This movie illustrated the everyday realities and horrors of a broken healthcare system. Daniel Blake, the protagonist, tried to receive employment and support allowance after being prevented from working by his doctors due to his failing health, yet faced constant opposition, from the very services that are supposed to help the people, by frustrating and humiliating him to such an extent that it almost appears that they want the claimant to drop out and stop pursuing their right to ask for aid. Daniel’s journey illustrates a Kafkaesque journey; he is forced to look for jobs despite knowing that he has to deny any that he is accepted to due to his doctor’s orders, in order to qualify for benefits, while simultaneously being given demerits for trying to appeal the government’ worker’s decision that he was still able to work (despite what his healthcare physician said). This bureaucratic nightmare illustrates the indifference of the government, and how its crushing silence leads to its people’s lives spiraling downwards into deeper poverty. Though this movie was based in England where healthcare is provided to all, this made me wonder what happens to those in need in the US, where the government is offering partial healthcare to some.

I, Daniel Blake is a movie that really highlights how the public health system and the government continuously fail those in need. Oftentimes, there’s this idea of “pulling yourself up by the bootstraps” that is fed to us as a drive to work harder to acheive our goals and financial security. At the same time, there are a lot of barriers to this such as health conditions (as demonstrated in the movie) and structural barriers that prevent people of a specific gender, ethnicity, sexuality, etc. from navigating through life in a manageable way. Furthermore, I think this movie highlights the unrealistic expectations of our government to continuously work even when going through hardships.

I ,Daniel Blake is a classic example of bureaucracy being inefficient and whose only purpose is to make itself richer. He was a carpenter who suffered from a hear attack. Following this event he was deemed unfit to work by his doctor. When he requested his unemployment benefit he was deemed fit to work and therefore his request was denied. This sort of things happened over and over in every country. This further makes me want to become independent by the age so I do not have to rely on an incompetent system.

I think I related to the protagonist, Daniel Blake, even though my problems are nowhere similar to what he faced. Every student at Cornell goes through a cycle of stress at some point of the other. And unfortunately (or fortunately) those days are the ones that I find myself bonding the most with people. It’s the adversity that brings people together and not the non-existent bright sunny days of Ithaca. The protagonist too connects with the single mingle over the hardships either of them faced. And both of them lift either of them together when things didn’t go the right way. That’s what I think my student life has been as well. I have been fortunate to have my friends there at my lowest and I strive to be with them when they need me.

I, Daniel Blake had many themes and points, but one that struck me immediately was its portrayal and commentary on bureaucracy at the Jobcentre. When Katie, a single mother, is late for her appointment, she is told to leave and make a new appointment. Things get a bit heated, and the manager tells Katie to make a new appointment and leave any complaints there. Even when a sympathetic worker at the Jobcentre tries to help out, she is reprimanded by her manager.

Bureaucracy being inefficient and impersonal is no new critique. But this scenario in particular made me wonder, what exactly is the alternative being proposed? If someone is late, and there are others waiting, what can be done except to ask them to reschedule? If someone is making a scene in your business center, and you can’t appease them by offering the one thing they’re asking for, what can you do but ask them to leave and file a complaint if they so choose? Ensuring management and workers are as compassionate and informed as possible is one way of mitigating the negative effects of bureaucracy–however, being compassionate is difficult when your department is understaffed and your position is underpaid. There may not be any clear solution, and perhaps the problem lays further back than simply the institution of bureaucracy itself.

The fact that there are multiple flaws in the welfare system are pointed out in the movie “I, Daniel Blake”. His life is full of unfortunate events, starting with the heart attack he suffered from. He was willing to find a job but the doctor did not allow him. The worst part is that he ends up dying from a heart attack anyways even though the doctor was not granting him the permission to start working in order to prevent such a thing from happening.

I, Daniel Blake showed a perspective I probably never would’ve been aware of otherwise. It makes sense that there are older people who grew up and lived in a very different world and who are now faced with systems that are not kind to them. It was really heartbreaking to watch him do his best in the system and to be met with frustration every step of the way. I also applaud the film makers for not submitting to the trend of all happy endings. The film wouldn’t have had a proper ending without his death. Unfortunately, at least to me, films like this are not very entertaining. They’re depressing, and sometimes difficult to watch. While it would be nice to have more lighthearted movies at rose occasionally. These are also important as they are opportunities to get perspectives we might not otherwise seek out.

