I've been making an effort to see the movies that were the so-called "best pictures" of the year, according to, e.g. the Motion Picture Academy, the Foreign Press, etc. Let me recap:
Brokeback Mountain
Crash
Capote
Good Night and Good Luck
Munich
ok, I've only seen the first two, but these were recognized as the favorites. I've also seen a bunch of other movies from 2005. I want to compare some of these to the two films (Brokeback Mtn and Crash).
Brokeback Mountain is a good film. It's not a great film, it's not particularly well-directed, but it is competently so, and the acting is effective (Heath Ledger almost atones for the hideous remake of the Four Feathers). I'm judging on a more or less cerebral basis, because I really had limited emotional response to the movie; it left me rather cold. Nonetheless I recognize that on a level of craftsmanship it was a good effort.
This is a bit funny. What makes a good movie, anyway? The first judgement should be aesthetic: do you like the way the picture looks? Does it create emotional response? A good film often makes me gasp, or gives me an adrenaline rush. Secondly come more high-brow criteria: Is it realistic, interesting, thought-provoking? Does it raise interesting issues? Finally, there's a more technical side: are the shots complementary to the subject matter, or are they essentially random? Are the performances believable, if not moving? This takes a level of sophistication that I admittedly don't have. I recognize it when pointed out, but only occasionally spot it myself.
Like music, painting, sculpture, whatever, film tastes change with experience. Some things are considered puerile to people who have seen more films (for example, The Shaggy Dog). More often, though, those films should be dismissed not because they don't shape up to some elite group of films, but more because they were made with little or no care, with no inspiration, and really have nothing substantive to bring to the table. In short, they're boring.
Crash is boring when it isn't insulting. It's not hard to see just what Paul Haggis is getting at, but it is hard to see why anyone would care. Are we surprised or effected by the fact that a policeman helped a black woman who was about to die? This is supposed to be a commentary on racism around us, but what about this film reflects the real racism that exists in the world? Is there any parallel at all? Do well-spoken black men thoughtfully contemplate the state of violence in black culture just before carjacking a white couple (complete with a Hollywood wink right before committing the act)? What does this correspond to? At best it corresponds to Haggis' idea of racism---and who gives a damn what he thinks anyway? He isn't apparently in any position to comment. And god damn does Sandra Bullock suck.
I've seen two foreign films and two domestic (English-language) films that are so far-and-above either of these films that it makes me mental.
The best film I've seen from 2005 was Head On (in German and Turkish with English subtitles). It's deeply moving, beautiful (and not just because of the gorgeous Sibel Kekilli), depressing, and astonishing. Fatih Akin presents tasteful but also flashy and breathtaking images of sex, drug use, and attempted suicide. One also gets a healthy dose of Turkish and Turkish-diaspora culture. I wouldn't presume to summarize the plot.
Another exquisite film is The Beat that My Heart Skipped (French with English subtitles). Thomas is a mid-level thug in a small-time organized crime ring. Redemption offers itself up in the form of concert piano: his mother was a concert pianist and he played for years before falling in to his father's nefarious business. The performance by Romain Duris is impeccable, and as a study of someone trying to escape a life of violence and depravity, it's really engrossing.
Speaking of escaping your violent passed, A History of Violence is one of the better English-language films I've seen in the past few years. There's been enough said about this film. Let me just say that Viggo Mortenson gives as understated and perfect performance as I can conceive of.
Finally, I must mention a real delight that easily beats out Brokeback and Crash: In Her Shoes. Toni Collette and Cameron Diaz portray two sisters with a complicated and deep relationship, and both undergo traumatic life-changes as each tries to become more like the other.
I'm not sure when the Academy Awards became such a farce. The AFI Top 100 Films/Comedies of all time lists are similarly bunk. I know it has primarily to do with ignorance. Especially when it comes to foreign films, there just isn't enough exposure (and oddly enough, neither Head-on nor the Beat that My Heart Skipped was submitted as the Best Foreign Picture from its country). On the other hand, maybe the members are just fogeys with no perspective (Forrest Gump, anyone?).
