Since I am discovering my own style, and since you as readers are just getting to know my tastes in film, I thought it would be interesting to take a look back at my favorite and least favorite films of the last 5 years (2006-2010). I tend to be a man of extreme opinions. There are films that I despise so much that it makes my blood boil, yet there are films that are so astoundingly wonderful that I always want to come back for more. Sure there are plenty of films that lie somewhere in the middle of this range, but I find it more fun to talk about the extremes.
The following films are my personal favorites and least favorites. I am not attempting at this time to argue for the objectively best and worst films of the last 5 years. I judge all films primarily on two criteria. The first is the technical merits of a film: its writing, plot structure, character development, acting, direction, visual feel, etc. The second standard is a film's content: specifically its tone, subject, and message. Finally, I should mention that this is not an exhaustive list. There are a lot of films from the last 5 years that I still need to see and others that I need to re-evaluate. In fact, I'd be happy to take suggestions in the comments.
And so, let us begin a summary of my favorite and least favorite films from 2006-2010. ***Warning, light spoilers to follow...***
2006
This was an absolutely astonishing year for film. 5 movies moved me in such a fundamental way that they remain on my list of all-time favorites. Something very interesting also happened. There were an additional 5 movies I consider to be so good that I decided they deserve honorable mention here. I did not find the need for this in my lists for any other year. Another interesting thing happened. 3 of my all-time least favorite films came out this year as well. I suppose it was a polarizing year.
Favorite:
V for Vendetta - Upon leaving the theater, seeing this film for the first time, a friend of mine noted that I appeared to be in a daze and he asked if I was alright. I was in such a state because never before had a movie spoken to me and affected me more than this. Its content is brilliant, I loved the performances, the music, the visuals, and everything in-between. If I had to pick one film to be my all-time favorite ever (which is a difficult task, bear in mind), it would likely be this one.
Runners Up: Pan's Labyrinth, The Illusionist, The Fountain, Children of Men
Honorable Mention: The Prestige, Thank You For Smoking, The Holiday, The Pursuit of Happyness, Stranger Than Fiction
Least Favorite:
Idiocracy - Prior to a recent viewing of a 2009 film, this was at the top of my list of worst-all-time films. To its credit, this film has an interesting point to make. But it is made completely in the first 5 minutes. The film then proceeds to beat it over you for the next 80 minutes until you want to smash your head against the wall just to make the pain stop. It's a hard feat for a film to actually make me furious, but this did the job.
Runners Up: X-Men: The Last Stand, My Super Ex-Girlfriend (both this and Idiocracy starred Luke Wilson), Superman Returns
2007
Strangely enough, this year produced the weakest batch of favorite and least-favorite films in this 5 year period. But I suppose that is to be expected when compared to the polarizing 2006.
Favorite:
Hot Fuzz - One of the most unintentionally Objectivist films ever made, this parody of buddy-cop action films was not only extremely fun, it lambasted one of the worst philosophical principles ever devised: that your life is meaningless unless you are serving the greater good of some larger "entity" (society, your race, the State, God, etc).
Runners up: Juno, Superbad, Death Proof, Michael Clayton
Least Favorite:
Transformers - I have to admit to not having a really strong case for making this my least favorite film of 2007. There were a lot of generally bad films in this year, but none of them compare to the blood-pumping rage I felt after watching the worst films of 2006. Yes, Transformers was stupid, but there were aspects of it that were enjoyable. Ultimately I decided to list it as my least favorite film of 2007 because of how much better the film could have been. It focuses on annoying and insipid human characters while the Transformers are comic side-characters in their own movie.
Runners Up: Spiderman 3, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Live Free or Die Hard
2008
This was the year that comic book films found there ultimate expression. Even more to the point, both varieties of comic book film found their best representatives to date: the gritty, dark, realistic comic book film (The Dark Knight) and the more lighthearted all-American comic book film, (Iron Man). 2008 was also the year that the Coen brothers, two of the most talented filmmakers in Hollywood made one of their best films. Interestingly, it marked the last time they told the same basic story. Since then they have moved on to a different model, curiously, with mixed success (in my opinion).
Favorite:
The Dark Knight - This was another hard year to choose one ultimate favorite, but it has to be this. No other comic book movie has achieved the combination of philosophical depth with a mastery of intense action as this film has. In fact, that is true comparing it to all films, without the comic book qualifier. Simply one of the best films ever made.