I am no avid movie goer, but I don’t recall many films that induced such frustration and disappointment like “I, Daniel Blake.” The depictions of the American unemployment systems, supposedly designed to provide aid to the less fortunate and improve human welfare, were disheartening and eye-opening. With all human decency seemingly just thrown out of the window, Daniel was never able to get the government help he desperately wanted and needed. The government failed to act on its most important purpose and serve the people. Daniel, like so many Americans out there, was powerless. Although I come from a background that prevents me from directly relating to Daniel’s daily struggles, I, too, felt powerless watching Daniel’s story. The fact that Daniel refused to give up and showed unstoppable courage and perseverance only made the film even more heartbreaking to watch. The compassion he shows Katie and her family sheds light on an otherwise dark film. The ending of the film, in which Daniel passes away before being able to present his appeal case, is tragic and perhaps not what viewers were initially hoping or expecting to see. But I appreciate the realism of the ending and tried to come to terms with the fact that many individuals in the real world share the same unfair fate. It is sad to think that Daniel’s situation is not unique. Overall, I believe that the film did an excellent job of showcasing the injustices that happen all around us but are ignored.

The movie I, Daniel Blake was quite a different film than the ones that I am accustomed to. I didn’t think that I would be very interested in watching a drama film, yet this movie experience was very eye-opening. As someone born into an affluent environment, it is easy to pretend that there isn’t poverty and the needy around me. Especially now at Cornell, in an environment with plenty of rich students, we so often not see those struggling financially. Watching the life of Daniel Blake and his friend Katie we the viewers are shown how hard some people need to work to provide for their families and really drove me to appreciate all that I have. All students should really see this film as it would change many of our world views and possibly even lead to reflection into our materialistic and status-conscious world.

I, Daniel Blake depicts the harsh realities of poverty and unemployment and the inefficiency of the very system that exists to “aid” those in these situations. Just watching the very first scene where Daniel is denied unemployment because he is deemed to be physically able to work by a “healthcare professional” who doesn’t even see him but conducts the test via telephone was frustrating. I shared Daniel’s anger in receiving the decision that denied him the unemployment and support allowance because he was “deemed fit” when his doctors clearly indicated that he would not be able to return to work. During the rest of the movie, I couldn’t help but also think of all of the people that take advantage of this system. Harry Edwards did too, when he offered Daniel the job and he refused it because his medic told him he can’t work because of his condition. People living off the government out of convenience rob citizens like Daniel Blake from receiving the help they really need.

To address my post’s title, I was thinking of Katie’s speech when I wrote it. She said that the State drove him to an early grave because he spent the last days of his life trying to fight the injustice he was faced with. I felt empowered by his resilience to “fight the system” and demand his rights. This definitely wasn’t a “feel-good” movie, it’s a movie to make you think… Think about current governmental systems in place to help people and families like Daniel and Katie, and think about our perspective on unemployed citizens, homeless people, and all those who live in poverty.

Although this film is not something I’d ever watch on a whim, I really enjoyed it, and I wonder how government officials feel watching a film like this…

The film I,Daniel Blake was really interesting as it displayed a common and important phenomenon: how new and unexpected scenarios can allow people to feel emotions and experience situations that they grow from. Although Daniel could have looked as his situation negatively and been upset by not being compensated despite his health condition, Daniel learned to forge a new bond with his mother and help her out. They say that in negative situations, that is when true family bonds are forged strongly. In this case, Daniel’s circumstance could be interpreted as “meant to be”, because as a result he was able to connect with his mother on another level. What is most interesting about this incident is how Daniel did not necessarily fake optimism at every point in the journey. In fact, on the contrary, Daniel let himself feel the emotions of sadness and chose not to act on those emotions at all time. I think this is an important lesson in life. While we do not need to feel satisfied and happy all the time, we can acknowledge that we are upset or angry, etc and not let those emotions completely affect us. As a person that does not deal well with unexpected situations, I am trying to keep this mentality as throughout my life,  I will encounter moments that will throw me off guard, yet they do not need to derail me completely. It can be challenging to distance ourselves from the problems that we encounter but doing so is incredibly important in being able to move on.

