Cool News
Moriarty’s Big Fat Juicy 2006 List Part One! The Runners-Up!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
I have to start somewhere, and I want to be efficient since I’m the last one out the gate, and you’re no doubt worn out by all this end of the year nonsense by now, so without further ado, here are my ten runners-up, the ten films that I genuinely loved that simply don’t have a place on my top ten list. If this was my top ten list for the year, I’d be content and happy, and I’d walk away thinking it had been one heck of a good year of film overall.
NUMBER TWENTY: TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY (dir. Adam McKay; scr. Will Ferrell & Adam McKay)
I don’t think there was a better film made this year about the American id.
BORAT and CARS both made some big statements about our national identity, but for my money, here’s the film that got it most right. I was a big fan of ANCHORMAN, but Adam McKay makes a huge jump as a director from that film to this one, and I think what makes it really worthwhile is the way it manages to mock the fundamental things that make these characters American, but also celebrates them at the same time. This is affectionate in a way that BORAT isn’t, and it’s outrageous in a way that CARS can’t be. It reveals some of our worst tendencies, and it underlines the things that make us great.
And it is funny as shit.
Let me confess something: I have a soft spot for the original SMOKEY & THE BANDIT. I think it’s a pretty great commercial entertainment, and I don’t mean that in some post-modern hipster ironic sort of way, either. I just plain enjoy the film, and it makes me laugh even today when I revisit the film. Part of what makes that film so funny is how Burt Reynolds is playing a completely clueless douchebag. Oh, sure, he’s charming and funny, but he’s pretty much a public menace and a giant bag of ego. I love watching Evel Knievel for the same reasons, especially VIVA KNIEVEL!, the film he starred in the same year that SMOKEY & THE BANDIT came out. There’s a lot of both of them in Ricky Bobby. He is unfettered ego backed up by just enough talent to make him dangerous, and there’s nothing more American than that.
I’ve heard fans of LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE talk about how they love the 12-minute dinner table sequence in the film, and it’s nicely written. It’s all exposition, and it has to do all the heavy lifting for the entire rest of the movie... setting up Steve Carrell’s backstory, establishing that Paul Dano isn’t talking, demonstrating the active friction between Greg Kinnear and Alan Arkin, explaining Abagail Breslin’s pageant history and positioning Toni Collette right there in the middle... and the miracle of it is that it plays at all. For my money, I’ll put the dinner table scene in TALLADEGA NIGHTS up against it. “I will come at you like a spider monkey, Chip!” Ricky Bobby’s insistence on praying to the Baby Jesus. “I’m all jacked up on Mountain Dew!” Cal Naughton’s constant hero worship, and his offer to hold Carley’s hair. The scene makes me cry laughing because it is random and loud and stinks of crazy, and it somehow strikes me as hilariously real in a way that something as meticulously scripted as LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE can’t quite get at. The dinner table scene in TALLADEGA is probably just as long as the one in LMS, but it’s not in service of exposition. It’s all just behavior.
There’s a lot of that in the film. Molly Shannon does her best work in any film so far in her brief moments onscreen. I actually watched one of her scenes twice, laughing out loud both times. I was already completely in love with this film before they even introduced Sacha Baron Cohen as Jean Girard, but he pushed it from being a comedy I really enjoyed to being a film that made my runners-up list. Everyone freaking out about Borat this year strikes me as a little late to the party. I agree that Borat is very, very funny. And I thought he was funny when I saw him originally about three years ago. And that was me showing up late to the party as far as the original UK fans are concerned, I know. My point being, Sacha’s been playing Borat for a while. And I think the film put an punctuation mark at the end of a sentence he’s been working on for a while. People saying, “Can he create another character now?” miss the point; he did. Jean Girard is all new, something we haven’t seen him do before, and it’s another great original characterization. His French accent may be one of the least convincing and most blatantly fake accents in the history of movies. And that’s why it makes me laugh so hard. I’ve said before that I think Sacha Baron Cohen is the new Peter Sellers, and I think this is the performance that confirms it. He throws himself into the role with an impressive abandon, and delivers.
Gary Cole is fantastically sleazy as Ricky’s father, and Jane Lynch continues to prove that she is willing to be as big a freak as possible for the sake of laughs. Michael Clarke Duncan gets at least one of the film’s best lines (“DON’T YOU PUT THAT VOODOO ON ME, RICKY BOBBY!”) and Amy Adams, one of last year’s Oscar darlings, gives a surprisingly dedicated performance and has never been more adorable than she is near the end of the film. Lots of real NASCAR stalwarts show up in the film as themselves, and they deserve credit for taking part in something that could have easily turned into a mean-spirited roasting of the culture of NASCAR. I may not be a fan of NASCAR myself, but I recognize how much Ferrell and McKay obviously care about the characters they’ve created. That affection is a big part of why I included this film on the list, and it’s why this will be one of the first films from this entire list that I look forward to revisiting.
NUMBER NINETEEN: STREET FIGHT (dir. Marshall Curry)
This is the second highest-ranking documentary on my list this year, and it’s one of the last films I watched as I was putting my list together. I had no real expectations for it, and I am surprised by what a powerful study of modern race, media, and politics it turns out to be. This is a great film about where we are right now, and one that people should see if they want to understand how the system works, and how it doesn’t.
The documentary tells the story of the 2002 mayoral race in Newark, New Jersey. But more than that, it tells the story of what happens to anyone who chooses to be part of the political process in America. If you want to run for office, even if you have the best possible intentions, even if you genuinely want to change your community for the better, I believe that you will, by definition, get dirty. No matter how well you behave, no matter how you conduct yourself, the system will grind you up somehow, and you will get dirty. That may sound cynical, but I guess growing up as part of the generation that came of age with Watergate will do that to you. Even the politicians I like and respect... and they are few and far between... I approach with a fair amount of skepticism because I know that they have successfully navigated a system that rewards bullying and manipulation, and that worries me.
The mayoral race was between newcomer Cory Booker and incumbent Sharpe James. Director Marshall Curry is given full access by Booker’s campaign, and there’s no doubt that Curry likes Booker. Even so, I think Curry approaches the campaign without predjudice at the start. Sharpe James turns out to be a great movie bad guy, an almost cartoonishly corrupt career politician who is practically an institution in Newark at the start of the film. Booker comes after James without hesitation, but I don’t think he really knows what he’s doing at the start of the film. I think Booker is an idealist, a young man with young man’s ideas. He recognizes the fundamental rot at the heart of the James administration, but I don’t think he counts on just how rough James is willing to play.
