couple of Dardennes films more, but her performance may be the best thing they've ever captured. 9/10.
totally intense
tkno10 May 2001
i think, this movie is an intense experience in real life from the first to the last minute.maybe the camera is a little bit uncommen in the beginning; but very soon you forget about that and you get drawn into the plot. well there are not too many things happening, but what's happening is just like real life. in some way this movie ressembles the "dogma95"-films, but is much more authentic, as it takes place in some sort of sub-proletariat and not in
the middle class with its phoney-problems.
the middle class with its phoney-problems.
A film that haunts and stays with you for years after watching it
Camoo22 September 2013
Re-watched this film recently out of interest and vague, powerful memories of the lead actress, Emile Dequenne. I was very happy to have revisited it. In the years since seeing it, I have caught up on all the Dardenne brother films, and consider them to be among my favorite directors, observant, gentle, and tuned into a world I personally know very little about. His characters are alien to me - and indeed alienated themselves, though I grew up in Belgium I did not know anybody like Rosetta.
The impact of a Dardenne brothers film is very intense, and are often very cathartic. Rosetta is no different. Filmed very sparsely, leaving characters with very little place to hide and ultimately displaying a profound vulnerability.
It really belongs among the greatest films.
The impact of a Dardenne brothers film is very intense, and are often very cathartic. Rosetta is no different. Filmed very sparsely, leaving characters with very little place to hide and ultimately displaying a profound vulnerability.
It really belongs among the greatest films.
Tragically Watchable
ddumanis20 May 2004
A very tragic tale...almost comes off like a documentary with the hand-held camera work, which was dizzying at times. The lead actress was excellent and the girl's determination to lead a normal life was admirable, although at times heartbreaking. Watching her go through her everyday routines was fascinating.
I did also find that I wasn't pleased with the ending...didn't really conclude in any meaningful way for me..but it is the closest I've ever been to getting inside the head of someone who is struggling just to stay alive on such a basic level. I kind of wish that the ending had been more clearly spelled out..on the other hand I know that's very American of me:)
I did also find that I wasn't pleased with the ending...didn't really conclude in any meaningful way for me..but it is the closest I've ever been to getting inside the head of someone who is struggling just to stay alive on such a basic level. I kind of wish that the ending had been more clearly spelled out..on the other hand I know that's very American of me:)
This is, perhaps, one of the worst movies I ever enjoyed.
=G=21 July 2000
The film Rosetta is superficially the equivalent of a bad high school documentary class project. However, if you project your emotions with as much energy as those who projected Rosetta's face (you'll get to know every pore) on the silver screen, perhaps you'll enjoy this austere look at the determination of a young French woman. If there is anything extraordinary about this film, it is the accolades which it received.
More Dogme 95 doggerel
bfoster-48 January 2001
If I had known this movie was filmed in the exasperating and quease-inducing Dogme 95 style, I would never have rented it. Nevertheless, I took a dramamine for the seasickness and gave it a shot. I lasted a very, very, very long forty minutes before giving up. It's just boring, pretentious twaddle.
The last French movie I saw was "Romance" and it too was pretty dismal, but at least the camera was steady and not breathing down the necks of the characters all the time. I am baffled at the continuing popularity of Dogme 95 overseas -- it'll catch on in America about the same time as the next big outbreak of leprosy. (It's called Dogme 95 because that's the average number of times the actors are poked in the eye by the camera.)
The last French movie I saw was "Romance" and it too was pretty dismal, but at least the camera was steady and not breathing down the necks of the characters all the time. I am baffled at the continuing popularity of Dogme 95 overseas -- it'll catch on in America about the same time as the next big outbreak of leprosy. (It's called Dogme 95 because that's the average number of times the actors are poked in the eye by the camera.)
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews