2004: The Year in Movies

AOL's Top-10 List
Critic vs. critic.
Jan. 5 2005 2:46 PM

2004: The Year in Movies

VIEW ALL ENTRIES

David, let me clarify a point explicitly if not implicitly. Slagging the institution of the New York Times is a venerable film critic tradition—one that this year's Movie Club, of all groups, should be familiar with. But I have no interest in slagging Tony as Tony. In fact, I respect the seriousness and intelligence he applies to his work. I happily respond to his intriguing inquiry about my championing of Son Frère over other films with related themes. Illness, death, family tension, human responsibility, and intimacy are profound subjects, and Patrice Chereau's pure pursuit of them was also profound. Yes, it is a hard film to watch at first (no dancing girls), but as it proceeds, Chereau's artistry lights up this two brothers story.

Son Frère doesn't offer conventional uplift but a clear and intense vision. (Calling its style "documentary" evades its point and its beauty.) This film exults in several kinds of nakedness—physical, emotional, spiritual—which brings the brothers' experience closer. And it's done through "art," the sort of style you rarely see in the CGI age and that is completely original to Chereau (cf. his modern epic Those Who Love Me Can Take the Train). Chereau is a stage-to-film director, as Visconti was. But you can't see the artifice for the rich sensuality. Son Frère offers a tough sensuality and it is linked to mortality. It is sentimental in the best sense. One's sentiment is respected, earned. It's the rare film completely without cliché. This cannot be said for Million Dollar Baby or the even sappier The Sea Inside.

Advertisement

Obviously, I think Son Frère is a major achievement. That critics failed to rally behind it can be called lily-livered, but it's more likely the sad result of the film having a small distributor. Strand Releasing just didn't have the wherewithal to make the film a media event comparable to the Eastwood and Amenábar. Critics were needed to tell the public that Son Frère's substance matters. Without that support, the Eastwood and Amenábar (and even Ray) are made to seem more important simply because there's Time Warner promotional money behind them.

And yes, those films are indeed easier to watch. You don't have to work at them, which is why they will eventually mean less—every time you watch them, and in future movie history. Eastwood and Amenábar comfort audiences with cliché. That's why Million Dollar Baby sits so easily at the top of so many uninspired critics' lists—as do Sideways and Before Sunset. There's no challenge in these films, and compared to Son Frère, only hackneyed, fake artistry. The shame is that many moviegoers missed out due to critical neglect and—dare I say?—laziness (which, in turn, encourages lazy movie watching). Chereau realizes that a deeper understanding of the human condition must be diligently pursued (we're still in the AIDS era, but that's not the only crisis he addresses). Most critics didn't accept the challenge of Son Frère, and many simply never bothered with it, despite Chereau's well-established credentials. When this happens, audiences lose out on a great movie, and Time Warner wins again.

Armond White

David Edelstein isSlate's film critic. Scott Foundas is a film critic for LA Weekly. Christopher Kelly is a film critic for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Wesley Morris is a film critic for the Boston Globe. A.O. Scott is a film critic for the New York Times. Charles Taylor is a film critic for Salon. Armond White is the film critic for the New York Press. Stephanie Zacharek is a film critic for Salon.

TODAY IN SLATE

Frame Game

Hard Knocks

I was hit by a teacher in an East Texas public school. It taught me nothing.

Republicans Like Scott Walker Are Building Campaigns Around Problems That Don’t Exist

Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You

If You’re Outraged by the NFL, Follow This Satirical Blowhard on Twitter

The Best Way to Organize Your Fridge

The World

Iran and the U.S. Are Allies

They’re just not ready to admit it yet.

Sports Nut

Giving Up on Goodell

How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.

Chief Justice John Roberts Says $1,000 Can’t Buy Influence in Congress. Looks Like He’s Wrong.

Farewell! Emily Bazelon on What She Will Miss About Slate.

  News & Politics
Foreigners
Sept. 16 2014 4:08 PM More Than Scottish Pride Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself. 
  Business
Moneybox
Sept. 16 2014 2:35 PM Germany’s Nationwide Ban on Uber Lasted All of Two Weeks
  Life
The Eye
Sept. 16 2014 12:20 PM These Outdoor Cat Shelters Have More Style Than the Average Home
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 15 2014 3:31 PM My Year As an Abortion Doula
  Slate Plus
Slate Plus Video
Sept. 16 2014 2:06 PM A Farewell From Emily Bazelon The former senior editor talks about her very first Slate pitch and says goodbye to the magazine.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 16 2014 1:27 PM The Veronica Mars Spinoff Is Just Amusing Enough to Keep Me Watching
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 16 2014 1:48 PM Why We Need a Federal Robotics Commission
  Health & Science
Science
Sept. 16 2014 4:09 PM It’s All Connected What links creativity, conspiracy theories, and delusions? A phenomenon called apophenia.
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 15 2014 9:05 PM Giving Up on Goodell How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.