The situation is made even more complicated by virtue of the fact that both Booker and James are black men, but race becomes an issue because Booker has light skin and James exploits that. The notion that James would actually attack Booker for being “too white” or that he’d slur him by suggesting that he might be Jewish is ridiculous... but that’s exactly what happens. And that’s just the start. You have to see the film to appreciate how blatant and out of control every step of this contest is, but what makes me maddest is the nonsense we see occur on the actual election day. There is no way you can watch the film and tell me that this was a fair election. Every crooked tactic in the world gets trotted out in an effort to control who has access to the ballot boxes and how they vote. My father has started to volunteer to co-ordinate elections in his local area because he has such strong concerns about election fraud and mismanagement. Seeing this film, and realizing that this happened in a major city in this media age and nothing was done about it, I find myself unconvinced that there’s any way I will ever trust an election in my lifetime again. This film may be a bitter pill to swallow, but it’s a film you owe it to yourself as an informed citizen to see.
NUMBER EIGHTEEN: THE SCIENCE OF SLEEP (dir./scr. Michel Gondry)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
The second-best film this year at creating a dream state.
Once I’ve seen a movie the first time, the only reason to rewatch it is to try and recapture the particular feeling you get from watching it. The films I see that don’t have any particular identity, the ones that just blur together into a big blur of Hollywood mush at the end of the year, those are the movies I’m never going to rewatch because there’s nothing that makes them any different from the Hollywood mush the year before or the year after. The films I know I’m going to watch again are the movies that caused a genuine reaction in me. THE SCIENCE OF SLEEP is a movie that, much like Gondry’s ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, makes you want to be in love. Or maybe more specifically, it makes you want to have the dreams you have when you’re in love. If you’re a romantic and you find yourself in those first dizzy days of knowing someone, in a situation ripe with possibility, your dreams become more candy-coated, more playful, more inviting. You can’t wait for the next night. Part of it is because the pleasure of falling in love is thinking about what might be, and Gondry’s film is like tapping directly into that feeling, mainlining it for a few hours. It’s a fizzy drink that tickles going down, and further proof that Gondry is a filmmaker who should not be underestimated.
NUMBER SEVENTEEN: BREAKING AND ENTERING (dir./scr. Anthony Minghella)
Would you like to know why I don’t like CRASH?
Check out Anthony Minghella’s delicate human comedy if you’d like to see a more complete and persuasive argument than I can mount here. I know what Paul Haggis was trying to do with his (shudder) Oscar-winning film... he wanted to take inventory of Los Angeles as it exists right now. But Haggis ladled on the obvious metaphor and the “surprise twists,” and the end result just chaps my ass. Minghella seems to have approached his first original screenplay since TRULY MADLY DEEPLY with much the same intent. He seems to be taking stock of the world around him. In his case, London. Or, more specifically, North London, around King’s Cross. It’s a rough area, but Jude Law’s character is part of a design team working on a way to rehab the entire area, a major urban development project. Wanna bet he’s going to meet some of the inhabitants of King’s Cross, and that they’re going to affect the way he looks at the world and his life?
And wanna bet Minghella’s got a feather touch that proves once again why we started paying attention to him in the first place?
Will (Law) is partnered with Sandy (Martin Freeman) on the project, and the two of them open a new office for their architecture design firm. Almost as soon as they open the office, someone burgles them. Then, as soon as they report it and replace their things, someone burgles them again. What happens to Will when he tries to catch the thief will affect everyone around him: his girlfriend Liv (Robin Wright Penn), her daughter Bea (Poppy Rogers), a Bosnian refugee named Amira (Juliette Binoche), her son Miro (Rafi Gavron), and even the cleaning crew at the offices. Even so, the way Minghella chooses to spin his narrative threads, it never feels forced, and there are no easy epiphanies. It’s a film of quiet revelation, and it really comes down to the chemistry between Binoche and Law for me. It’s one of the unlikeliest pairings in a recent film, and the film takes its time putting them anywhere near each other, much less together. This certainly isn’t some cookie-cutter love story, and I’m not even sure I’d tell someone that this film is romantic. I think it is about people dealing with some of the more difficult responsibilities that come with caring about other people, and maybe that’s the point. Some of these characters are strange, prickly, difficult. They act in confounding or irritating ways. They seem inscrutable in a few places in the film. I contend that Minghella knows exactly what he’s doing in writing these characters, and that is part of the point of the film. Instead of wrapping up all the ideas he introduces in nice neat little bows, Minghella gives us something more like life, something that dares you to invest in it. And once you do settle into the groove with this film, it offers up some rich rewards. The film may not work completely, but so much of it is so good that I find myself eager to see it again, almost like a novel that I read too fast the first time. I want to linger with it, and I hope Minghella doesn’t make us wait another fourteen years for his next original script.
NUMBER SIXTEEN: CURSE OF THE GOLDEN FLOWER (dir./scr. Zhang Yimou)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
It doesn’t surprise me that this was based on a play by Cao Yu. The film plays more like one of Kurosawa’s Shakesperean adaptations than it plays like a typical martial arts action epic. Then again, this is anything but typical. For fans of director Zhang Yimou or lead actress Gong Li, this is a major event because it reteams them for the first time since SHANGHAI TRIAD. The two of them were synonymous from the very beginning of their careers. She made her first onscreen appearance in RED SORGHUM, his first film. She served as his muse, both onscreen and off, and then... seemingly overnight... their relationship ended, and both of them ended up adrift artistically for a while. She flirted with Chen Kaige, while he gave Zhang Ziyi her start in film with THE ROAD HOME. It wasn’t until HERO that Zhang Yimou really returned to prominence as a filmmaker, though, and it feels like he has finally brought things full-circle with this reunion with the actress who defined so much of his best work.
