|
I find it a bit depressing that my list this year is largely made up of films that released after September. In the past, my compilations have included quite a few number of films from every season, but this year, only two movies from February and March represented the earlier part of the year. Indeed, throughout most of this year until the end of summer, I was sure that this was one of the worst years in film I was subjected to. More crap was being spoon fed to the public, and they were lapping it up greedily (not pleasant imagery, I know). I was hard-pressed to give any movie an excellent rating; I feigned fake enthusiasm over Road to Perdition and Frailty because there was nothing else out there to praise. Unfortunately, audiences decided to support the big budget films like Goldmember, Scooby Doo, and xXx this year (decidedly lackluster in what they had to offer).
The winter and spring seasons weren’t too bad. Great movies like Monsoon Wedding and Insomnia received some mild attention, while stuff like Changing Lanes and Frailty proved to be critical successes as well. But the fact still remains that I had endure through a lot of crap to finally make to the good stuff; and this is depressing because it looks like the same thing will happen next year. Studios are very much influenced by the idea that Oscar members suffer from first-half of the year amnesia (somewhat true), and thus wait until the last possible minute to release their precious contenders in limited release. I certainly hope this trend stops – I look back at my top ten lists over the years and see that most films were released in December. Last year’s number one film In the Bedroom was released late November in limited release (I didn’t see it until January of 2002), while the 2000 martial arts masterpiece Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was another December product. I pray that this year works out better, otherwise I’ll stay home catching up on classics that I really should have seen by now.
As everyone already knows, Spider-Man was the biggest hit of the year, racking up more than $400 million domestically. As of writing this, the second Lord of the Rings film has a good chance of coming in a close second beating Star Wars: Episode Two, but has no chance of upsetting the webslinger’s record. I rather liked the movie, but it was sad to see that Minority Report, an infinitely better film, didn’t even take half of Spider-Man’s gross because audiences had to actually sit back and think about what was being projected. But not all blockbusters were undeserving of their financial success; Signs proved to be an intelligent and perceptive summer film that defied conventions and still racked up a lot of big bucks. Otherwise though, the summer season failed to deliver anything else truly special. Let’s please, for the sake of my own sanity, forget about My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
Then came the fall and winter seasons. Everything changed completely, especially in December, when it seemed like there were three and a half and four star films everywhere. My list kept changing drastically each time I would come home from a screening, and I would be hard-pressed to modify because there were so many films to praise.
So, I guess I’ll just go straight to the top ten now. It was very difficult to come to this final compilation, only because I would hate to throw off a film when something new came in to replace it. Don’t take the order too seriously. Anyways, I really only think the number one position is the most important; just because something is at #2 doesn’t mean it’s any less than #10 in my eyes (reviews can change over time and with repeated viewings). So, here it is…
Runner Ups
Insomnia (dir: Christopher Nolan) à This sleek remake of the 1997 Norweigan thriller is a terrific little piece, with some great over-the-top acting by Al Pacino. Nolan may not have achieved the level with this one as he did with Memento, but it’s a strong picture that is very underrated in all areas of production.
Devdas (dir: Sanjay Leela Bhansali) à The most expensive Hindi film ever made is an experiment simply drenched in melodrama and layers of glittery confetti. If you’re expecting subtlety, you might as well skip this one. But it’s also unafraid of its loud emotions, and that’s exactly what makes it such a fulfilling experience. Think Moulin Rouge was the over-the-top musical you’ve ever seen? Wait till you’ve feasted your eyes on this one.
About Schmidt (dir: Alexander Payne)à It’s painful to see Mr. Schmidt all the way down here, but some minor problems with pacing and writing made me drop it in favour of some other great films. Jack Nicholson sets a new standard with his
unglamorous performance, moving us to tears by the end of his existential journey in search of identity and what it means to be alive.
Igby Goes Down (dir: Burr Steers) à We’ve been reminded for years that J.D. Salinger will never sell rights to his beloved Catcher in the Rye, but with Burr Steer’s sharply written comedy, this is as close as we’ll ever get. Kieran Culkin plays to perfection the whiny rich kid Igby who is abused by nearly every authoritative figure in his life. Supporting him is a terrific cast with players like Susan Sarandon, Claire Danes, Bill Pullman, Amanda Peet and Jeff Goldblum.
Signs (dir: M. Night Shyamalan) Ã Horror is tough to do. So many filmmakers have resorted to slapping a mask on a serial killer, and then proceeding to kill off every member of a group of no-name teen characters that you never really cared about in the first place. So Signs is a welcome addition to the few scary stories done very well, but what sets it apart is that it has a heart. It came very close to making my list.
