Few filmmakers would have dedicated their first feature film to silence; how its visualisation can be preciously held to address one of the most personal and political issues of our times. Even fewer would have been able to fully express its subtleties, nuanced texture, eloquent power and inherent loudness amidst intervals of words in a mode most cinematic.
Leonardo Van Dijl’s cinema is one of humility towards cinema itself, attention to humanity and the detail of its expression. A cinema of care that is meaningfully paced to reveal its subject matter in all its facets: vibrancy, fluidity, porosity and uneasiness that allow different types of connections or associations to emerge organically between spectators and the film itself.
Van Dijl’s acclaimed film follows the days in the life of Julie, a teenage professional tennis athlete whose life turns upside down when her coach, Jeremy, is suspended following an official investigation into his conduct and overall behaviour. Julie had been spending most of her days training with Jeremy and she is put under immense pressure to talk, reveal all that she knows; continue training, keep up with her schedule in school and manage the anxieties and uncertainties of navigating the adult world. To all this external pressure, Julie, brilliantly played by newcomer Tessa Van den Broeck, goes silent. She then skilfully serves a unique form of resolution that wins the tiebreak, essentially reimagining the processes that attribute meaning to things, events, behaviours. Her stance highlights the need to re-evaluate and transform the frameworks through which we understand and respond to forms of abuse, both in terms of mitigation and active resistance. Rather than a linear culmination however, all this is expressed through cinematic time; a defined but open assemblage of different paces and expressions of constant motion that can be internal, affect-ridden, reflective or in anticipation of what is to come. Also, through the film’s breathtaking aesthetics and their ingrained humanistic politics. The beautiful photography features sharp edges that are balanced by cold, darker tones interchanged with warm bright light. There’s a subtlety and particular softness in the film grain that emerges through the film’s sequences, shot on 35mm and 65mm, lending the visuals a tactile, almost nostalgic texture. This seems to breathe life into the image, giving it warmth and allowing affect to emerge organically. The film’s aesthetics and its politics is, perhaps, one of the film’s most remarkable features that reveals a certain vision, an inclusive perspective that is much needed in today’s post-digital, post-personalised cultural landscape. As such, it is an essential watch for anyone who is genuinely interested in contemporary independent cinema.
Julie Keeps Quiet. And this decision is equally conscious and a subversive one, in its own unique way, as Leonardo Van Dijl himself, tells me. How to stay silent in a world full of noise covering words? How to honour the small and long pauses, the politics of their beats, texture of meaning that Julie herself wants to convey? In a networked, always on, post-digital condition where volume, action and reaction are used as a proof of humanity -what I would describe as a self-imposed Turing test akin to I post, therefore I am appropriating the Cartesian Cogito, Ego Sum- Leonardo Van Dijl does the unthinkable. He makes a coming-of-age film about silence and the importance thereof; A silence that does not concede, dignify, or acknowledge certain structures, predefined roles, power dynamics and institutional certainties. Instead, it gently allows empty space to be created so that meaning can be reassigned, and forms of expression can be reimagined. In so doing, the filmmaker is sculpting truth out of cinema’s inherent verisimilitude and unveils the breathtaking, raw beauty that evades qualification or definition, pushing the boundaries of what contemporary independent cinema can achieve, especially when it is shot on film.
Soft spoken but energised, deeply invested in his film, Leonardo talks passionately about Julie. Through his words she emerges as a fully embodied person, rather than a character. He has spent so much time to nurture and respectfully bring the character to life, give her justice, as he tells me, that our conversation at times feels like a Q&A session about a biopic. His passion for cinema, the arts, and the idea of justice is contagious, his words paint the context of his film world and his creative vision for the film. I had the pleasure of talking to Leonardo in person a couple of weeks before the film’s release in UK cinemas and discuss why Julie Keeps Quiet, the nuances of his film, its aesthetics, his inspiration and the creative dialogues that this film potentially develops with other filmmakers, works of film and art.
“We were not going to shoot this on 16mm. This isn’t a video clip. It is a Greek tragedy”.
F.I: I would like to start our conversation with one of the most striking elements in the film, in my opinion, which is the film’s aesthetics; the way that the film looks and feels. It reminded me very much of 15th century Flemish oil paintings, which I found fascinating. It is this certain look that has been maintained throughout the film both in moments of stillness and moments of a very intensified motion; fast-paced moments like a tennis match, for example. I was fascinated by how this aesthetics permeate the film and represent its themes. We have a young pro tennis player who is navigating the complexities of her sport and equally the process of coming of age. I was wondering if it is possible to talk about the aesthetics of the film and how it ties in with those themes.