‘I, Daniel Blake’ is a thoroughly depressing experience of a film.  I found it rage inducing, even. Daniel Blake and his friends are helpless against the tide of dehumanizing bureaucracy and capitalist drudgery that befalls them. I think the message of the movie is self explanatory – bureaucracy is dehumanizing, poverty is soul-crushing, inescapable, destructive.

I don’t mean to sound glib. In fact I would say I am quite the opposite when it comes to this film – its message sunk deep into the core of my philosophy and sat like a pit in my gut for days. It’s been a long time since I saw it, so some of that effect has worn off. Though my slightly dismissive tone shouldn’t be taken for dismissal of the film’s message. On the contrary I couldn’t agree with its positions more – I’m more interesting in talking about a different point, taking it for granted that the film’s message is true and good.

I raised after the film – perhaps more forcefully than intended, the question of whether or not we have the “right” to be angry. What I meant by this was that we, being at Cornell, are certainly of a certain non-trivial degree of privilege. We take advantage of one of the best academic institutions in the country, are well fed on a regular basis, live a life of study (to some, leisure) and so on. Some would argue (perhaps even correctly) that such privilege is indirectly the cause of the suffering and dehuminization experienced by the characters of “I, Daniel Blake”. So as much as we want to be angry watching it – as much as we ARE angry watching it – can we in good faith be so? Even if our privilege isn’t a cause, we still have no basis of relating.

My worry comes from the idea that we shouldn’t fetishize (for lack of a better word) poverty and such. This comes up in art – that somehow suffering or being “real” in the “element” and so on create great art. I loathe this idea, and I worry that “I, Daniel Blake” in being a depiction of poverty runs the risk of toeing this line. Daniel has his heroic stand with the graffiti and we cheer, the same way we cheer for other movie protagonists. But there’s something gut wrenchingly real about the experience of Daniel and his friends. This, however, is just a concern. I’m not sure to what extent it applies here – I’m not even sure if it does at all. But I raise it more as a caution.

In the end, this film made me feel and think things at a level deeper than any other this semester, and for that alone, perhaps I should give it a pass.

I, Daniel Blake was a very powerful and emotional movie.   The story took place in England and revolved around an unemployed Daniel Blake, who could not work because of heart problems, and an unemployed single mother named Katie.  Both Daniel and Katie were forced to struggle and fight for government benefits in order to make ends meet and live with some dignity.     I really felt the pain Daniel and Katie felt as they were treated as almost subhuman and not deserving of any compassion and understanding.  The discussion after the movie really solidified my emotions.  The entire room was in agreement that something needs to be done so what happened in the movie will not happen in real life.

This movie was good but not in the way I expected it. The movie really just gave me the feeling that embodies “what a shame”, “that sucks”, or the classic response “oof”.

Daniel Blake was a man screwed over by bureaucracy in its most hellish form. He never had a chance. I kind of expected him to die at the end though because otherwise the story lacks all impact. Had the process been incredibly smooth, he wouldn’t have died

I don’t watch trailers or research too much about a movie online beforehand because I want to experience the movie as I watch it. And I was not prepared for how moving it was. This movie felt too close to home, but I don’t want to go into detail about my own personal experiences. However, I’m glad that this movie exists to show the real, raw emotions that disadvantaged people in society feel when dealing with the bureaucracy and stupid “rules.” These people feel tired, frustrated, and humiliated because they are treated as just another step in a long process instead of as human beings who are desperately seeking help.

At the end of the movie, someone asked if we have the right to be angry since we attend a prestigious school and probably come from a well-off family. Although he probably didn’t have ill-intentions, there were many aspects of that question that I didn’t agree with. It took me some time after the movie to formulate my feelings into coherent thoughts.

First, it is presumptuous to assume that everyone on this campus is well-off. We should be aware that not everyone has the same opportunities in life and many people in this school struggle to stay afloat financially while still trying to pursue their studies. It is this assumption that makes low-income students feel invisible and even, at times, unwelcome.

Second, this question detracts from the purpose of the movie. I, Daniel Blake showed some of the most vulnerable parts of these people’s lives. The most impactful scenes were when Katie opened the can of beans in the food pantry and when Dan was hiding in his empty, cold house because he felt hopeless and didn’t want to seek help. Katie didn’t realize that she was so hungry that she was shaking. She felt so embarrassed and didn’t want to be seen.