Catch Me If You Can and Minority Report (dir: Steven Spielberg) à It’s a shame that Spielberg’s movies have recently taken up a self-congratulatory attitude, because he could have had two potentially brilliant films this year. However, as we all know now, he simply doesn’t know when to end his movies properly, or when relieve (and therefore respect) his audiences. This seems too smug for my liking; these two films, with a little bit of editing, could have been great. As it stands, they are definitely good, but bloated beyond belief.
Honourable Mention : Bowling for Columbine (dir: Michael Moore)
During the fall, Michael Moore’s perceptive study of gun and fear culture in the United States created quite the controversy. Screened during the Toronto Film Festival, it won many accolades, and as it slowly expanded into wider release, it played to packed screenings, eventually becoming the highest grossing documentary of all-time. It’s a shoo-in for numerous awards during the winter I’d say; documentaries are well-regarded, but never has one played to such a wide audiences – even I can say that this is the first time I’ve included one on a top ten list of films. Although it is very much a documentary at its core, I feel that Columbine takes a very similar structure to a film, especially so in the final sequence that may very well be called “the climax†(ominous music). The study takes us through the history of America, and the instillation of fear within the public. Moore interviews victims of the Columbine High School massacre, talks to gun-wielding maniacs and even includes a hilarious cartoon (easily the highlight) about European colonization. Mostly, he is successful in arguing his thesis, and this is made all the more engaging because of his dark sense of humour that had me laughing and cringing both at the same time. Sometimes though, he just doesn’t play fair, presenting some of the people as complete dimwits (could be true) and being extremely one-sided. Indeed, not all critics were warm to this project – I even read a one-star review, complaining about this very problem. For me, I didn’t think this actively hurt the film to such a negative extent, and although Moore plays to one side, he is very persuasive. There is a lot of passion behind this study, and this is very visible through his research and effort in examining this current issue. Even though he takes some arguments too far and some just don’t work, Columbine is easily the most interesting and entertaining documentary I have ever seen. I’m quite excited to see what he does next.
10. Frida (dir: Julie Taymor) and Talk to Her (dir: Pedro Almodovar)
I’m not usually this indecisive when compiling a list, but I really couldn’t make up my mind in the end. To be honest, Frida wasn’t a great film by a long shot, but on the other hand, it was made with special care and passion by Salma Hayek (who acts as the artist and also produced the film) and director Julie Taymor. Every film is like a lens into one of Kahlo’s gorgeous, twisted paintings, and it is this creative style that really makes the film develop past the conventions of a made for television melodrama. Hayek doesn’t have a terrific grasp on Kahlo, but she is more than adequate in the role, and is supported by Alfred Molina as Diego Rivera, who steals the film. Every frame is packed with so much detail and colour, that the film can function simply as eye candy and still succeed admirably. On the other hand, Pedro Almodovar’s Spanish import Talk to Her is a dark, bizarre and extremely strange little experiment that completely rubbed me the wrong way after the credits rolled. I admired Almodovar for his effort, but I decidedly concluded that it was a failure. But the film stayed in my mind, and I started remembering it at the strangest times; truthfully, it grew on me even without a second viewing. It grew on me so much that it had to be included here. I won’t even try to explain it (it’s quite impossible), suffice it to say the following: coma, bull, tears, rape, lunacy, death, prison, suicide, friend, and two pairs of sunglasses.
9. Monsoon Wedding (dir: Mira Nair)
Mira Nair’s Monsoon Wedding, which won the Golden Lion from the Venice Film Festival about a year or so ago, could be seen as nothing special. Indeed, films about family weddings are hardly considered experimental fare in India (believe me). When I first saw the film on a pirate disc two years ago, I wasn’t all that impressed. What Nair was trying to do wasn’t new, nor was it very impressive filmmaking, and I was puzzled by all the great critical assessments. What I completely missed though, was that she wasn’t attempting to do something new with this material. Wedding, at its heart, is a love letter to the city of Bombay, and Nair’s great love for the people and history really shines through every frame of this triumphant musical drama. In spite of its overcrowded state and poverty, she still makes the city look alive and beautiful in its energy and huge communities. Whether it’s an exercise in family life voyeurism or capturing the drenching monsoon pour over the parched earth, this is an invigorating film that is undeniably fresh in its approach.
8. Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki)
Now, this is not really a comedy, but I was shaking in laughter at pretty much every frame of this wacky and twisted fairy tale. Never are you likely to see such a bizarre assortment of creatures anywhere – there are mutated crazy ducks, rolling grunting heads, and a giant baby that demands attention… or else. Imported from Japan where it is today the highest grossing film ever, Spirited Away arrives in North America in an English dub, but don’t let this deter you from seeing it (I’m pretty sure the inevitable DVD will contain both Japanese and English tracks). Miyazaki, who is considered a god in his country, has always made great films (Princess Mononoke and My Neighbor Toturro), but this may be his most accomplished film. It is evident that much effort has been undertaken bringing this strange world to life (he painstakingly hand draws every frame of his movies). The result is quite magnificent; an insane hybrid of Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz that will amaze you with its visual scope and unforgettable characters.
7. The Pianist (dir: Roman Polanski)
I can’t remember a time when I’ve felt so uncomfortable watching a film as this one. Seriously, I crossed my legs, twisted my knees, looked at my hands, and some other things to avoid looking at the screen. Why? Because The Pianist is so disturbing, so terrifying, that I was unable to think about anything else for the next few days. It may be a bit daunting to see another Holocaust film (for many, Schindler’s List is the definitive film on this time in history). But Polanski has made an even better film than Spielberg’s opus, one that crawls underneath your skin and puts you in the terrifying situations that these innocent victims faced. By avoiding any shred of sentimentality or melodrama, The Pianist is so straightforward and honest that you’ll be convinced you’re seeing the actual atrocities taking place on screen in front of you. And that’s why I couldn’t settle down at all. I cringed. I shut my eyes. I turned my head. And I cried. This coming from one who declares himself immune to any disturbing content in movies. There are no violins in the background. No sweeping camera shots. Only matter of factly scenes played out as they had been years ago in real life. A senior is thrown out the window of his house. A woman is shot quickly in the head for asking a simple question. A child is beaten to death on camera as he is trying to re-enter the ghetto through a hole under the wall. You’ll be convinced that you’re watching this actually happen. And never has the Holocaust been put in better context for me personally. I had to be there every moment, and place myself in the characters’ positions. It’s a devastating movie experience, one that will likely disturb even those who have a strong stomach. While Polanski must be acknowledged for his work, credit must go to Adrien Brody, who is on screen pretty much every scene of the film. To create the gaunt look for his sick and starving character, he lost twenty pounds in a matter of weeks, denying himself food and restricting his time to practicing the piano. I loved this film for its honesty and courage, but in the tradition of Requiem for a Dream, I don’t think I ever want to see it again.
6. Chicago (dir: Rob Marshall)
I’m not usually a fan of musicals. Sure, Baz Luhrmann’s Moulin Rouge made it into my top ten of last year, but it was a new take on the genre, and was not rooted in Broadway origins. David Fosse’s stage musical, which I have admittedly never seen, seemed like more of the same in static convention. The movie version, however, defies the constrictions of the theater, and is the most fun you’ll spend watching a film this season. Rob Marshall, in his directorial debut, has very deftly created a classy yet sinister tale filled with memorable characters that stay with you long after the credits have rolled. Renee Zellwegger plays Roxie Hart, full of delusions of grandeur, and is determined to one day perform on the stage, just like her murderer mentor Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones). And she, does – in her vivid imagination, in which most of the film is based. When she is jailed for offing her boyfriend who informs her she won’t make it in showbiz, she lobbies for the attention of go-getter lawyer Billy Flynn (Richard Gere), who’s never lost a case. What then unfolds is a struggle for consideration between her and Velma for Billy and the rest of Chicago, who will determine their fate in the courtroom. As one would expect from a cast of this caliber, Zellwegger and Gere deliver the goods, but it’s Catherine Zeta-Jones and Queen Latifah who steal the show with their terrific dance numbers, “All That Jazz†and “When You’re Good to Mamaâ€, respectively. This is the best stage to screen musical adaptation you’re ever likely to see, and the best representation of the energy and passion of a live Broadway show.
5. Punch Drunk Love (dir: Paul Thomas Anderson)
Paul Thomas Anderson never really did it for me. I only moderately enjoyed Boogie Nights, and pretty much detested the overblown three hour, self-indulgent Magnolia. This history, coupled with the fact that Adam Sandler was to play the lead, made the prospect of sitting through Punch Drunk Love unpleasant. Imagine my surprise when I found his newest film to be one and a half hours less than its predecessors, and even more impressive than both of them put together. Love is difficult to categorize; at its core, I personally think it’s a romantic comedy, but definitely not in the tradition of Pretty Woman. Some have been off put by Anderson’s pacing and Sandler’s low-key portrayal, but I think these are to be highly praised, along with the screenplay. True, Love is a demanding film; it’s not an out and out comedy, nor does it fall to convention. But it’s a rewarding experience, a love story that actually rings true and moves beyond the Hollywood-ized manipulation in representing what this connection means. Adam Sandler is a revelation. He carries the film, which is not surprising, as every other character is sorely underwritten (the film’s one flaw). Still, Emily Watson has never looked so beautiful or been so charming as the love interest; she moves beyond the expected portrayal. But for me, the best performance comes from Phillip Seymour Hoffman, who has barely five or six minutes of screen time (it’s really an extended cameo of sorts). The telephone match between his character and Adam Sandler’s Barry is possibly the best scene in the film (which the trailer actually ruins – avoid it). Hoffman is just hilarious, especially in this particular scene; he shifts from complete shock to anger, then from indignation to intimidation. While he only appears sporadically through the movie, he proves to dominate attention whenever he shows up on screen.