Runners up: Iron Man, Cloverfield, Burn After Reading
Least Favorite:
Hancock - The premise of this film initially intrigued me: a superhero that was resentful of his supposed altruistic responsibility to save everyone but himself. Turns out that's not what the film is really about. It's true subject...is mind-numbingly stupid.
Runners Up: 10,000 BC, The Happening, Get Smart, The Mummy 3, Tropic Thunder (by the way, the screenwriter of this trash ruined Iron Man 2).
2009
While this had been an evolving trend in my film tastes for a few years, 2009 was the year that I truly began to dislike the vast majority of blockbuster films. In the past I could enjoy at least some element of most blockbuster films, even if they were simple popcorn movies. But at this point, most of my most-hated films were huge blockbusters that were very successful. On the positive side though, this year saw a challenger for the title of all-time favorite film, and it also produced several other great films as well.
Favorite:
Inglorious Basterds - "This might just be my masterpiece". This is Tarantino speaking to the audience through a main character at the end of his film. I am inclined to agree with him. While in parts it displays Tarantino's tendency to mash different styles and fail to edit out some extraneous scenes, on the whole the film exudes a raw energy that exemplifies his glorification of purposeful violence more than any other of his films to date. The dialogue and performance of the actors in this film just sticks with me. It's a violent eruption of rage not only against centuries of anti-Semitism, but from totalitarianism as well. While I think that V for Vendetta still stands out as my all-time favorite film, this might be a close second or third.
Runners Up: Sherlock Holmes, Adventureland, Zombieland, Up in the Air
Least Favorite:
Gamer - While my severe disappointment in the Star Trek reboot was ultimately a more crushing blow, this film simply cannot be ignored. It has taken the mantle of worst film of all time. It simply has to be seen to be believed. You will know in the first 5 minutes. Trust me. Nothing more need be said or experienced. It is currently streaming on Netflix. Watch a little bit of it if you are truly curious. I wouldn't recommend subjecting yourself to it in its entirety, unless you want to peer into a dark chasm of misery and disbelief that you will struggle to climb out of.
Runners Up: Star Trek, Watchmen, Avatar
2010
This was a year where my dissatisfaction with blockbuster movies reached the point that I just did not go see them. I am sure that a lot more movies would be on this list if I had, but I knew by now that the summer films would be a waste of my time. The films that I have seen from the summer, with one exception, were seen after the fact. There were two great films this year that also received much popular acclaim, and two that were less renown but were nevertheless excellent.
Favorite:
Inception - Christopher Nolan does it again. The perfect fusion of action and intellectual soul-searching. For a film to activate my intellect and my adrenaline at the same time and for the same reasons is an accomplishment. And the music, my god the music...
Runners up: Shutter Island, The Social Network, Edge of Darkness
Least Favorite:
Iron Man 2 - I really, really, really wish that this film was not on this list. But, it must be. While the first act was incredibly good and philosophically excellent, the rest of the film was utterly terrible. It was as though screenwriter Justin Theroux took the first act from another draft of the script and lobotomized the rest. The man has absolutely no sense of basic plot structure or character development. Throw in a 100% pointless sub-plot about War Machine, who was there only because I suppose it would look "cool" on the posters, and you get a terrible film.
Runners Up: Legion, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, and my shocker special...True Grit.
2011 bonus!
Favorite: Super 8
Runner up: Battle: Los Angeles
Least Favorite: Transformers 3
Runners Up: Thor, The Green Hornet
And there you have it. I'm happy to receive comments and for others to share their thoughts. I hope you enjoyed reading. Also, if you have any suggestions for movies that I missed, or if there are any films or TV shows you would like me to review, please let me know!
All I can say in this context, of course, is a matter of opinion. Actually, I tend not to draw a distinction between technical merits and my taste when judging a movie (though like you, I do judge a movie by the ideas it espouses, the difference being that I think I am inspired by more of a variety of messages).
ReplyDeleteThe Prestige is flat-out my favorite movie of 2006. While there is certainly a hegemonic message to it—that we are confused about reality not because it is unknowable but because we don’t really want to see it, a recurring theme in Christopher Nolan’s films—there are also many moments that offer problems if not messages, such as the difference between passion and obsession, about the strange way that obsessions can drive men away from women they love and once pursued intensely, and about the very-private nature of both cruelty and justice. (I also love it on account of my own failure to see the last 2 reveals coming.) I enjoyed V for Vendetta, but the most-succinctly I can put it is to say that I find its picture of a revolution to be too top-down to stir my soul. The Prestige is ultimately about 2 men—and about the lives they destroy while they are engaged in their private prestige battle.
