A chaotic and sweet making of a film, Day For Night is truly French cinema at its most enjoyable.

As of this is French, the direction and acting are rather subdued than Hollywood comedy (or I would say more natural), but this cold observant view makes this film effectively satiric/funny at times. One of an entertaining film depicts the industry. Director is always in pain.

This film taught me that while I love movies I really don't care how they're made, I only care about the finished product.

"See you at unemployment. We can sign up together!" As a general rule, you can't trust filmmakers to make films about film, because filmmakers have egos the size of your average aircraft carrier. Regardless of whether or not it's accomplished through subtle writing or overt worship, there is no shortage of films that extole 'the craft' as the most sublime form of art ever devised and those that practice it as the enlightened few that are tasked with bringing the fire of Prometheus to the dull, ignorant masses. Fortunately, Day for Night is not that sort of film. Truffaut's treats filmmaking as important, but predominantly when considering those that are actively involved in creation as a means of both personal expression and livelihood; in particular, he doesn't shy away from the absurdity of it all, the eccentric personalities, the mishmash of emotional liberation and varying levels of professionalism, and the combination of artistry and commercialism. People engaging in spontaneous affairs while deciding on what vase will look best in a scene, trying to navigate the channels of bureacracy while also corraling a series of personalities brought together by the love for this insane lifestyle. It's both a warm love letter and a sharp satire, and likely among the best representations of its type. Some may say its lighthearted treatment of the process ignores the genuine artistic depth of 'true cinema', but those people probably consider Ingmar Bergman and John Cassavetes to be the only directors worth watching. You can't talk about movies without considering, and in Truffaut's case tenderly memorializing, the quirks. All this to explain how two professionals end up kneading butter in a bathroom sink to meet the absurd demands of an emotionally compromised actress, while another flags down a wayward, strung-out actor on a go-kart track. (4/5)

Day for Night, director Francois Truffaut's love letter to movie making, is a humorous, informative and, at times, touching look at a film shoot. It's filled with behind-the-scenes tricks of the trade and shows us through their own lens how filmmakers work their way through a scene. Truffaut, not surprisingly, plays the director, pinballing his way through the shoot by putting out fire after fire, including a great scene involving a cat who can't grasp the fact that his only function is to drink from a saucer of milk. Winner of the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film almost fifty years ago, it still stands up today as one of the best films ever made about the movie industry.

I wasn't interested in anything going on.

An interesting analysis of a film within a film. Really captures the whole cinematic experience

Movies that give you the behind-the-scenes look of how movies are made can be quite fascinating. It also must be a real challenge for the director because he has to direct and write his movie and the movie within that movie. Day for Night is François Truffaut’s attempt at doing that, and he even acts in the movie as the director. Just talking about it is kind of mind-bending, so I can’t imagine the amount of juggling that must have went on when making Day for Night. When the movie started by showing us the process of shooting an elaborate scene with lots of extras choreographed in order to make everything flow, I was on board. He captured some beautiful shots, and showed all the little things that go into making a crowd scene work. In fact every time that they focused in on the small details that have to be thought through when making a movie, I was fascinated. The less interesting parts for me were all the interpersonal relationships between the cast and crew. At one point a character has a rant about all the soap opera drama that is going on behind closed doors while this movie is being made and I couldn’t help agreeing with her. Perhaps this is a direct reflection of experiences Truffaut had while filming other movies, and he was trying to encapsulate the melodrama that actors can bring into the production of a picture. I think a little bit of this would have worked, because I do appreciate that these scenes made the story more personal, but a lot of the relationships made the characters look dumb and annoying. In particular, Jean-Pierre Léaud’s performance as Alphonse became increasingly insufferable as the film progressed. It’s clearly intentional, because the character is intended to be a bit of an airhead, but it’s so hard for me to watch (particularly when he drags other people down with him.) There was a lot to like in Day for Night, and I appreciated how many different aspects of film-making they showed. Most of the cast fit their roles nicely, even if some of the acting is a little over-the-top. Truffaut did some cool things with the camera, especially when he duplicated the exact shots that they were using in the movie within the movie. I wish there was a bit more direction or focus to the story, because it didn’t flow like a typical story. Many of the scenes could have been shifted around because they didn’t connect in any order, and I was disappointed that there were a few montages that skipped over some interesting scenes. It’s worth mentioning that most of this is probably on purpose, because making a movie doesn’t have the kind of flow that makes for a traditional story. They can often be shot out of order and thrown together a piece at a time. I did enjoy aspects of Day for Night, but there are other movies about making movies that I like more.

If you do not end Day for Night wanting to make a movie, you're not a cinephile. This film creates an environment that fits me like a glove: breezy and wonderful, that excites and seduces in a wonderful kind of way.

There are few films that adequately depict the lifestyle and philosophy of filmmaking by transposing it with a "realistic" narrative and Truffaut could not be replaced by anyone better to do such a fantastic job. Everything from the cuts to the frames are descriptive and involving.

A movie about making a move, full of manic, non-stop happenings. It treats the busy lives of everyone in the cast and crew glibly but there is always something surprising and unpredictable happening. I love the cat who refuses to lap up the milk. It's like a feline metaphor for the way that everything that can go wrong does go wrong. The movie gets made in spite of and not because of all the efforts of those tasked with making it.

A more supreme version of Contempt, this does what films about film production should show and tell about: film production!

4.5/5 With frantic energy Truffaut brings us behind the scenes of all the drama, chaos and hilarity involved in filmmaking - where the cast and crew can be just as absurd as the characters on screen.

4.4/5 Day for Night is as close as a filmmaking crew can get to the u¿purity of cinema itself as the film stands for itself as well as for everything that it bases itself on.

A nice film. A good one, indeed. But I casn't see the masterpiece. Maybe it is a limit of mine, but when I think to, say, Les Quatre Cents Coups, or L'Enfant sauvage, or Le Dernier Metro, or Jules et Jim, all of these are incomparable better of this Nuit Americaine. Seriously, maybe it is my limit, but, for me, this is a minor Truffaut.

Considered one of Truffaut's finest films and an homage to the filmmaking process, this movie is about a French cast and crew in the process of making a movie. There are a number of smaller stories with the people involved as they reveal themselves through the shoot, and the movie highlights the difficulties from a director's point of view - time pressure, various idiosyncrasies of the actors, and the complexities of getting shots just right. Truffaut himself played the director, which was interesting to see and think about (you know, directing himself directing). The movie was reasonably good and it held my interest, but it was not great, because the behind-the-scenes action was less interesting to me. Maybe some of that is because the behind-the-scenes aspects have had more exposure since 1973 when the film was made, and it was more of a novelty then. I have to also say that with the exception of Nathalie Baye, I didn't care all that much about the cast and characters, which was probably also part of the problem. Worth watching though.

I always enjoy movies about movies.

Esto se me atraganta mucho... es tan indigesta como la peli que intentan rodar... está bien, sí pero... no llevo bien el estilo Truffaut.

This is exactly my taste in movies. A movie about the filmmaking industry that portrays almost a whole production as if it were a documentary. I really wish there were more movies like this.

Lots happening in this fun filled film right from the get go. It's own self-absorption is both comical, irritating and playfully ironic.