4. Far From Heaven (dir: Todd Haynes)
Remakes are one thing. Recreations are another. Todd Haynes’ film is neither of these. Called by many the film Douglas Sirk never made, Haynes takes what was merely hinted at in All That Heaven Allows, and brings them to light, juxtaposed against the golden age backdrop. Julianne Moore gives a winning portrayal of a contented housewife who suddenly finds she is falling for her black gardener (Dennis Haysbert) while her husband (a strong Dennis Quaid) satisfies his sexual desires elsewhere. Yet it is important to note that not once does Haynes resort to caricature (as in 1998’s Pleasantville). That is not the point here. Watching this movie, I was reminded of how little society has changed since the 1950s. We may think we have succeeded in combating racism, or that we are all accepting of gays and lesbians, but this is a sad delusion.
Haynes shows how these biases and fears are still operating in subtle ways; they may not be as overt as in the film, but they are always there. Far From Heaven was an easy experiment to ruin in so many ways. But these characters are real; we never laugh at them, or think them inferior to our world today. But this is not where the genius of this masterpiece (ugh, there’s that word) ends – Haynes’ direction emulates the films of that time, when melodrama was expected and the score overpowered the emotions. But he finds the beauty and validity within that structure, and this is why Far From Heaven moves beyond the arena of simple recreation and plagiarizing. Beyond Moore’s excellent performance (how she evaded the trappings of stereotype and caricature, I don’t know. It’s her best work, but then, this isn’t surprising) and the support by Quaid and Haysbert, Patricia Clarkson steals the ten minutes she is on screen as the best friend of Cathy Whitaker. It’s really a thankless part, but what this actress does with the little screen time she has is quite astonishing.
3. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (dir: Peter Jackson)
I’m afraid to admit that it took two viewings of the second chapter in the fantasy trilogy to fully appreciate Peter Jackson’s grand mastership over his medium. In comparison to the excellent first showing, I walked out the first time satisfied, but undeniably disappointed. What I had just watched was no doubt brilliant spectacle, but it was also - to me - unfocused, long, and terribly murky. How wrong I was, and what a difference a second viewing makes. It was a different movie, another experience altogether. The continuation of Peter Jackson’s engaging adaptation of Tolkien is a fantastic technical achievement, and falls just short of its masterpiece predecessor. The journey goes on, showcasing the breaking of the fellowship formed earlier; Frodo and Sam trek on toward Mordor followed by the vengeful once-hobbit Gollum, Merry and Pippin escape from the murderous Urukhai, and Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli join the perilous defense against the oncoming attack from Isengaard. Director Jackson expertly keeps the pace mostly lively, moving swiftly between all separate stories, and all three episodes culminate in the spectacular battle at Helm’s Deep. The clash between the super-breed Urukhai and the warriors of Rohan is a true wonderment to behold, apparently culled from over forty hours of footage. The tone for The Two Towers is unmistakably darker than in The Fellowship of the Ring, and at times the narrative seems a bit less forceful. Indeed, while the former picture’s plot was more linear, the second film faces a more difficult task, jumping between each significant character , and especially since it lacks a beginning and end. However, these are minor quibbles. Among the notable acting distinctions within the enormous cast, Andy Serkis acting through a computer generated medium evokes both laughter and sympathy as the conflicted Gollum. As well, Viggo Mortensen has the benefit of further character development and screen time; in many ways, he is the true star of the film this time around.