I think Casino Royale and Letters from Iwo Jima (Clint Eastwood’s surprising shadowpiece to Flags of Our Fathers) should be counted among the great movies of this year.
If I were to go strictly on quality of craft—which neither of us are—I might have to say Children of Men is the best 2006 film I’m aware of.
2007 is actually a year in which I’d have a hard time picking a favorite film. I can certainly see why you’d pick Hot Fuzz (which strolled onto my own list of favorite films, sat down on the couch and asked “When’s diner?”), but I also loved No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood. I wouldn’t expect you to give such examples of Naturalism your movie-of-the-year title, but I found Michael Clayton to be the most-inspiring 2007 film I’ve seen. Hot Fuzz is a cautionary tale in which an exemplary defender of justice boldly declares his opposition to perfectionism enforced through violence. (It’s also frigging hilarious.) Michael Clayton is George Clooney playing his idiomatic role—as a middle-aged professional at the top of his craft who has a strange encounter that reveals the hollowness of his life—at its very best. Even Michael Clayton’s moments of anger are pitch-perfect and worth remembering.
I think you came up with precisely the right indictment of Transformers: The movie doesn’t have the imagination required to make the title beings central to the plot, and we are left following very unremarkable spectators.
Finally, I’d like to advance Breach, 300, Ratatouille, and American Gangster to this list. I also thought Zodiac was great, but it wasn’t my favorite film of 2007 and I don’t believe you’d put it even on an honorable-mention list. I think either Ratatouille or American Gangster should be a plausible candidate for your favorite 2007 film (though I could still understand an insistence on Hot Fuzz). Ratatouille is my favorite Disney movie, and everything that I think a fairy tale aimed at adults should be. It’s about a rat that adamantly denies that “Food is fuel,” and who thinks that the act of eating should be an art-experience and not about mere survival. It deals with this premise seriously and thoroughly. I think it’s beautiful. American Gangster, as I saw it, isn’t really about Frank Lucas but about the Newark narcotics detective who takes him down. Russell Crowe’s portrayal of Detective Richie Roberts as an uncorruptible hero in his professional life and an incorrigible mess in his personal life is fascinating to a subscriber to artistic Naturalism such as myself. (Incidentally, the film reportedly vastly understates Lucas’ vulgarity and viciousness—which may not be that surprising considering he is a drug dealer but still worth thinking about when seeing him do what he does.)
I have no reservations about calling The Dark Knight the best film of 2008. That was the moviegoing experience that convinced me that Christopher Nolan is the closest thing we have to a Greek tragic playwright in moviemaking—an artist who (at least in the case of Batman) uses a familiar story to give us a refined meditation on the dark drives that motivate a hero, as well as the level of austerity and purposive articulation that radical evil is capable of. Since July 2008 I have called Nolan “our common storyteller,“ and I remain both awed and grateful for his capacity to bring philosophical problems to our popular culture. (The creators of LOST and Battlestar Galactica deserve credit for this on the same level, though the messages they offer are more-various while Nolan tends to use his movies primarily as an opportunity to narrate an individual problem.) I’m shocked to remember now that more than 3 years ago I believed the gap between high culture and popular culture was unbridgeable, but that was lazy of me (and of the many people who put themselves squarely in either camp and think the 2 incommensurable). I owe it to Nolan for demonstrating that popularity and worthiness can be reconciled if one can find the right words. To put it differently, it’s like we have our own Richard Wagner—but he’s a good guy.
ReplyDeleteI couldn’t feel more-differently about Iron Man, which certainly isn’t the worst movie I saw in 2008, but which I found frustratingly disappointing. I actually view Iron Man and Iron Man 2 exactly the same way—as movies that open with interesting problems which imply that there is tragedy or injustice in the nature of the system…and then Tony Stark simply uses his genius to think up a (completely fanciful) solution. The irony about having a hero who is too convenient of a genius is that…there is nothing for the audience to think about. Even Roger Ebert lumped Iron Man together with The Dark Knight as a comic book movie that pushed the boundaries of what was possible for such movies; in the end, I think it (and its sequel) is really a bait-and-switch that resolves as neat and tidy as the simplest of those, and is more-indictable for pretending to grapple with “issues.”
