Before reviewing Dardennes brothers' "The Son", I needed to check the trailer. The reason was simple: did they reveal why the character of Olivier (Olivier Gourmet) was so intrigued and focused on the kid? They didn't. And the trailer only shows a scene with his ex-wife asking if the boy is the "one" then bursting out of anger and fainting. The mysterious kid asks if there's need for help, Olivier tells him to stay away. The only bits of dialogue heard are "it's him" and "why do you do that?".
So the surprise must come from the film. And if I could encourage someone to watch it without spoiling anything, I would say this is a movie about an ordinary man, a carpentry teacher in rehab school, who seems obsessed by a kid who comes from a juvenile detention center. He peeps over him for the first ten minutes and then decides to take him for his courses. The man is divorced and his ex-wife announces her remarriage and pregnancy. He doesn't take it in all stride but his reaction shows a mix of anger and resignation that don't strike us as odd. The film deals with the interaction between Olivier and Francis, a teenager who looks lost and tacitly looking for help.
That's the situation. Now, what do you make of a title like "The Son"? We've seen enough movies to anticipate that Francis is Olivier's hidden son. The Dardennes brothers are straight shooters and never use symbolical titles... or it's got to be about a father-and-son relationship, with a wound from the past and some potential catharsis emerging from this relationship. Or is there something darker or more poignant in that "secret"? Viewers aren't given much time to endure the suspense as the revelation comes early, adding even more thrills to drama, like in a Cassavetes' film. And it works.
After the success of "The Promise" and "Rosetta" (Golden Palm winner), the Dardennes decided to dedicate their next feature film to their fetish actor Olivier Gourmet. Like Gérard Jugnot for French Cinema, this actor looks so exceptionally banal he can be believable in any movie exploiting the reality of Belgian society in general and humanity as a whole. I believed the man was a carpenter all his life, I believed every word from him and I couldn't believe he was capable to do anything harmful or bizarre if it wasn't uncalled for. And that impression is crucial to appreciate the film because we're put in a situation that will call for a confrontation, sooner or later, the mystery is all in the "when" and "how" it will happen.
As Gourmet said, you can play many expressions or feelings except for "I don't know?". He was constantly asked to be neutral, not to let any obvious emotions slip because his psychological journey was tough enough and his relationship with Francis (Morgan Marinne) so awkward it didn't need to be overplayed. The angle taken by Gourmet shows how much of an acting genius he is and how truly deserved the award at Cannes Festival was. Gourmet didn't play "I don't know", but played a man driven by contradictory forces, a compulsory instinct and something pushing him back, revealing how rational and truly human he was. At parts, he avidly stares at Morgan when he's not looking and gets immediately neutral when they make eye contact.
And you have the Dardennes' camera following the man through the school's narrow corridors, the kitchen, the offices, the car, making the two leads closer then further then closer again. We all know it will lead to a resolution, if not a solution, but again with the Dardennes, the journey matters more than the destination and the ending has every merit including the most important one: to be satisfactory, conclusive and believable. And it truly consecrates the talent of Gourmet as one of the greatest and most underrated actors of French-speaking Cinema and the perfect foil for the Dardennes, ever since their first collaboration in "The Premise" where he played a flawed father. Interestingly, that film was about a kid trying to get off his father's bad influence, while "The Son" leads to a reunion.
And I remember my initial reactions with the Dardennes, I naively thought they were only taking the camera and followed the actors like in a documentary. But "The Son" is full of master-shots and close-ups, many were made multiple times at different paces to play safe as the Dardennes clearly didn't want to miss their first film with Gourmet as the lead (notice that the character was named Olivier so they could think of him even in the preparation phase). Reciprocally, Gourmet couldn't ignore the Dardennes' camera either. It might look like cinema-vérité but the actors know where the camera is placed, Gourmet can make a gesture that shows good acting but that goes unnoticed by the camera and then the effect is lost. A "Dardennes" was the last movie I expected someone to point out the necessity to remember there's a camera behind.
I mentioned Cassavetes before, his movies felt improvised but they were not, he let his own truth implode in front of the camera but never forgot it started with an eye watching you, even Bergman never forgot that pact with the camera. And that's the essence of the Dardennes' talent as well, they don't tell, they show, they use acting and interacting as the vehicle of their plot, everything is left to our attentive eyes, it's all in way we see them... and even the climactic resolution is all visual.