I’ve read reactions from people who feel like this movie is an excuse for Yimou to torture Gong Li on film, but I think they’re missing the point entirely. There’s really only one character who we are asked to empathize with in this film, and that is Empress Phoenix. Gong Li invests this long-suffering character with a bruised dignity that I found incredibly moving. Chow Yun-Fat digs into his role as Emperor Ping with a gusto I haven’t seen in his work in quite a while, and watching these two movie stars together, I am reminded of the golden days of Hollywood, where stars weren’t just actors with a great perks package, but were larger than life.
I love the way this film swings between family melodrama and sweeping action. I love the fact that even as Gong Li returns to Zhang Yimou’s side, he discovers a new actress (Li Man) who should set any heterosexual man’s pulse racing. I love the way Yimou has approached each of his recent martial arts films completely differently, expressing the enormous dramatic elasticity of the genre in a way that no amount of conversation or film theory could accomplish. And mainly, I love the way a film like this transports me completely to another time and place, and when it ended, I found myself disappointed, eager for more. That’s not something I can say about many films these days, and I’m impressed at just how powerful the experience was.
NUMBER FIFTEEN: THE DEPARTED (dir. Martin Scorsese; scr. William Monahan)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
Pure pulp pleasure. This is not the most important film that Martin Scorsese has ever made, and it’s not the best. Not by a long shot. But there’s a reason that this one seems to resonate with audiences more than anything else he’s ever done, and there’s a reason he’s probably going to pick up his first Academy Award for Best Director finally. And that is because of the sheer pleasure that the film delivers for fans of the genre.
Scorsese is one of those directors who actors will crawl through broken glass to please, and it’s especially true when you give them a piece of material as juicy as William Monahan’s adaptation of INFERNAL AFFAIRS. How many movies this year were as tense as this one, yet as laugh-out-loud funny in places as well? How many movies had strong roles for not just one or two but as many as four or five supporting actors in addition to two equally strong leads? This is a guy’s film, no doubt about it. You can practically smell testosterone in every scene. Normally, I find my patience wears thin with Jack Nicholson doing his “Crazy Jack” act, but here, it’s completely appropriate, and I think Scorsese kept a tight leash on it. Even better, Matt Damon’s work here is, I think, the most important in the film. There’s a subtext to everything he does that could change the meaning of much of the movie, and I think it’s provocative to consider the clues that Monahan dropped in the script. Is this movie anti-Catholic? Is there the whiff of closeted homosexuality and survivor’s shame? Pay attention to Nicholson’s attitudes towards priests and nuns in public. Listen closely to what happens between Damon and Vera Farmiga. It’s fascinating stuff.
Overall, the thing that made me go back to see this a few times before I wrote about it the first time was the electric charge of just seeing good actors rip it up, enjoying each other, challenging each other. This isn’t a film you are meant to take seriously, and Scorsese winks at you with the closing image in a way that tells you that he’s had just as much fun as you have. Sometimes, that makes all the difference in the world.
NUMBER FOURTEEN: THE HOST (dir. Joon-ho Bong; scr. Chul-hyun Baek, Joon-ho Bong, and Jun-won Ha)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
Every year, there are films that we adopt here at AICN. And inevitably, we’ll hear from people that we overhyped the films, or that we built up their expectations too much, and they end up holding our enthusiasm against the film.
I hope that doesn’t happen with THE HOST. I love the film. I know Harry loved the film. We’ve run a number of very positive reactions to the film. And here it is on my runners-up list. And despite all that, I’m going to say to put all that aside when you sit down to see it when Magnolia finally rolls it out later this spring. Don’t let yourself by hyped up for it because of comparisons to JAWS. This is a unique and special film, part monster movie, part family drama, part metaphor about the generation gap in Korea. It’s a great monster movie, and the monster is a true original. I’m still not even sure what the hell it is, but that’s part of the fun of the thing. Every time it shows up, you just want to take a long look at it and try to make sense of all the details. When was the last time you were truly fascinated by a movie monster? It’s not because of the special effects, either. It’s because of the heart and soul that’s obviously been put into giving this thing a personality.
Joon-ho Bong is a major talent, a genuinely important filmmaker, and THE HOST is going to be just one of many high points in his career, I’m sure. I hope it turns into his arrival in pop culture, but no matter what, it’s a film I’m going to savor when I get a chance to see it again.
NUMBER THIRTEEN: HAPPY FEET (dir. George Miller; scr. Warren Coleman and John Collee and George Miller and Judy Morriss)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
It’s interesting to see what my eighteen-month-old son responds to and what he doesn’t.
I haven’t taken him to see many things. The first time we tried going to a theater with him was about three weeks after THE CORPSE BRIDE opened. We went to the first show in the middle of the week. We were literally the only three people in the big house of the Chinese Theater, so even if Toshi had screamed from one end of the film to the other, no one would have cared. In the weeks leading up to the HAPPY FEET press screening, I showed Toshi the trailers on my computer. So far, the only things he’s interested in watching are things that involve a lot of music, and the trailers for HAPPY FEET got him up and dancing in my office every single time. My wife and I took him to the screening on the Warner lot, which was in a fairly small screening room. He spent the twenty minutes before the movie literally running from us, around and around the theater, and I was starting to think it was a mistake to bring him.
Then the film began. And as much as I enjoyed it from the very start, it was absolutely magic to see how Toshi reacted to it. He went with it. The entire time. It worked on him on the most direct level possible. And at the same time, I think there are some really sophisticated ideas at play here. When Massawyrm freaked out about the film, it was funny more than anything because as much as he wanted to act indignant and insulted, he was just underlining exactly what the film set out to do. It’s not an anti-Christian film. It’s an anti-herd film. And when you get puffed up and protective over your right to be part of the herd... when you act threatened over the mere suggestion that individual thought and healthy skepticism are a vital part of society... it’s obvious that you’re hung up on the wrong part of the role faith can play in our lives. HAPPY FEET strongly believes in faith. It just doesn’t believe in blind faith. HAPPY FEET believes in a higher power. It just doesn’t believe there’s only one name for it. The main reason I am proud that this is my son’s first favorite movie (and there’s no doubt it is... he still gets excited when he sees banner ads for the film while I’m online or when we turn on the dancing Mumbles he has in the living room) is because it is a film that celebrates the basic tenets of love and community and individual expression, ideas that I hope my son grows up respecting. For a film to entertain him as much as it intellectually and emotionally engaged me, it must be something special.