I liked Hancock right up to the moment of the twist…at which point I felt...well, victimized, actually.
I really think you’re being hard on Tropic Thunder. I had every fear that it was going to be stupid at the opening scene, but they’re trying to drum-up anger at a lot of Hollywood clichés. I really think it’s a clever film masquerading as a stupid one. I think it works as a sly send-up of different varieties of Hollywood ego.
I’m kind of horrified by the number of 2008 films you’ve left out of your list, though it’s possible you just haven’t gotten around to some of the 2008 movies I’ve seen. I would advance Appaloosa, Body of Lies (like American Gangster a Ridley Scott movie), W. (You really should give Oliver Stone another chance, as I will readily attest that he is one of the last directors who should be judged by his worst movies), Changeling, Zack and Miri Make a Porno, Gran Torino, The Wrestler, and Defiance as movies that should at least get an honorable mention. Changeling and Gran Torino are both Clint Eastwood movies and among the clearest examples of his devotion to individualism; The Wrestler, I think is the most-sympathetic character Darren Aronofsky has yet made a movie about.
We had entirely-opposite appraisals of Inglourious Basterds. I still think Pulp Fiction is Quentin Tarantino’s masterpiece, as I think that film remains his best account of characters who, in spite of being criminals, discover their heart (or their honor). Its account of criminals experiencing a sort of character rebirth certainly offers a much more-hopeful picture of human potential than Reservoir Dogs, his excellent but bleak debut. In any case, Inglourious Basterds represents, as I see it, Tarantino’s complete turn away from the signature substance he had been developing in Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, and Kill Bill vol. 2 towards the style he has simply borrowed from someone else. Tarantino has become a very “memeish” director, with his movies offering homage to campy cult favorites that in themselves are kitsch and out-of-place in our contemporary pop culture. I sometimes feel that he is flaunting the fact that he simply copies the imagery of 1970s exploitation films that he likes and produces nothing original, rather than quietly and productively wrestling with that possibility the way I’d imagine a great artist would. Then of course there is the ridiculous turn history takes in that movie. I won’t go into spoilers, but I can say no more anyway than that I found it offensive for playing around with established facts of history in such a brazen manner, and for making a revenge fantasy (yes, even towards such monstrous people) central to what is supposed to be a work of art. I don’t like movies that I feel tug at my feelings while totally leaving my thoughts out of it.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me: I know you have Black Book, a 2006 Dutch film about the Holocaust in the Netherlands. Between Paul Verhoeven’s film ultraviolence and his subject matter in this case, I feel I should hold that up as a contrast to Inglorious Basterds in spite of how little they may seem to have in common.
I definitely agree about Sherlock Holmes and Up in the Air. Robert Downey Jr.’s Holmes and Jude Law’s Dr. Watson are probably the most-faithful film depictions we’ve had of those characters, and like a lot of good movies nowadays, it manages to say something about both late-Victorian Britain and the present without being inauthentic to either. On top of that, it manages to be fun. I went in to Sherlock Holmes with no faith that it would manage such a balancing act. Guy Ritchie has a very promising reimagining here.
I think you’ve done Zach Snyder an injustice in your judgment against Watchmen. I actually came out of the movie not quite liking it, but a few months later on a hunch I bought the comic and started reading it. I was stunned by the smooth faithfulness of the adaptation and now think that Zach Snyder has real talent at giving embodiment to other people’s stories. I think of Watchmen as an example of alternate history done right: How would the World be different if masked embodiments of American ideals of independence and tough justice walked the streets? We fall into cultural malaise anyway, and come closer to the brink of nuclear war. I also found Watchmen’s portrayal of a man who became omnipotent and who had perfect memory—that he would eventually drift out of the human condition and become indifferent to human problems—a similarly-directed satire of unbounded optimism.
For 2009 films The Soloist, Away We Go, The Hurt Locker, In the Loop, Paranormal Activity, The Informant!, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus all deserve mention. I know you don’t like Paranormal Activity, but I still see its unfailing strength as being its simplicity—in the temperaments represented by its characters and the basic problem of the intelligence and capabilities of the being they’re confronting. They really don’t know anything about it—but he wants to study it and defeat it, and she—having long experience with it—simply wants to live quietly with it as she has at almost all times of her life. In Micah’s arrogance we see a subtle satire of modern sensibilities—of the outsize sense of one’s self-sufficiency and freedom from the past.