You can be a Nolan, a Spielberg or a Chazelle, but the minimalist talent the Dardennes showcase might be even more difficult to reach, because without budget, special effects and marketing, you can't take any chances, you only have the truth to hang on and that has no price.
So the surprise must come from the film. And if I could encourage someone to watch it without spoiling anything, I would say this is a movie about an ordinary man, a carpentry teacher in rehab school, who seems obsessed by a kid who comes from a juvenile detention center. He peeps over him for the first ten minutes and then decides to take him for his courses. The man is divorced and his ex-wife announces her remarriage and pregnancy. He doesn't take it in all stride but his reaction shows a mix of anger and resignation that don't strike us as odd. The film deals with the interaction between Olivier and Francis, a teenager who looks lost and tacitly looking for help.
That's the situation. Now, what do you make of a title like "The Son"? We've seen enough movies to anticipate that Francis is Olivier's hidden son. The Dardennes brothers are straight shooters and never use symbolical titles... or it's got to be about a father-and-son relationship, with a wound from the past and some potential catharsis emerging from this relationship. Or is there something darker or more poignant in that "secret"? Viewers aren't given much time to endure the suspense as the revelation comes early, adding even more thrills to drama, like in a Cassavetes' film. And it works.
After the success of "The Promise" and "Rosetta" (Golden Palm winner), the Dardennes decided to dedicate their next feature film to their fetish actor Olivier Gourmet. Like Gérard Jugnot for French Cinema, this actor looks so exceptionally banal he can be believable in any movie exploiting the reality of Belgian society in general and humanity as a whole. I believed the man was a carpenter all his life, I believed every word from him and I couldn't believe he was capable to do anything harmful or bizarre if it wasn't uncalled for. And that impression is crucial to appreciate the film because we're put in a situation that will call for a confrontation, sooner or later, the mystery is all in the "when" and "how" it will happen.
As Gourmet said, you can play many expressions or feelings except for "I don't know?". He was constantly asked to be neutral, not to let any obvious emotions slip because his psychological journey was tough enough and his relationship with Francis (Morgan Marinne) so awkward it didn't need to be overplayed. The angle taken by Gourmet shows how much of an acting genius he is and how truly deserved the award at Cannes Festival was. Gourmet didn't play "I don't know", but played a man driven by contradictory forces, a compulsory instinct and something pushing him back, revealing how rational and truly human he was. At parts, he avidly stares at Morgan when he's not looking and gets immediately neutral when they make eye contact.
And you have the Dardennes' camera following the man through the school's narrow corridors, the kitchen, the offices, the car, making the two leads closer then further then closer again. We all know it will lead to a resolution, if not a solution, but again with the Dardennes, the journey matters more than the destination and the ending has every merit including the most important one: to be satisfactory, conclusive and believable. And it truly consecrates the talent of Gourmet as one of the greatest and most underrated actors of French-speaking Cinema and the perfect foil for the Dardennes, ever since their first collaboration in "The Premise" where he played a flawed father. Interestingly, that film was about a kid trying to get off his father's bad influence, while "The Son" leads to a reunion.
And I remember my initial reactions with the Dardennes, I naively thought they were only taking the camera and followed the actors like in a documentary. But "The Son" is full of master-shots and close-ups, many were made multiple times at different paces to play safe as the Dardennes clearly didn't want to miss their first film with Gourmet as the lead (notice that the character was named Olivier so they could think of him even in the preparation phase). Reciprocally, Gourmet couldn't ignore the Dardennes' camera either. It might look like cinema-vérité but the actors know where the camera is placed, Gourmet can make a gesture that shows good acting but that goes unnoticed by the camera and then the effect is lost. A "Dardennes" was the last movie I expected someone to point out the necessity to remember there's a camera behind.
I mentioned Cassavetes before, his movies felt improvised but they were not, he let his own truth implode in front of the camera but never forgot it started with an eye watching you, even Bergman never forgot that pact with the camera. And that's the essence of the Dardennes' talent as well, they don't tell, they show, they use acting and interacting as the vehicle of their plot, everything is left to our attentive eyes, it's all in way we see them... and even the climactic resolution is all visual.
You can be a Nolan, a Spielberg or a Chazelle, but the minimalist talent the Dardennes showcase might be even more difficult to reach, because without budget, special effects and marketing, you can't take any chances, you only have the truth to hang on and that has no price.