The purpose of this film was to invoke empathy, compassion, and respect for people in these moments when they need it most. We should not judge them in their most vulnerable moments, but instead treat them with dignity and respect. By asking if we have a right to be angry takes away the focus from these people and makes it a question about yourself. I, Daniel Blake shows us that we need to be aware that not everyone comes from the same background. Sadly, like the ending of the film, not everyone receives the help they need or receive the help they need in time. It is unfortunate that this broken system has failed so many people and continues to do so.

Watching “I, Daniel Blake” was a tear-jerking experience for me because it hit a lot of points very personal to me; very similar to some of my experiences; very real things I have witnessed; and things that are a reality for a lot of the people near and dear to me. This is why I don’t want to focus my recount of this event on the film, but rather on a comment that followed the film.

One of my peers posed the question, “Are we even allowed to be angry [at the systemic flaws and disrespectful experiences depicted in the film], since we come from a place of privilege?” While I understand that this question was posed with genuinely innocent intentions, it really brought to my attention the idea that some people at Cornell are unaware that not all of their peers here come from the same privileged backgrounds. I agree that all of us attending this institution have the privilege of being here, and that in itself is supposed to go a long way in helping our socioeconomic status post-graduation. Yet, I want to bring to attention that many students, even at Cornell, face very different realities during their time away.

I know multiple people who have had to delay their studies due to financial insecurity. I know people who face food insecurity when having to return home over winter and summer breaks. I know people who are here on full scholarships and work 20+ hours a week, on top of having a full course load, in order to finance purchasing their books, materials to study, and food to eat. While it is a privilege that they still have the opportunity to study, I felt this question undermined the struggles they face every day in order to be able to do that.

For me, one of the bigger take-aways from the film was that every person should be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of their situation; that if you are in a position to help and serve others, you should be doing just that: helping and serving. Changing this reality takes each and every one of us making an effort in our daily interactions; because despite the setting of the film, these things still happen in today’s society and even in the United States. These things happen to the people we interact with every day (yes, even at Cornell), and we never know which seemingly insignificant but disrespectful action of ours might be contributing to those less-than-ideal circumstances others are facing.

A conversation and movie with House Fellow Filiz Garip, allowed me to understand small part of the British society. We watched the movie “I, Daniel Blake” this movie highlighted the latter part of the life of Daniel Blake and the struggles that he had to endure post a heart attack. The pressure of returning to work, and the unsympathetic help by the government took a toll on his health. This movie was eye-opening in which it allowed me to see society from a different perspective, a perspective which I would never wish for anyone. The movie made me realize, that we pride ourselves for living in a progressive society however, we are still unable to maintain a sense of comfort, and care for all citizens. If citizens who are aged, or have health problems, or any other ailments, that restrict them from earning a decent wage, we must come together as a global community and help each other. Unless we all live a decent life, we are not a progressive society.

On Friday night, I watched the movie “I, Daniel Blake” with other Rose Scholars. The movie dealt with heavier topics that I don’t often encounter in my daily life due to the privilege that I am grateful to have. As I watched the movie, I felt so much frustration and anger due to the unfairness that the main characters experience as a result of the inefficiencies and apathy of the government and many of the government workers. After the movie, one of the other watchers brought up the point of whether we even have the right to be angry even if we are privileged enough to not have to experience what Daniel Blake and others in the movie had to. In response, I reevaluated my anger and after reflection, I believe that we do have the right to be angry and frustrated that this kind of injustice is even an experience that a human being in society can go through. I think the anger that the audience may feel toward the fact that the characters are forced to deal with this governmental inadequacy that affects them so detrimentally stems from an empathetic recognition of the injustice that is important in validating the struggles of others even if they aren’t our own. How can you not be angry just because the particular issue doesn’t affect you? I acknowledge that the I don’t fully understand what it would be like to have to face poverty and be trapped by it, but I recognize these as real, significant, monumentally difficult struggles and it makes me upset that others have to experience them. My anger and frustration are not intended to belittle anyone’s experiences. The movie has led me to reflect on difficult issues that I have no qualifications or idea how to address.