2. The Hours (dir: Stephen Daldry)
Slated to release over a year ago, I must say that it was difficult keeping my expectations low for this adaptation of the 1998 Pulitzer Prize-winning book. Not only did it have a rich source material to work from, but had a cast and production pedigree that was probably the envy of every producer in Hollywood. However, the lame trailer succeeded in dousing my anticipation – it looked quite ridiculous. Paramount seemed bent on selling the film as some sort of chick-flick thriller with twists and turns around every corner. Thankfully, The Hours is so radically different from the preview, I wonder if it’s the same movie being marketed. It’s also a brilliant picture that more than lived up to my expectations, and in some aspects, surpassed them. Because although I was confident that they would do justice to Michael Cunningham’s novel, I wasn’t sure exactly how they were going to do that. Set in three different time periods and places, the novel focuses on Virginia Woolf (Nicole Kidman) writing Mrs. Dalloway in 1921 Richmond. While she fights insanity and migraines, the setting moves to California in the ‘50s, where Laura Brown is reading the famous book and slowly feels suffocated by her familial role. And finally, Meryl Streep plays Clarissa Vaughan, a modern day Mrs. Dalloway; she is planning a celebration party for her dying ex-lover (Ed Harris), who has just received a prestigious literary award. The stories may seem dissimilar, but they are linked in ways that are unclear until the conclusion, in which every thread comes together. Director Stephen Daldry is bold and confident in capturing each of these episodes on screen, but the real reason behind this terrific film variation is because of David Hare, who took on the seemingly impossible job of making a screenplay out of this novel – and succeeded admirably. It is clear that one of The Hours’ greatest triumphs lies in the power of its performances. Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore, and Meryl Streep are exceptional; the supporting cast which includes the likes of Ed Harris, Stephen Dillaney, Alison Janney, Toni Collette, John C. Reilly, Claire Danes, Miranda Richardson, and Jeff Daniels is superlative. Do not miss this brilliant film because of its off-putting, misleading marketing and self-indulgent Oscar campaign. This is intelligent, powerful and deeply moving movie-going. Reading the book is highly recommended – adds to the richness of the story.
1. Adaptation (dir: Spike Jonze)
From the creative team that brought you Being John Malkovich, you can be sure that just like its predecessor, Adaptation is a bizarre, off-putting, and at times, difficult experience. That said, among the many films that came out later this year that impressed me, this one truly made me sit up, stare and think about its complex themes and ideas. Nicholas Cage impresses in a double role as twin brother screenwriters who couldn’t be any more different in their impressions on good screenwriting. While Charlie is adamant to omit any clichés and over the top sequences such as unnecessary sex and car chases in his adaptation (1) of Susan Orleans’ (Meryl Streep) “The Orchid Thiefâ€, his brother Donald is sure that his serial killer twist ending thriller will sell. While the film focuses on their troubles to develop their themes, it moves back three years to Orleans while she is writing her novel, based on the real life expeditions of John Laroche. She finds herself drawn to his passion for the passing obsessions in his life, and wishes to fill the void in her life masked by superficiality. What then follows is difficult to explain – I think the most challenging part about discussing this movie is analyzing its plot. That said, Adaptation is methodical in its pacing towards the beginning, and is at times a mess, but it’s a delightful movie-watching experience. Indeed, I doubt anyone could successfully argue that the film is conventional or a tried and tested concept – they must have totally misunderstood the last third act which is the film’s greatest criticized element. I personally think the last third of the film is the best, because Kaufman spirals into arenas where he decidedly does not want to go. But do not do this film a great disservice by categorizing it as a critique of Hollywood screenwriting convention; it also explores the adaptation of humans (2) to environment and surroundings in the midst of great change. In addition to the deserved acclaim for Kaufman and Jonze, equal attention should be focused on Cage, who in a comeback of sorts, plays and differentiates the twins so well without makeup or unnecessary visual effects. Supporting him are Meryl Streep, in her best performance in years, as well as the largely unnoticed actor Chris Cooper who is lock for not just an Oscar nomination, but probably the win as well. Also look for cameos by Brian Cox, Catherine Keener, Maggie Gyllenhall and John Cusack. Brilliant.
The Worst Film of the Year
The Sweetest Thing (dir: Roger Krumble) à For its offensive brand of crass humour and performances that hope to succeed only on charm, this poor excuse for a comedy fails on every single joke. It’s a disaster; not only did I not laugh once, I had trouble smiling for the rest of the evening, long after the film ended. Most people seem to be more forgiving, as it is, at its core, simply a “chick flick†that is supposed to be fluffy and ridiculous. But The Sweetest Thing isn’t this bad just because it conforms to formula and is clichéd beyond belief (which are also some of its crimes). It’s this bad because the movie consists of a string of bad jokes and one-note skits, laced together amidst a flurry of shallow characters and poorly written situations. The absolute lowpoint is the disastrous “Penis Song†that is beyond explanation. People, leave it on the shelves. You don’t know. No. Just don’t.
|
Login 
Register
FAQ
Search