L.V.D: So, I am partly Italian, and I have this fascination with Piero De La Francesca. It is early- not even the Renaissance yet. It is right before the Renaissance, and they try to achieve that sublime and kind of minimalism, in a way. It is hard to explain what it is, but I think that a bit in everything that I do is to create balance. I am always thinking about what is enough and try to not show more than what is enough. So, even in my aesthetics for example, I almost want to hide that I am inspired by paintings. There was not necessarily a colour mood board or something like that. It was more like; well, I have my colours and then I will add one or two colours more to almost hide them in that way. I didn’t think about everything. So, this is how I look at stuff. It is always about finding the right balance that it wouldn’t deflect from the main story, but still if one wants to maybe make that connection, they scan still make that connection. It is about offering options I guess, but it is OK if you don’t tap into it or something. Because in the end, the only thing that counted for me was Julie’s presence and how we can capture her presence in a way that creates that sublime. So, everything is almost yin and yang, in a way.
It isn’t because it is a movie about silence it needs to be a silent movie. So, it shouldn’t be silent. Again, sometimes it is loud, but I don’t want it to be extremely loud. So, I am always playing with the volume of things. I think also due to the fact that we shot it on film, which was very important for me. Because I took that silence of Julie as being very sincere, so I wanted to capture it in a very sincere way. Almost a mature way. We were not going to shoot this on 16mm. This isn’t a video clip. It is a Greek tragedy. But we went that far that we shot this on 65mm. We go towards Christopher Nolan in terms of heaviness. If the ending is that important to me, it also had to be reflected on borders of the frame in that way. It needed to be embodied in gold and not in a fake, shiny kind of thing. So, for all the choices that I made I was asking myself “Will it serve the purpose of Julie”? And to show that what she does at the end of the movie is a huge sacrifice. And in a way she has trusted me with her silence. And for me to then bring it onto the big screen, I also need to make the same kind of sacrifices, as she does. To bring justice where she didn’t have. And if that makes sense, going back to shape it, as a painting by Pierro De La Francesca.
F.I: I had this Italian expression in mind as you were talking: tanto quanto basta, which roughly translates to English as 'exactly what is enough.'
L.V.D: Oh, my god, that is so good! I understand exactly what you mean. I was more raised with the idea of “facciamo bella figura”, you know.
“Sometimes I Thought That I am Making This Jeanne Dielman For The TikTok Generation”
F.I: I think that this expression is so meaningful in relation to your work, because it is not about style itself but about how style expresses the ideas behind it. All the depth we see, all the intricacies we see, how Julie’s silence speaks volumes sometimes, and how when she is still, we can feel her anxiety, her stress. So, it is a very well-developed character navigating the complexities of the everyday life of a teenage athlete but also distrust as she is entering the world of adults. In a way it reminded me of the quotidian experience that we see maybe in the work of Chantal Ackerman or Michael Haneke’s, Cachè (2005). So, I found this fascinating, and I was wondering if this is something that you envisioned from the beginning, or if it naturally occurred in the filmmaking process?
L.V.D: It is something more natural, definitely. You start writing and then things start developing and Tessa starts to embody that true silence of Julie, and everything again develops around the question: “Does it serve the purpose in that way?”. And even in a way that I feel the need to shoot this on film because it has a beautiful texture. In Jonathan Glazer’s Zone of Interest (2023) for example it makes so much sense that it is shot on digital, because it serves the film’s purpose. But it all comes together like a method, almost. At the same time, I am hugely inspired by Chantal Akerman. And I am from Brussels so, you know, I live around the block where she shot Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1975) and sometimes (in the filmmaking process) I thought that I am making this Jeanne Dielman for the TikTok generation, you know what I mean? As I always say, of course, you have a huge language, but as film director you are never alone in how you envision things. You are almost inspired by anything basically and everything that comes with you, and how it is executed as a result. And the only think I will say came down to a “yes” or “no”, is this scene I remember at the end of the last cut, which I loved so much. And somebody said: “I don’t like this scene because it is the only scene where I can see you as a director”. And for me it is me, it is my voice, not Julie’s voice. So, we took it out. For me the process of making a movie is everything that you have as inspiration and almost removing yourself and all of that out, and then hopefully you have Julie, and she is autonomous and only then it becomes obvious that I disappear, and she is the one who directed the movie.