NUMBER TWELVE: CASINO ROYALE (dir. Martin Campbell; scr. Neal Purvis & Robert Wade and Paul Haggis)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
Color me shocked.
At the start of 2006, I can’t even honestly say I was looking forward to this movie.
Now I consider it a key moment in the history of the Bond franchise, and one of the defining representations of the character. In terms of having the right presence, I thought Daniel Craig stepped up as a movie star when he took the lead in LAYER CAKE, but it’s finally here, as James Bond, that I think he’s been given the sort of role that turns a great actor into an icon. If he does a series of these that are all as good as this one (and, man, are my fingers crossed), then I think we’re looking at one of the great action stars. Period.
But even if that doesn’t happen, we’ll always have CASINO ROYALE, as smooth and sleek a Bond film as I’ve seen released in my lifetime. For a while, it looked like Bond was obsolete. Jason Bourne had become the new standard for spy movies, and there was a lot of speculation about whether Bond could ever be relevant again. By following the lead of last year’s BATMAN BEGINS and giving us a Bond still learning how to be a double-o-carrying killer, they’ve humanized him. They’ve finally made him a character again instead of a cartoon. But they didn’t make the mistake of demystifying him. They didn’t show us Bond’s childhood. They didn’t try to give him some family trauma to deal with. They didn’t make the mistake that the makers of the TEXAS CHAINSAW and HALLOWEEN and FRIDAY THE 13th remakes or the HANNIBAL prequel are all making. I don’t want to know why James Bond decided to become a spy, and I don’t really need to know what boyhood influences led to him picking up that gun for the first time. When you work too hard at humanizing certain characters, you rob them of their power. Hats off, then, to Purvis & Wade and special guest star Paul Haggis for sticking close enough to Ian Fleming’s book to please a disgruntled nitpicker like myself, but for knowing the difference between reinvention and subtle expansion.
Now hurry up and make the sequel great.
NUMBER ELEVEN: THE PRESTIGE (dir. Christopher Nolan; scr. Jonathan Nolan and Christopher Nolan)
You can read my original review of this film right here.
Even after watching this one a few times, I’m still just as impressed by the sleight-of-hand that Chris Nolan pulled off. I think I have a much better handle on it now, but studying it closely only increases my appreciation of just how meticulous the film is. Often, when you look closely at a magic trick, you start to see the way it works. You see through it. You see the misdirection, and it takes away the fun of the thing. Sometimes, what you thought was quite wonderful the first time you see it turns out to be a simple mechanical move, nothing special at all. Not so with Nolan’s film, which has my single favorite opening shot of the year. The second and third time through the film, the detail of the thing actually proves to be richer than you notice the first time. Thematically, Nolan’s on his game all the way through, but more than that, he has fun by hiding some of his film’s big “secrets” right in front of your face. It’s bold. No... wrong word. It’s cheeky. The Nolan brothers are obviously very smart guys, but it’s possible for these filmmaking brother acts to be too smart for the room, too chilly, too inside, more clever than sincere. It’s a familiar accusation against the Coens, the Polish Brothers, the Wachowskis. But what I see in the collaboration of the Nolans is a sense of trying to entertain each other. They’re playing a game with each other as much as they are with the audience, and that’s why I think it’s so much fun.
I mentioned the other day that I just saw THE ILLUSIONIST, a very good film by the very talented Neil Burger. I still prefer THE PRESTIGE, but I’m sure many people feel the opposite. I can explain why by comparing the two films to the characters in THE PRESTIGE. Nolan’s film is Christian Bale. Technically gifted. Dedicated. Brilliant. And sad. Oh, so very sad. Burger’s film is Hugh Jackman. The better showman, no question about it. Entertaining. And right down the middle in terms of how it plays the crowd. People walk away happy. I think THE PRESTIGE is working class, a peek behind the curtain, while THE ILLUSIONIST is a romantic fable. Which one you prefer probably says something about you.
I don’t automatically prefer sad to happy... and in fact, this year in particular, I thought there were a lot of obligatory sad endings that weren’t very good. But in the case of THE PRESTIGE, there’s so much integrity to the way the film plays my heart that I don’t mind being tricked at all.
I’ll be back ASAP with my top ten, and then I’ll do one final article to tackle the year’s worst films and hand out some individual accomplishment awards, because I know there is nothing that the world needs more right now than more awards.
I’m just doing my part.
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
-
+ Expand All
-
Glad to see someone finally defend this movie. I was so excited when I saw the commercials but it never caught on with the critics for some reason and I feared the worst. Looks like I can look forward to seeing this after all! Enjoyed the list.
-
I like their writing very much. I know Christopher Nolan is credited as the sole writer of Memento, but it's taken from Jonathan's story, so I think of it as a team effort. That and The Prestige are great examples of top flight screenwriting.Is brother Jonathan involved with the Dark Knight script at all? David Goyer is alright, but coherence is not his strong point. I'd love it if the Nolans (tee-hee) were working together again on that one.
-
thats me i'm 4th
-
For the life of me, I just don't understand all the praise for Happy Feet. It was a mess. A extraordinarily silly mess. That being said, my toddler enjoyed it too. Which is okay. He is a year and a half and isn't all that discriminating.
-
I don't understand why this isn't in more best of lists. For my money, it ranks right up there with Children of Men and Pan's Labryinth. One of the best film experiences I had in 2006.
Plus I think the performances are being ignored. Hugh Jackman in the dual role was just amazing. -
The Prestige is DEFINITELY one of the best films of last year. But as Mori says, it's a very cold, calculating film. I find it interesting that many people that dislike it have problems with 'The device.' I think to truly enjoy the films you have to make a leap of faith in order to buy it. If you can, then your likelihood of enjoying the film is so much higher. Just thinking about film and the sheer inventiveness of the carefully crafted script, makes me smile. I definitely have to pick up the novel.
-
A lot of those flicks are in my top ten, so it's gonna be interesting to see what made yours. I'm betting Children of Men and Pan's are in there somewhere, and probably The Fountain, too...
-
then again, i didnt watch 35 movies last week alone.
-
and John Nolan is IN, which already means vastly superior product
-
Good to get that into the AICN vernacular.
