Life in a Day
Life in a Day
PG-13 | 27 January 2011 (USA)
Life in a Day Trailers

A documentary shot by filmmakers all over the world that serves as a time capsule to show future generations what it was like to be alive on the 24th of July, 2010.

Reviews
Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much
Actuakers One of my all time favorites.
GetPapa Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible
Humbersi The first must-see film of the year.
aronjackson1995 My first impressions of the film were that it was fairly confusing and had no sense of order. However, if you paid close attention, you could begin to tell that the film was telling a story, beginning at the earliest point in the day. Immediately, you expect the ending of the film to be the end of the day. My initial thoughts would be that the film would be rather boring and something which I would not pay to go and watch at the cinema. However, it is completely mind-blowing. The way in which the editors used clips generated from YouTube from hand-held cameras and adapted them into a way in which a professional film would be made is astonishing. The film is slickly edited to a high degree; it breaks the codes and conventions of a documentary, but was successfully pulled off by Kevin MacDonald.The film is mesmerising in terms of the thought process behind it. The idea to film a worldwide society on one single day and create a film from clips uploaded to YouTube is extremely unique. To add to this, MacDonald has included third-world countries by providing them with cameras, which further builds on the uniqueness. The film shows the contrast between light and dark, day and night and the contrast between life and death. The contrasts, we would have thought, would be obvious to the audience, however they were relatively subtle and disguised; it took detailed analysis and observation to see these contrasts but I believe that this subtleness draws the audience further into it and makes them understand the concept behind the film.However, some of the scenes included in the film, such as the slaughter of livestock, questioned the appropriateness for younger children, despite being rated 12. Yet, this theme of death is emphasised here. At times the film became tedious and the audience often found themselves distracted. The lack of voice-over pushes the audiences focus away from the film as does the lack of dialect in certain places. One certain point, where racism is shown, may cause offence to people of that religion and create a negative opinion, of the film, based on one specific scene.Overall, I thought that the film was unique and exciting in places. However, some aspects often left me distracted.
Rajan Popat I was shown this film as part of my A2 Media course and did not know what to expect from a film which was solely made from a UGC website. First impressions of the film were that it would be a film that had no structure and no real story line and would just be numerous videos stitched together. My first impression continued to ring true through the first couple of minutes where the audience are shown footage of feet and a women in the dark. After the film continued, it showed to have a number of good points which made the film revolutionary and stand out against other more conventional documentaries The film, literally showed peoples days from getting up in the morning of the 24th July 2012, to sleeping at night, through the changes in dark and light. The good points continued as it showed the audiences real footage, in the sense that it was not directed, depicting their real lives, in their real homes and showing their real emotions. This allowed the audience to connect with the film which also made it revolutionary. I believe that film did contain a number of bad points, for instance the scene in which a cow was slaughtered. Even though the film is rated 12 and many 12 year olds do understand the killing of animals to provide their meat but may not actually have seen the killing process which could have shocked a much younger audience, even at this age this particular scene was hard to see. However as the film title depicts it is about people's lives and therefore could be justified that that scene was edited in. Another bad point of the film was the lack of narration. The lack of narration meant that the audience had to create much of their story in their head and had to find out themselves what was happening. This could be a bad point for the film as it does not make the viewing of the film "easy". Overall my opinion of the film has changed from my first impression and know do understand how this film is ground breaking in the film industry. I also believe that the way the film has been edited together to have a sense of continuity and flow and been an advantage for the film as it follows and standard "day" structure well.
Jonathan Hall I watched the film in school as a Case Study for my NMT exam.First Impressions – It was a very different film to others that I have seen, with no clear narrative and the quality of the footage is not as good as 'Hollywood' films. However, something that was positive about the film that was different to others is there are no actors, nothing is set up.Good Points – It is a new way of making films, getting 75% of clips from YouTube 'User generated content' and the actual idea of the film, how 1000's of people would film themselves and their lives on one particular day, to get a look inside how the world looks like from different points of view and not just being Britain's or Americans which are common in films.Bad Points – The quality of the clips are not very good, but you get used to it after a couple of minutes and each clip uses different camera shots and quality, which is good as it keeps it interesting, but as a whole, and film, it should be consistent. Each clip is too short to get attached or feel emotions to, whereas another film like 'Marley & Me', you get half an hour to learn about the characters which gets you attached to them. Also, the film is quite boring at times, with scenes being too long (not being very interesting), or too short in some cases.Overall, it is a film only to be watched as a last resort, but it does provide us with a very interesting view of the world on one day and acts as a time capsule for future generations.
CourtsideJack We have all had that moment. At a particular point in any given day, we wonder what someone is doing on the other side of the world at that exact moment. Life in a Day gives us just a glimpse of the world on a normal day and does so masterfully. I was very engaged by the flashy editing and creative montages but also very touched at some of the short sequences of humans in their most candid moments. This film gives us a window into life on the macro and the micro. It presents us with constant scene changes and slick editing to keep us interested and then gives us some very real and very profound moments. This film manages to reward the viewer with quality and quantity, in the sense that it packs more into its 95 minutes that you can shake a stick at. Many of the stories in this movie could be their own documentaries themselves and make for a great watch. But it is not just the people, that make this movie great. Without giving anything away, this film will find ways to pull at your heartstrings in ways you may have never experienced with cinema. Everyone at some point in this film can relate to moments that are so visceral and so real, you may find your self reliving emotions you may not have expected, good and bad. I am being purposefully vague because any explanation of the events in this film will not do it justice. You need to experience it. I highly recommend this film, not as a documentary, but as an experience and window into the human condition. Life, death, love, laughter, bodily function, work,war,heartbreak, fear. Just some of the emotions and experiences chronicled, this film does a great job of presenting it in an interesting way that keeps you wanting more. It is almost too bad that for most of the subjects, we are offered a very brief glimpse into their life only to be whisked halfway around the world and thrust into the home of another. The Scott brothers (Tony and Ridley) did a great job of keeping some cohesion as far as the chronological order of the day and the subject matter. With 4500 hours of footage from 192 countries, this was no small feat. In closing, I hope more and more see this movie as it gives us an unbiased glimpse into the human condition. Approach the movie with an open mind and a little patience, and you will be rewarded. It is art such as this that can help us understand one another to hopefully be able to put aside our differences, if for just one day.