“I am not here to oppress somebody who is already living in oppression”
F.I: That’s fascinating to hear! Watching you film I had Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1975) in mind. Julie being the younger version of Jeanne in a contemporary context and how she could have lived, gone through teenage years and evolved into adulthood perhaps, what types of challenges she might have gone through and that was a beautiful thing to see. Once again it comes as a testament of the film’s brilliance in understanding the generation that is now coming of age, but also allowing them to develop and express themselves through the film.
L.V.D: Yes, and it is also about giving voice in a way that some people would call slow cinema, which I absolutely disagree with, in that way. We have seen these kinds of narratives often before, but here it is not through this angle, not with that intention. I am not here to oppress somebody who is already living in oppression. I want to free her as much as possible out of that horrible state that she is in at the beginning of the movie, and so I felt that it was almost like it was right to give it time. And I know that it is not for everybody. Everybody who sits in that movie can identify as much with Julie and perhaps as time goes slow and for some people who had experienced what she has, it may be really tense, and it is hard to sit and watch that movie. So, I am not here to challenge people - you know, like you have to sit there and watch it. It is more like I am doing this for people like Julie that have the time to connect with this character and feel safe somehow. Not like being rushed into decisions that a 15-year-old girl should not be making.
“What is it that framework that allows abuse to take place? What is the responsibility of the community? What is the responsibility of an institution in that way, and how does that weigh on a character?"
F.I: That’s what really fascinates me in this film. With regards to the decision that she makes -which I will not disclose here- what is interesting is the timing and the pace that plays a really important role. Throughout the film we see that there is always a movement, a pace and we something that feels an illusion of stillness, even though things are in fact in motion – we can see it, we can sense it. And then she chooses the timing of when she wants to do things, as if she is taking charge of her life and wants to show this to the world around her. So, I don’t know if the way that you saw Julie, the whole experience that she went through and also the resolution that the character is experiencing, is this something that you drew inspiration from the real world, perhaps?
L.V.D: I never spoke with girls and boys who experienced something like Julie. I spoke with coaches, therapists, lawyers, people who do research and look more into the academic research into safe sports, safeguarding in relation to the bigger structures and systems. What is it that framework that allows abuse to take place? What is the responsibility of the community? What is the responsibility of an institution in that way and how does that weigh on a character in that way? And to go towards the ending from this perspective, you see that’s always the resolutions like, 90% the same or something. So, I didn’t need to talk with victims because I know. I know why they do what they do. It is easier of course to have this question after a Q&A but it is almost like this. I don’t need to go into detail with Julie because I know what they go through, and it is always the same in that way. If you could use it in a more elegant way, when you set foot in a public space it is not because you want to be seen but because you want to be heard. It is because you are there to share the story so that you can protect others to endure what you had to endure, in that way. You are not speaking up for yourself, you are speaking up for somebody else. It is always the same in that way. Because if you want to be understood, you go to a therapist. You see what I am saying? This is always the case and yet it is how we sometimes perceive it, in a completely opposite way. When we talk about victims this is when it might be easier to write in a way, because it is polluted in a way as we analyse the kind of attention that they acquire. But why in the world would you desire that kind of attention? And this is also the case with Julie, as well. She doesn’t want to be seen as a victim. She doesn’t want to be seen even as a survivor. She just wants to be seen as a very good athlete. And at the same time, she also wants to go through a process which is impossible to go through, but she still has to understand. She is still like “what is happening?” in a way. Because where she comes from, when the movie starts this is when the coach is expelled, and she is asked to talk about it. I would be like: “But why?. A week ago, he was here, and you were all looking at it. Nobody was asking questions. And now suddenly everybody is like there is something wrong". You know what I am saying? This is not how you create safety for someone to speak up. And I think, in a way, what I tried to do with my movie is almost like Julie makes that decision to keep quiet and it is almost like it encourages us to listen to her. And to say to society that if you really want people to speak up, you also need to start listening to silence. You need to have patience and now sometimes we want to skip one thing and go to the next. Like you speak and then we can change stuff. No, it doesn’t work like that. If you want to change stuff perhaps you should start being more invested in listening to silence. You have to learn how to detect that and allow people to stay silent. So, create the space for themselves to sit in their own silence and to start to understand that before we pressure them into any disclosure.
F. I: This is beautiful. So many things to unpack there. But yes, watching the film I did not feel that Julie is a victim in any way. She is just a young woman who tries to be a top athlete.
L.V. D: Yes, and yet the most important thing is that she is a victim. You see what I am saying?
F.I: Yes, exactly! But she does not allow this to define her identity and who she wants to be and allow the world to see.