-
That's good news if it's true. Nothing against Goyer, but I don't think his style meshes well with Nolan. Goyer's good when he's revelling in cheese, but the mix of serious and daft in Batman Begins didn't quite work for me, especially toward the end of the film.
-
Can you at least TRY to make it organized and not a jumble fuck? At least make the list more organized and use different colors.
Oh wait, you want people to have to read the whole article instead of skimming through. How egomaniacal of you. -
I love Americans. Also The Prestige is one of the best films I've ever seen for it not to have made the top 10 is b-zar. What can you have seen to beat it? Hmmm? ... Oh god ... please don't put The Queen into your top 10... Honestly I will lose all my respect for you.
-
Ooooh...don't say that. I'd hate to see Mori tell everyone how you freaked out.
-
Else besides me giving it props...Very under-rated.
-
i'm tying to work and the silly phrase "torture porn" keeps flashing across my eyes
-
sometimes are the same exact thing. (or is it just at my work?)As I've only seen two of these movies at this portion of the list, I can't really judge them. But I did see Casino Royale, which I loved. Great action/Bond movie, with Craig freak'n awesome and Ms. Green hmm-hmm good! And I saw Talledega Nights, which I wasn't crazy about. It had a few funny moments/scenes for me: dinner table was pretty damn funny, 1st meeting with Frenchie (is that a catch-phrase or epilepsy?), Ricky on imaginary fire. But overall not that funny for me.
-
If I'm not mistaken, Christopher Nolan and Goyer wrote the treatment for The Dark Knight together and Nolan's brother wrote the script with rewrites from Christopher Nolan....
-
Seriously, killing off all your main characters isn't very effective if you didn't care whethere they lived or died. I think it's very funny that Scorsese, after MEAN STREETS, RAGING BULL, GOODFELLAS, CASINO, CAPE FEAR, THE AVIATOR, etc is finally going to win an Oscar for one of his most mediocre movies.
-
...will consist solely of movies that don't officially open until 2009. All over the planet, millions of sexless dorks' heads explode, countless numbers of basements in the houses of their mothers suddenly go empty, and the world's comic book shop owners breathe a little easier as they file for bankruptcy. The end.
-
Is it me or is the worst part of this site Harry Knowles? Harry you are the Albatros around the head of your own creation. The only thing holding you up is stuff like this. A well written best of list without the immature cursing and baby talk.
-
In fact, the scene Mori mentioned is the only one that even approaches the best scenes in Anchorman.
-
Only when he's talking about movies. Oh, and Wesley Snipes' vagina.
-
Now, I've watched a ton of these types of films over the past 20 years, and I've never seen more gratuitous cleavage shots than in this trailer (Gong Li mostly). Are they going for a stylized period piece? Because most of the time, in these sorts of movies, and in the time period they are portraying, the women are covered up.
-
when your "big break" is Death Warrant and the best script you've worked on (outside of BB with Nolan) is having Alex Proyas rewrite your script for Dark City, then you enter the realm of HACK, where you are warmly greeted by the current Mayor of HACK, Mrs. Akiva Goldsman.
-
I have no idea. I do know that the screenplay for that film was extraordinary. P.S. Akiva Goldsman = man.
-
First off, The Departed was not mediocre; The Departed was excellent. Second, what the hell is this doing on your 'Runners Up' list Mori? What the hell? Here's my stab at what your top ten list will be: 10.) The Fountain 9.) The Fountain 8.) The Fountain 7.) The Fountain 6.) The Fountain 5.) The Fountain 4.) The Fountain 3.) The Fountain 2.) The Fountain 1.) The Fountain
-
Top 10 lists GOTTA EAT!
-
Jan 15, 2007 11:17:46 AM CST
Happy Feet is definitely better than Scorcese's Departe
by mattyboomstar
Are you a film reviewer or a nine year old retarded girl? There goes the need to EVER read another word you say again. Go review TV. Just pathetic.
Oh, and Talladega Nights is horrible. Seriously bad.
I can't wait to read about Big Momma's House 2 is in your top three. -
Some more solid film writing. Even as I glanced at the titles and their placement on your list, you explanation won me over every time. Even if we occasionally disagree. That's the sign of a terrific writer.
-
I'm still confused as to why anyone over 5 years of age liked this movie.
I am not exaggerating when I say I saw HAPPY FEET for free and still almost walked out. The movie was all over the place. One coherent target would have been nice. Instead, we have global warming OR littering OR over-harvesting. The first encounter with humans (aside from the machinery that is stupidly abandoned on an ice shelf as if corporations would throw away millions after what - running out of gas?) is a church that has, of all things, a well-populated CEMETERY in the Antarctic.
Hugh Jackman (not even from the U.S.) added himself to the long list of actors who can't do a Southern accent but think they can. Nicole Kidman was far from "adorably breathy;" I couldn't bear to listen to a single line of her dialogue that wasn't spoken like an adult. Baby-talk is for small dogs and even then it is insulting. Robin Williams (though a great voice actor) was cast as (presumably) Hispanic AND Black penguins... why not cast Hispanic and Black voice actors? Ah well. I'd even venture to agree with the politics, but I still hate the film. I'll just read my kids the Lorax. -
Was actually a lot funnier the second time I saw it. The first time I just thought it was okay. You should try watching it again, people. Also, The Presige, The Departed, and Casino Royale are all amazing films, so his Top Ten better be really fucking good to not have those three in it. Children of Men and The Fountain should be one and two, respectively. After that, fuck knows, but I probably didn't see most of what will be on it.
-
The Departed rules!
-
You know it makes sense!
-
Sorry, but with all the positive reviews I expected something more. I think Will Ferrell got a pass on that film, when he's just as unfunny as he normally is. Although I will commend the list for putting Curse of the Golden Flower up there. For me it's my favorite martial arts Zhang Yimou film.
-
Was okay. I had figured out the ending by halfway through the film, and at that point it was nothing spectacular. It was predictable and easy to see through. It was well made, but they were trying to give this unbeleivable twist, and they failed. The Illusionist at least gave a twist that I did not see coming or expect.