ReplyDeleteFinally, I haven’t seen Gamer (fortunately, it seems), but Star Trek: FUBAR is the worst film of 2009, period. You know this.
I thought 2010 was a great year in film. Consider some of the other movies of last year that I saw: The Ghost Writer, Winter's Bone, Restrepo, The Last Exorcism, The American, The Town, The King's Speech, Black Swan, and Tron: Legacy.
Yes, I even thought the Tron sequel good-enough at least to warrant consideration. While I’d say it’s the least of the movies I’ve just listed in terms of its technical merits and significance, it won me over just on terms of its stunning visuals and the Daffpunk soundtrack. For what it’s worth, I went into this movie with the express purpose of riffing on it, and by the time Sam Flynn reached the Grid, it had made a believer out of me.
Restrepo is a great documentary about good American men dealing with the absurdities of modern war. The Ghost Writer immediately became one of my favorite Polanski films, and through a careful study of it aspiring film students should be able to make their own Polanski films someday. The Town convinced me that Ben Affleck can direct: In adapting a novel to a screenplay, he managed to balance the morally-shaded characters that novels (and good contemporary TV series) specialize in portraying along with the rising action of a good crime drama, and keep everything down to 2 hours even.
I’ve seen very few 2011 premieres so far. I loved Super 8 as much as you did, especially because it’s J.J. Abrams’ most “cryptobiographical” film and because it has a spectacular train wreck.
I can also recommend X-Men First Class and Midnight in Paris, the new Woody Allen film. I was very pleasantly surprised by X-Men First Class. Right now I consider it by far the most-serious of the movies in the X-Men franchise. Magnito steals the show, because Michael Fassbender manages to portray him as driven by the same fundamental motivation throughout, yet sympathetic as a victim of meaningless and impersonal violence. The way in which characters’ own idiosyncrasies and fears that will lead them to take sides on the question of whether to co-exist with normal humans is dealt with more-probingly here than elsewhere, and the fear humans have towards what mutants can do is more-palpable. Charles Xavier’s and Erik Lensherr’s refusal to deny either their friendship or their political differences is more-interesting with this origins story. Finally, there is this strange sense that the mass-murdering mutants who refuse to live with humans seem more sure of what they’re doing, while those mutants who simply want to coexist peacefully cannot fully articulate their values at this early stage. Finally, in Midnight in Paris Woody Allen manages a warm but properly-neurotic send-up of romanticism. This has a touch of whimsy that isn’t quite normal for a Woody Allen film, but I found the direction the story took to be upbeat, even stirring.
Anyway, this is just a list of suggestions for movies or merits you might want to consider or reconsider. I do think your list is extensive and consistently-justified.
I definitely agree with you on many accounts. Hot Fuzz and V for Vendetta I think are two of my all-time favorite movies. I think I screamed with laughter for the entire last 20 minutes of Hot Fuzz. And yeah, I really was not impressed with Avatar. A very pretty movie, but there was absolutely nothing in the way of character development or storyline. It would have made a good 20 minute 3-D ride with moving seats at Disneyland but that's about it.
ReplyDeleteWow, thank you for the long and meaningful response. Many of the films you mentioned that I left out of my list do deserve at least some mention, if not inclusion. Several of the films you mentioned didn't make my list solely because I had to draw some kind of line, otherwise this post would have turned into an analysis of every single film I had seen in the past 5 years. I only disagreed with a few of the prescriptions that you made, but most of those were on your opinion of films I had dismissed.
ReplyDeleteThe Prestige is certainly a fantastic film, and I imagine that my appreciation of it would increase significantly upon another viewing. You know, Casino Royale was originally on my list for 2006, but I removed it seeing how I already had 10 films listed for that year alone. I have not yet seen Letters from Iwo Jima (of Flags of Our Fathers for that matter), but I will add them to my list.