L.VD: Yes, but it is almost like – to add a sad note to it- also the fact that she doesn’t allow the world to see it like that is also oppressing her. You see what I am saying?
F.I: Yes, clearly.
L.V.D : So, even that is keeping her closeted. I am not making plea for silence, because I truly believe that coming out of the closet is really a way to align more with yourself. But it takes time in that way to accept certain things or something. And this is close to what we call intersectionality. We are never only one thing, we are always a few things and always aware of the outside point of view, if it turns on us. And that’s what I am saying that we, as a society, we put a lot of pressure on victims in that way, to bear responsibility with the aim of their disclosure being a way of changing stuff. But that’s also what sometimes keeps them trapped. Because that responsibility is a heavy bag to be added to the weight they are already carrying. To create in that way a movie in which Julie can be empowered to also focus on that community and how they empower each other as a community and little by little they start to listen. It is Julie and her silence that creates almost this sublime in a way. And it is only then when it is possible, and she goes: "Actually, I now have a new coach, and he has good intentions. He is not there to do the same thing as the old one and it is little by little less of an anxious situation". Little by little she becomes, and this is also how I shot the movie. At the beginning of the movie, you can see that she really feels uncomfortable, in the centre of that frame. Because Julie didn’t choose that silence, so now she has to be in the centre because of it. And by the end of the movie, you see that she is centred, and she aligns in that way in mind, body and everything. It is like you know she is in that centre and she is ready to engage in a full committed life.
“When I started writing it five years ago, we were living in a world with a lot of hashtags, the conversation was kind of mean and not necessarily going towards the right direction”
F.I : Again, this is a very complex and beautiful story, and it is your first feature film. Have you been working on this for a long time? How did you come to Julie’s story as an inspiration for your first film?
L.V.D: Well, when I started writing it five years ago, we were living in a world with a lot of hashtags and the conversation was kind of mean and not necessarily going towards the right direction. So, I wanted to project it five years ahead and almost say so what is now the result of this whole debate that we had? How did it actually benefit a generation? And so, I guess, in the beginning when you pitch it, it was not something that everybody understood because everybody had other questions. At that moment in time, I had to also say that we will understand the mechanics but by then things will have been explained by other outlets. I don’t have to go there anymore. I do not have to help people understand what gaslighting is. I think the world would be able to do that work for itself and I don’t know what my contribution will be on that, but the story will be offered. So, it was an interesting process to think ahead in time. I don’t really think that there was ever a word like gaslighting in my script, because that is not needed anymore. So, little by little the movie aligned with the zeitgeist and became more silent in a way, because so many things had already been talked about and explained. You can also feel it in the way that people started to accept what the movie was about. At the beginning it was kind of a situation where people loved it or hated it and at the end of the movie everybody was like, “this is right”. And it was almost like when we were premiering in Cannes it was a “now or never” moment and that was really scary. I was ready for Julie to be slayed, but also, I did not punish her in my movie in that way and I didn’t know if she would be punished by the audience. Because when we talk about female protagonists often, they are being punished, that’s how we … so, I was like is the world ready in that way? And they were, which was fantastic. But again I hold my breath and I am not saying like in two years there might be a different world and we might perceive Julie in a completely different way but I serve Julie and I hope that this movie will speak in 10 years still in terms of raising interesting questions and contribute to a debate about stuff that I might not be aware of. Or that I need to erase myself and my opinion of it to achieve a character like Antigone, or Jeanne Dielman in that way. I need to erase myself as director and my ego from it and the story, so that the story and the dramaturgy and the tragedy of the story can be in conversation with the world, which sounds like a megalomanic idea but for me Julie is Antigone in that way. I bring her into the world, and she is here to stay and be in dialogue with the world as it is emerging. I made this story because it was still unseen. So, it came from a desire to see it. And I always believed that there was an audience for it and for someone with the desire to see it, it will work anywhere. I made it in a way that it can work on every platform.
Interview to Eirini Nikopoulou.
Info: Julie keeps Quiet (2024) is released in UK cinemas on 25 April 2025, by Curzon.
Writers: Leonardo van Dijl & Ruth Becquart. Director: Leonardo van Dijl. Cast: Tessa Van den Broeck, Grace Biot, Alyssa Lorette, Ruth Becquart, Koen De Bouw, Pierre Gervais, Claire Bodson & Laurent Caron. DoP: Nicolas Karakatsanis. Music/Composer: Caroline Shaw. Duration: 100 minutes. Language: Dutch / French