-
my distaste for the prestige was that i saw what was coming a mile away. there were no secrets. there was no magic. the nolan brothers got too caught up in the act and blatantly revealed all the strings and wires hoping the sheep watching would not see it coming and upon watching a second time would feel like such morons. unfortunately, in their arrogance, they ruined the "twists" and before they could even get to the end we knew what was coming. And any moron could have figure it out. the first line is "are you watching closely?" so you know to look. And then they parade christian bale around in a terrible disguise making sure not to let him talk, in such a ridiculous attempt to pull one over on us. it doesn't work. unless you're a mindless zombie. the illusionist is more remarkable because it doesn't flaunt it's power. it does what it does and you don't even know the trick is being performed. The prestige is definetly the commercial winner. it's bigger and darker and a better ride. but when it comes down to it the illusionist is the better trick.
-
When's that movie coming out? Christian & Hugh vs. Paul & Edward, cage match, wizard's hats off!
I think it's funny that people say ending of The Prestige was so predictable, yet The Illusionist wasn't. For my money, though, the ending wasn't what walloped.
The best thing about The Prestige for me was to see the way they analyzed obsession, and I think that both Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman did remarkable jobs playing dual-roles. Sure, I didn't grasp the ending until the end, but it wasn't the twist that won me over. Honestly, if the twist ending was shot into space, I'd be happier for it ... and no thanks to M. Night Shamalamadingdong for perpetuating the thing.
-
Really disliked it, on so many levels. Paul Giamatti is unbearable. American actors faking European folks speaking in English?? Double-whammy. I'd rather have seen European actors in the film speaking English - at least we wouldn't have the "Victor/Victoria" scenario of languages.
-
Paired "Illusionist" with "Lady in the Water" - agony.
-
I pretty much never post on here, but I had to get on here after reading that paragraph about THE PRESTIGE vs. THE ILLUSIONIST. You really nailed, it Moriarty. If this was a MySpace blog, I'd given you 2 kudos, since that's the most that Tom allows.
-
I'm searching for the movie, "Number Nineteen: Street Fight" in Netflix and wondering why it's not showing up...
-
esp. since they kept saying in the movie that once you know how a trick is done, it's actually rather simple and a little silly. If you watched the prestige trying to figure out what the "twist" was gonna be, then you really weren't watching the movie. And The Illuisionist is pap. It's getting a pass cause Jack's Raging Bile Duct is in it (that's the reason I saw the movie anyway).
-
what's left?
-
I think a lot of movies that comedies that are heavily improvised are funnier on multiple viewings. For whatever reason, that improvisational style creates a more subtle style of humor/behavior that is more apparent in multiple viewings. That said, I thought Taladega Nights was waaaaaay too long. Movies like that should have no longer than 90 minutes. If you have a ton of great footage left then put it on the DVD.
-
...is not the big twist.
Spoilers!
The disguise is, of course, very obvious, and probably obvious to EVERYBODY. It's the resolution of the Tesla trick and the explanation for all the bodies that caught me off guard. This is a movie with about five huge twists during the final 20-30 minutes, so seeing one coming isn't that big of a deal to me. -
Okay ... maybe I'll watch it a second time to see if it gets any better. But putting it in the top-20 movies this year? I think that's a stretch.
Talladega Nights might show special place in the American psyche to you, Mori, but for someone who grew up in the South, you'll look at a movie like Run Ronnie, Run or Idiocracy and think it's a little closer to home.
And besides ... how many times are we supposed to watch Will Ferrell run around naked and laugh at it? -
Was the way the crowd was constantly gasping in amazement at the simplest, stupidest tricks we've seen a million times before, to the point where Burger had to resort to CG crap that could never really be performed on stage to make us impressed by the trick. The Prestige points out that both we, the audience, along with the 19th century magic fans, have seen tricks like this before, so instead of trying to dazzle us he takes us behind the scenes and gives us a very convincing portrait of the real world of stage magic. I also get annoyed by movies about how Rationalists are a bunch of meanies for not believing in The Power Of Magic, which is what The Illusionist is.
I am kind of stunned to see The Departed and Casino Royale not in the top ten. I guess that's going to be one hell of a list when it comes. -
and the deleted scenes on the dvd are even better.
(is it possible that this movie could get even better and better with each viewing?...you know, like the Big Lebowski? -
Documentaries are my bread and butter! And I don't have any idea how Wordplay makes it into a top 20 list. Sure, I crossword myself, so it's interesting to see the "science" behind the puzzles, but if you face this film against something like "Why We Fight" or "Who Killed the Electric Car?," it simply cannot carry it's own weight. For one, you're dealing with "willing" participants, which means that the whole movie is a big advertisement, instead of a film that tries to balance the differing opinions. "Word Wars," the scrabble counterpart, had better characters, better insight and a more enjoyable final competition that Wordplay did, even though the production value wasn't as high. The part with the militant black scrabble player yelling at kids in the ghetto, getting pissed because even teenagers degrade him for wanting to be intelligent, was more truthful of a moment than anything in the other movie ... plus he was funny. We didn't see any of the Crossword puzzlers going to buy a Mexican hooker before the night of competition, did we?
That said ... I bet "Jesusland" is in your top 10, and I haven't even seen it yet. Sounds like something to look forward to ... and has anyone seen "The Bridge," that eerie-lloking documentary about the people who commit suicide by jumping off of the Golden Gate Bridge. That shit looks intriguing. -
DO you win a prize?
1. Jesusland
2. Borat
3. The Queen
4. Pan's Labyrnth
5. The Fountain
6. Children of Men
7.
8.
9.
10.
Oh shit ... running out of fuel here. Is it time to dig through the archives?
-
I forgot United 93. That's one of his most raved about films.
-
...would have been much better if it had ended with Mumble in the zoo. The whole Spielberg artificially happy ending felt really dishonest and just tacked-on... unless the whole thing took place in Mumbles head... but a cartoon can't be THAT cynical... can it?
-
"Important" usually translates to "preachy" or "boring", which is only worth paying for the movie ticket if you're part of the proverbial choir in the first place. (How many of you atheists out there really loved the Passion of the Christ, for example?) I go to movies to be entertained, and The Departed was entertaining. If a movie's going to be canonized as "important", then it better also be entertaining on an emotional level (Schindler's List, for example). The fact that 90% of my DVD collection contains either a fight with bladed weapons and/or at least one large explosion does not detract from the legitimacy of my argument.
