Yo, Daniel Blake

I, Daniel Blake starts out as one of Loach’s most powerful films. The octogenarian standard-bearer of British left-wing cinema directs with admirable precision and economy, though it may seem that he is primarily trying not to get in the way of the actors’ work. He gradually interconnects the protagonist’s story with those of the supporting characters (Katie, Chino), thus inconspicuously pointing out how important people like Daniel Blake, who don’t live solely for themselves, are in uniting a community. As if by accident, the camera sometimes takes in anonymous people waiting at an office who find themselves in a similar situation as Blake, thus drawing attention to the widespread nature of the issue being examined in the manner of neorealist films. Also, the choice of setting on both a larger (Newcastle) and smaller scale (Blake standing incongruously in front of a display window with luxury goods) reveals the director’s sensitivity and talent for conveying meaning in a slightly roundabout way. Despite the melancholy subject matter, the film is greatly helped by humour from the beginning. Dave Johns, who otherwise makes his living as a stand-up comedian, has precise comedic timing and I easily could have spent an hour and a half listening to his increasingly clueless communication with robotically thinking officials. But as Blake’s humour abandons him, Loach also loses his ability to maintain distance and starts pushing the situation to extremes. I have no doubt that he proceeded based on field research and interviews with unemployed people, but in this concentrated form, the unhappiness and desperate behaviour occurring all at once (the freezing children, the food bank, Ivan, vandalism, the final scene) are unnaturally excessive. The attempt to support the thesis that bureaucracy is harmful to both mental and physical health gradually takes precedence over perceptiveness toward the characters and the film becomes exceedingly literal in its attack on the system. It suddenly becomes too obvious what the director is reaching for and thus harder to accept. Of the recent dramas about dehumanised and dehumanising capitalism, I, Daniel Blake, despite all of its qualities, thus remains in my view a few steps behind the brutally blunt The Measure of a Man and the more well-constructed Two Days, One Night. (09.10.2016)

It's almost tempting to say that it's just an ordinary film about how life can be complicated sometimes, but it turns out that when it's well-directed and well-acted, it will have the right effect. And it does. Ken Loach hasn't aged a bit, and being 80 in the director's chair isn’t a bad thing at all. Civil, yet great. (19.01.2017)

Awesome! I really enjoyed I, Daniel Blake because it deals with a topic that is more than close to my heart. To my surprise, British officials and laws are even more inhumane than ours. I also went through an interesting process when sorting out my disability pension and card. However, compared to Daniel's ordeal, it was a walk in the park. I only got stuck in a loop once and thankfully not for long. The film took me through such a wonderfully depressing story that I delved into it completely, staring open-mouthed. Dave Jones was perfectly natural as the knight without fear and beyond reproach, battling the windmills, and I believed him every word he said. Hayley Squires complemented him perfectly with her despair. I was thrilled! (21.08.2017)

Ken Loach delivers an honest portrayal of the working-class struggle, capturing the frustrations of dealing with the British bureaucracy. I really appreciated the setting — Newcastle’s gritty vibe, the thick accents, and the banter about football. It all felt so authentic and perfectly suited to Daniel Blake’s world. Watching this film was like stepping into the life of an English bricklayer, seeing how tough things are for him, and then quietly stepping back out. It’s a solid piece of filmmaking, though perhaps a bit too raw and real at times, which is classic Ken Loach. (19.12.2021)

It's not Loach's best film; it's a semi-political statement that, when reading Laverty's screenplay, struck me as difficult to digest with its final appealing pathos. But Loach directed it completely civilly, chose great protagonists, and settled it with a slight irony, although, of course, the harsh indictment of a mechanized social system dominates, in which a person becomes an indecent item. The result is a difficult view of poverty, which potentially affects each of us because it is a malignant part of the system in which we live. Paradoxically, Loach must be criticized and appreciated for the consistency with which he easily idealizes his working heroes - there is nothing distorted and inauthentic about it, and there is an almost naive belief in the good of those in need. I, Daniel Blake is the best Loach since 2006, and I personally feel that this is a more vital and substantial film than The Wind That Shakes The Barley. [Cannes 2016] (23.05.2016)