I usually really like the cinema verite thing when it's done right. Problem with "DNDN" though is...it's not done right. The watchability of the docu-realism thing pivots on one very important factor: SOMETHING INTERESTING ON THE SCREEN. Though the lead actress has a lot going for her, she simply can't handle an entire movie with just a camera aimed at her face (not many could, in her defense).Van Sant's films have an equal amount of minimal dialog but I never find myself watching the clock during his opuses, no matter how seemingly meandering (yes, I like "Gerry").I like bits of this film too. It has a basically fascinating subject. I especially like the jagged bits of steam that get cooking in the last third of the film, when the lead's tension and frustration threaten to boil over, though I'd debate that anything "happens" at the end (other reviews seem to indicate otherwise).I get the symbolism. I get the message. I just thought it could have used an editor's unbiased shears.

A young woman is seen arriving at a bus station. Before she gets off the bus she might be giving us a clue as to the purpose of her trip. At the depot, she is met by a man that takes her to what appears to be a suburban motel. She has come for the sole purpose of being trained for a mission to sacrifice herself in a terrorist act. The woman takes a bath, scrubbing herself clean, as though preparing for the sacrifice she is about to commit Masked men enter the room. Blindfolding her, they take her through a training different in a lot of possible scenarios. She is given a new identity and has to learn it by rote. When she is deemed ready, she is taken to a desolate area where a car awaits her to take her to another bus depot. Her destination, we learn at last, is Times Square, the heart of New York City.Leah Cruz, the would be terrorist, embarks on a walk throughout the area. The usual crowds are a reminder of what she is about to do. She is constantly surrounded by a mass of people that are oblivious to the danger so near to them. After trying the explosive device, she realizes it's not working properly, something she, or the team that prepared the explosion, probably didn't count on. As the story ends, we watch her being pursued by a young man, who might be a predator looking for easy an easy mark.Suicide bombers are a recent development in the world. They have been responsible for the death of thousands of innocent people that didn't deserve to die, in the first place. It is hard to understand how a human being will get to that stage. Not only will they kill a lot of bystanders, but in the process they don't live to see the havoc they create."Day Night, Day Night" is the creation of Julia Loktev, a director unknown to this viewer. Not knowing what to expect, we took a chance with this indie film from IFC, a producer of quirky fare. Ms. Loktev takes the viewer into the mind of a person that is determined to carry out a horrible act. We never get to know Leah's background, or what is the cause for which she is fighting. We never learn what has been her reason for getting involved in such a criminal act. When she calls her parents, they sound as though they are concerned about her, but not much more than what a parent of a young person would be.Louisa Williams has the kind of face that could pass for any ethnicity, it is difficult to peg her down to any specific race group. Her eyes tell the story of the conflict within her. Walking among the crowds of Times Square, Ms. Williams appears at times as though she is overwhelmed by the garishness of her surroundings, while at other times, she appears to be afraid of dying for a cause that even she can't comprehend.The excellent hand held camera of cinematographer Benoit Debie, captures the Times Square area as through the eyes of a tourist, or even a would be killer. Ms. Loktev shows she can provoke her audience, however disgusting the central issue is.

One can't talk about this film without ruining a long-held secret. Then again, I'm not sure that not knowing would help one to enjoy it, either. Without knowing the film's sense of purpose, it would be easy to get bored, I think. It's not that hard even if you do know, unfortunately, but it might be excruciating if you didn't. So here's the secret (SPOILERS, duh!): the girl, played by Luisa Williams, has been drafted to execute a suicide bombing mission in Times Square. We never know who the girl is, we have only tiny clues as to why she would agree to do this, and we never know why the mysterious organization, several of whose members we meet, wants this mission carried out. In a way, the film reminded me of last year's Old Joy, and it is similarly frustrating. There's so little information, and the style is so minimalist, that it's hard to care. I liked both films to an extent. I think I slightly prefer Day Night Day Night. It had a hypnotic rhythm about it. Luisa Williams is a very good actress. Plus, the final half hour is quite tense, and worth the wait. The writer/director's decision to completely depoliticize the situation pretty much subtracts any real meaning. The terrorist organization is hilariously diverse. I half expected a Native American in a wheelchair to show up at some point. Loktev's direction is strong. The way she uses sound during that last half hour is impressive.

Caught this at an art theater last night, and the crowd afterward was split about 50/50 as to how they received the film.One side admitted that the film was unique while avoiding any trace of pretentiousness and that Loktev was captivating. Still, these people felt that the film’s incredibly slow pace was too much to bear. I understand this sentiment, but I don't agree with it. Likewise, just about everyone thought the film was very creepy, and while this turned on many in the art-house crowd, it repelled nearly as many.Personally, I like creepy movies, and I thought the creepiness was magnified wonderfully by the slow pace. It felt like a snuff film combined with soft-core child porn combined with _The Passion of Joan of Arc_. Seriously, it was that creepy. And that added creepiness greatly to the suspense—I literally jumped a little bit out of my chair at one point, and I can only remember doing that a handful of times in my history of movie-going.Still, I don’t know whether or not the slow pace would hold up well to repeated viewings, and it's not like the pacing was perfect; shaving ten minutes overall probably would have helped. But I still think the film was effective and unique enough to deserve a high rating.