-
I think that CreasyBear's got a point ... to a point. Many of the films that hit critic's "best of" lists often fail with main audiences. For example, "The Fountain" was interesting, philosophical, and well-designed, but do I think it was entertaining? No. And should it make a best-of list in my mind ... probably not.
I think it's a classic case of a filmmaker masturbating to his own cleverness. I wrote a short story once that piled on metaphor after metaphor, and I was thrilled with my own writing and description until it universally bombed when read out loud.
The point is this ... many of the so-called "art-films" attempt to woo us with these lofty ideas and forget about telling any semblance of a story. "The Fountain" was such a movie.
On the other hand, "Children of Men" sets out to tell the story first of this chase, and winds up revealing more about the human psyche, life and death, than Aronofsky did.
I guess that's where CreasyBear and I would disagree. I haven't seen his DVD collection yet, but if it includes "The Island," I'm going to go back to being a movie-snob. You don't need explosions for an awesome movie ... just explosive performances, explosive dialogue, or in the case of Jackass, explosive diarrhea. -
"Be Gentle with her!" "Take it Easy!" "FUCK HER!"
-
I guess my point boils down to this: I want it all. Good, confident direction, great acting, sharp dialogue, inspired casting, fitting music, and yes, enough verve and energy to keep the whole thing rolling along. Ideally, I would rank all movies up there with L.A. Confidential, Gladiator, Aliens, Man on Fire, and some other movies that give me everything I want in a movie. Most movies are lacking in one or more of these categories, though, and, stuck with such a choice, I would rather see a goofy, fun flick like the Fifth Element than something like Babel. If I want heavy, depressing issues, I have the real world and cable news for that. Movies are for fun.
-
a little movie is coming out soon called "Transformers". It's got the whole package: explosions.....Um, what were the other stuff you wanted?
-
I haven't seen it yet!! But I DID see Children of Men for the 3rd time today. Still rocks my socks. I'm thinking, for Mori's Top 3: Children of Men, The Fountain, Pan's Labyrinth, in no particular order, or in fact, reverse order.
-
What makes a great movie?
Shit, I dunno. But I can tell you what pisses me off instead - movies with Sean Penn in them are right out of the window. He's not a genuine everyman actor, no matter how hard he tries. "All the King's Men" proves that. No one believe Sean Penn's a man of the people.
Those quirky little gems! I fucking hate movies like "Me and You and Everyone We Know" that seem to push "quirkiness" into a level of total non-reality. They're not genuine, and watching them is painful. It's like the script-writer just made a bunch of characters that are "weird" for the sake of appealing toa bunch of other hack-writers in Starbucks, who sit with their brooding faces, their macchiatos and laptops, pounding away. Cliches. AHHHH!! I wish I could kill all the people who make "quirky little gems."
On a lighter note, I will sit down and watch a shitty horror movie like "The Gingerdead Man" before I sit through another "Thumbsucker." And I wish the critics would stop adoring bullshit. I like movies that are in your fucking face, whether you want them to be or not ... balls out in some respect. No reservations or apologies. No attempts to please an audience, no holds barred.
For me ... the movie that had everything this year was "Children of Men." It was gritty. It was intense. And it had a great storyline, great acting and incredible resonance.
I'm sure "Apocalypto's" going to be similar. And so is "Jesusland." As far as comedy goes, I guess that's what pissed me off about "Talladega Nights." Sure, it got some laughs out of me, but it's a fucking formula of a movie. And "Borat" and "Jackass" were far superior movies. -
i always thought jesus was middle-eastern/brown-skinned fellow, but the jew man confirmed his whiteness to me
-
Which is why I actually liked it. Gary Cole should have been nominated for a Golden Globe, but oh well.
-
is when he comments about all the completely adolescent and immature names the talk-backers call him. That said, Mori you're a real Anal Probe for some of the films you've selected for this list.
-
Sounds way too childish and puerile for my tastes, but I may give it a shot. As long as it doesn't come out the same weekend as "Disillusionment of the Heavy-Laden Soul", a poignant and heart-rending film that takes place in a bleak, dystopian Third World country, exposing American policies of de-globalization (or something like that). That's what I've got circled on my calendar.
-
Not sure which movie you're making fun of there (sounds an awful lot like 'Blood Diamond'), but in case you haven't seen "Children of Men" yet and the fact that many critics are raving about it's dystopian blahhbity-blah, I would suggest making it the next movie you see.
Because hands down ... you mentioned things like Man on Fire, Gladiator, etc., and not one of them even has a dream of achieving the intensity or action that Cuaron's movie achieve in two particular spots. Those scenes alone chop the heads off of every other Highlander in the filmmaking universe and will win over any detractors. -
Ironically enough, I figured out the trick behind Tesla's invention as soon as they stuck Jackman's top hat under the machine (and then assumed that the stiff in the glass tank was indeed not him), but completely didn't see the identical twins thing coming. I was like "What, can he teleport or something?" They literally hid that trick in plain sight, too.
-
I'll be checking that one out. And I wasn't thinking of Blood Diamond, though I can see why it might've seemed like it. That's actually another movie I do want to see. (And not just because there's 'splosions in it.)
-
So, hands down ... what's the best movie explosion ever?
I'm thinking something from Die-Hard ... but then the geeks would say something like the Death Star exploding. -
Sam Peckinpah GOTTA DRINK!!!
-
When I left the theater after THE PRESTIGE, I was disappointed, though I couldn't immediately figure out why. A few days later, I decided I thoroughly disliked it. Then, a few days later still, I realized something that revolutionized the ideas in the film for me and I now consider it a good film with some excellent parts, but certainly not one of the best of the year.
Here's the thing with the "Twin Twist": I was one of the many who figured out the twist about halfway into the film, and I'm a total idiot. I NEVER see these things coming, ever, so if I figured it out then the fact is that it's been executed poorly. However, if you're going to sit here and tell me that you figured it out because Bale's "other" costume was transparent, you're almost assuredly a fucking liar. The costume wasn't the problem.
The problem was that it was treated awkwardly and absolutely given away during the scene where Bale visits himself at the merry-go-round. At first, knowing this ruined the rest of the film for me.
Looking back, it created some false blinders, and I wish I'd been able to keep with the story because I missed something important. To me the power of the film lies not in the twists (I didn't get anywhere near hitting on the Tesla Twist - that caught me totally off-guard), because there were too many and the film's ultimate fault lies in trying to constantly one-up and out-clever itself.