Having just viewed V for Vendetta again last night, I can make a few comments on it. I did notice that the film utilizes quite a significant amount of character exposition over subtle, between the lines character development. The whole film is filled to the brim with expository statements. I think that this ties into your misgivings about the revolution being far too top-down. Indeed, we do not really see the natural evolution of a revolutionary spirit consuming the country. We are told it is happening after V tells people it should happen. I am thinking about how to reconcile that with its status as my all-time favorite film. Even though I was thinking about this throughout my viewing, it still affected me emotionally more than any other film ever has. The scene where Evey walks out into the rain still stirs a sublimity that no other film has ever come close to matching. I think at this point I would be forced to admit that there are other films more technically sound than this one, but again, I am not judging on that basis alone.
I too had a hard time picking a favorite film of 2007 (and even a least favorite). It was a quite average year. I do need to re-watch No Country for Old Men in order to properly assess it. I would currently categorize it as ranked 5th on my list of the Coen brothers' films. Despite its technical merits, I think the philosophical message of There Will Be Blood was so fundamentally repulsive to me that I could not get over its stench. Naturally it would be hard for me to love a film which tells us that the monsters of capitalism and religion need to move aside for something else (implicitly, socialism). I remember being extremely impressed with Michael Clayton, but it too is a film that I need to watch again soon. I have not seen Breach or Zodiac, but I have seen the other films of 2007 that you recommended. While I liked Ratatouille, it paled in comparison to my favorite Disney film, The Incredibles. If you have seen it, it should be rather obvious why it is my favorite. If you have not, well, I will not spoil it other than to suggest its Objectivist underpinnings are far more striking than even Hot Fuzz. I did see American Gangster in theaters, and I remember not being particularly impressed with it precisely because of its Naturalistic tone. However, given that I have come to appreciate the technical merits of Naturalistic films more and more, that assessment could change. I enjoyed 300 for its call to arms against Islamic fundamentalism, but I disliked the film for the same reason. It plucked a story from history, completely ignored every important fact and detail, and then Americanized its characters. It would be like watching a film where the leaders of the communist revolution in Soviet Russia espoused principles of capitalism and individualism.
I really like what you said about Christopher Nolan's status as a filmmaker, and what you said about The Dark Knight. I will keep quiet on the subject for now, because an analysis of that film is on my short-list for upcoming blog posts. Adding to your analysis of its underpinnings in Greek tragedy (which I agree with), I intend to submit that the film flirts with a refutation of Hobbes.
ReplyDeleteAs for your objection to Iron Man, I would simply submit that they are definitely two different kinds of films, which I believe both serve a purpose. Sometimes it is important for a film to present a moral problem on a large scale that does not have an easy answer, and indeed, the suspense that the film creates lies in how an attempt at such an answer will be obtained. In the Dark Knight, The Joker presents Batman with the moral position that pulling the right strings will cause human beings to revert to their base human nature and cave in on each other. How Batman can prevent that from happening, and whether or not The Joker's premise is true, provides a complex and interesting moral quandary. But Iron Man does not pose a larger question about human nature or moral predicaments on a societal scale. Rather, it deals with the rectification of an injustice done to one's own moral principles and how to resolve it. Tony Stark discovered that his moral principle (that his company's weapons serve the national defense of only moral nations) had been betrayed without his knowledge. You can rightly argue that it is an interesting and complex moral question to determine on what basis someone can judge who deserves to benefit from Stark's weapons and why. But that is not what the film is about. It's about the rectification of an injustice against his chosen moral principle. That Stark rectifies the injustice with a vigor, ease, and lack of mercy is a testament to the exercise of integrity that a man should have. I relished in the story of a man who discovered that his own inadequacies and lack of attention to the integrity of his moral principles and then decided to take it upon himself to correct his error. And then, when given the opportunity to hide his error and its correction, he owned up to it personally.
Feeling victimized...that is an excellent way to describe the experience of watching Hancock. As for the films I left out of my 2008 list, again I was trying to keep my list as small as possible. I could understand including at least some of those films you mentioned to the list. I found Changeling to be good but it had some basic plot structure problems. Zack and Miri Make a Porno I still consider to be one of the best romantic comedies ever made, and would likely be my top choice to be added to the 2008 list. The Wrestler would be my second choice. While I liked Gran Torino stylistically, the climax of the film revolted me, for obvious reasons. Defiance I found to be far too derivative of other, better films. I have not yet seen Appaloosa, Body of Lies, or W. I will readily admit, as I have before, that Oliver Stone is good at creating a fiction story. It is when that fiction is applied to real life stories, which many of his films are, that I begin to suspect his intent to rewrite history upon a liberal narrative. That is why I have no interest in watching W.
Given what I just said about 300 and W., it is certainly interesting that I will now offer a defense of Inglorious Basterds. I will agree that Tarantino seems to now delight in borrowing heavily from his favorite film genres and that they can seem out of place in our current context. I think, however, that's one reason why I like his movies so much. They serve as such a stark contrast to what we tend to get in most movies made right now that I am naturally drawn to them. The way that Tarantino's characters in Basterds interact just had me drawn to every word. As for the flaunting of history, it simply did not bother me. I thought the film established rather well from the beginning that it existed in some kind of alternate reality. The notion of an American force deep behind enemy lines with the task of fighting a guerilla war against Nazis was so historically jarring that I expected anything could happen.
ReplyDeleteAs for Black Book...you know, I never watched it. I had it from Netflix for quite some time, but I just, for some really strange reason, never got to watching it. It just became one of those things mystifyingly impossible to explain. Yes, I was shocked at how faithful Sherlock Holmes was to the source material, particularly given how the trailers for the film gave it a far, far different tone.
As for Watchmen, I never argued that the film was poor because it was not faithful to the source material. I had heard, and believed, that it was almost a shot-for-shot faithful adaptation of the graphic novel. That, I believe, was precisely the problem. Traditional film structure exists for pretty good reasons - they are not the arbitrary and socially meaningless constructs of music in the Baroque era. The pacing of the story of Watchmen just went off on too many tangents, was too disjointed, and had a pacing that felt jarring in a film setting. While I can agree with you about some of the characters (Dr. Manhattan being the best example), I found the philosophical climax of the film to be astoundingly stupid. I would have to give it another viewing in fairness, but I am not sure that my mind would be changed that significantly.
I am slightly annoyed at myself for forgetting Away We Go for my list of 2009 films. In fact that is a great film. I actually considered putting The Hurt Locker on my list of least favorite films of the year, surprisingly. The movie isn't about anything in particular--it is a slice of life. I just don't find that journalistic approaching to filmmaking all that compelling, or lasting. I have not yet seen The Soloist, In the Loop, or The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.
I completely understand and share the depth of your hatred for Star Trek: Fubar. Gamer was worse. It really was. Kate remarked that it made her feel sick. Personally, I think I almost lost my sanity watching that film. While the writing of Star Trek is mind-numbingly stupid, at least it looks good. The direction and visual representation of the universe matches the adventure and romanticism of the world being presented to us. The visual world of Gamer made me want to claw my eyes out as an act of mercy.
The only films of 2010 I saw from your list were The American, Black Swan, and Tron: Legacy. I was incredibly bored by The American, but in fairness I was rather tired and struggling to stay awake throughout the film. I had a bad theater experience watching Black Swan - a lot of people talking and a lot of distractions. I was also very, very close to the screen, which made Aronofsky's style of placing the camera extremely close to its characters extremely jarring for me. It hurt my eyes and I was having a very hard time focusing. While I do agree that the visuals and music of Tron: Legacy were stunning (and I did enjoy the film for that reason), the writing was lacking and failed to inspire anything in me.
Finally, 2011: I was incredibly disappointed by X-Men: First Class, perhaps because of how much it had been built up to be a great film. It was certainly better than any previous offering in the franchise, and there were moments in the film that had me on the edge of my seat in excitement, but ultimately it failed to live up to its potential. Interestingly, I had precisely the same objections to it as I had to Thor. Not surprisingly, both films were written by the same people. I did not buy Eric's turn to the "dark side" in the slightest bit. There was no moment where I could understand why he would turn from the progress he was making with Xavier. He simply told the villain that he agreed with his conclusions about humanity, and that was that. Just like in Thor, the writers had an outline in mind for a character arc. They plugged in the main bullet points, but forgot to include links from one to the other. And I have to disagree with your statement about the villains' articulation of their motivations. We had absolutely no idea why they wanted to kill all of humanity. They just wanted to because obviously that makes them villains. The beginning of the film set such high expectations for me in Kevin Bacon's character, only to see them fall tremendously when he remains a cliched super villain that doesn't have any interesting perspective to offer on his choices.
ReplyDeleteAnd that brings me to the end of my response. Thank you for all of your suggestions for additions. This was good.