What really caught me was when I realized that, every single day, Jackman's character woke up realizing that he was going to die that night. True enough he would be instantly reincarnated, but what does that say about self-awareness? And what about the first leap of faith to actually make test that out? Going back and watching the film again with this in mind I found it to be a masterstroke that most people missed. It elevated it to a vastly more layered and cerebral film to THE ILLUSIONIST, though out of the two I'd see THE ILLUSIONIST again just for Rufus Sewell, who's fucking awesome. THE PRESTIGE also loses points for killing off Piper Parabo so quickly.
Anyway, my ultimate point is that I understand people who thought this was the best film ever and I understand people who didn't dig it at all - and that's pretty rare. -
Why? Well, there were far more explosions in it than in the Illusionist. Now, if they'd shown Norton prematurely exploding into his pants in the Jessica Biel love-scene, maybe it'd be a different outcome ...
-
I have no idea what movie you're talking about with the emperor, tomatoe, etc. Enlighten me, please!
-
The twist concerning the Christian Bale was not only that he accomplished his trick with a twin but that the two men shared one life together, hiding the secret from even their wives/lovers. That was the intriguing part of that subplot. But it was fairly obvious, especially since the Bale character was constantly followed by someone the same height who had a heavy beard and wore a hat. If you read the novel, you'll have a greater appreciation for what the Brothers Nolan did with the movie--not because the books fills in any gaps but rather because, although I like the book, it seems completely unfilmable and Nolans took huge liberties with the story to make it work on-screen. Oh and David Bowie rocks.
-
Beyond the twist being obvious (and yes all twists, not just one, including the twin Tesla twist), I thought the general idea of what was going on is stupid. Hugh Jackman's character decides that he is going to kill himself every single night just to be the better magician and have a better show? There is no motivation there and it is a ridiculous idea, and when the movie attempts to make these characters human that motivation is ridiculous. I am a huge Nolan fan, but this dissapointed me on many levels. I thought it was well put together, but sloppily written and in the end too silly. But the motivation for Jackman to do that is stupid and completely unbeleivable, making the movie complete fiction and making it so that you can't care about the movie at all. In the end the movie was fun, but nothing more and definately not one of the best movies of the year.
-
Sounds like you should watch it again ... half of the movie was dedicated to showing just how far Jackman's desperation would take him. His competitveness. His escalation from thinking of killing his former friend to killing himself simply to make a good show is not that hard to believe. What else did he have to live for? He obviously had money. He had no more love in his life. All he had was desperation to become the best. To leave a legacy of his ultimacy. I think you should watch the movie again, Mr. Honcho.
-
Even though he was desperate, killing yourself every single night is absurd. Revenge is beleivable, but killing yourself over and over is not good motivation.
-
Both Bale's and Jackman's characters suffered greatly for their "art" (Jackman's probably moreso, considering he drowned every night); one of the things I appreciated about the movie that the book actually didn't play up so much was the metaphor of the spare pigeon being squashed by the collapsing cage. All this pain and brutality in the service of cultivating an aura of grace and mystery; is it the necessary ingredient behind movie magic as well? I don't know if that's what the Nolan Brothers were driving at, and truly, I don't know if there was any real "message" to the film, but the sacrifices that Bale and Jackman made in the name of their profession were at times quite vivid and shocking. Now, because I don't know how to do paragraph breaks, here's some of this: **************** High-five also for liking Piper Perabo. Speaking of her, I wonder if Angier thought of how her character had died when he drowned himself every night.
-
Great pick on Street Fight. I think it bested the two "green" docs of Who Killed the Electric Car? and An Inconvenient Truth, as well as the two music docs of Devil and Daniel Johnston and Be Here To Love Me. I'm geussing the #1 doc is something I haven't seen: Deliver Us From Evil, The War Tapes, or Iraq in Fragments.
-
I dunno ... everyone's got their own take, but for me, the guys in The Prestige didn't care about living normal lives. Edward Norton, in the Illusionist, seems to put more stock in his love than in his work.
What worked for me about The Prestige was that is was a movie filled with masochism. I completely believe Jackman would kill himself every night in order to prove, though a legacy, that he was the better magician. And the idea of him drowning was a good barometer for where he was, mentally. People kill themselves all the time in real life (moreso than murder even), and I'm sure they're not doing it for as good a reason as Jackman's character is - immortality through name-alone. Why's that so unbelievable?
Anywho ... I'm going to check out that clip now, and then watch some "Down in the Valley." Norton's best two movies for me are still "Fight Club" and "American History X." -
I agree with both of you completely, specifically on the points that A) most of the film was dedicated to showing just how far Jackman would go - the rest of humanity be damned - to top Bale as a magician in the eyes of the public and that B) that there's not a sociological message here per se, but rather that it's a sometimes-fascinating look at how some will cripple themselves for such a perception. In the end, for me, it was the 10% of the script that I found lacking that sadly soured the rest of the story for me - especially when all the chicanery at the end didn't feel necessary.
Ribbons, great point about Parabo and Jackman. That makes me think even more...
(BTW, to do a break, type this () symbol, again with no spaces, at the end of the paragraph you want to end. Once drops your next line of text down a space, the next gives you one whole space in between paragraphs.) -
I think he not only thought of her character when he drowned every night, I suspect it is the self-imposed penance he is paying for allowing her to die in the first place. Even during his time with Olivia, he never recovers from the loss of his wife.
-
Ignore my last paragraph - that couldn't have possible gone any worse. Let me try again:
1. At the end of the paragraph you want to break, type the "less than" symbol found on the comma (,) key.
2. Without spacing, type the letter "b".
3. Without spacing, type the letter "r".
4. Without spacing, type the "greater than" symbol found on the periond (.) key.
Typing one of those will drop your next paragraph down one space; typing two will give you a full line of space in between the two paragraphs.
This is literally the only html trick I know, and fuck me if this doesn't work because I give up. -
Agreement, completely. My friend, who's a bordering-on-insanity-runner and health-nut has this poster on his wall that says that every five miles is "atonement" for his sins, etc.
Christian Bale has always reminded me of him, not only because they look sort of alike, but also because of the amount of discipline it requires to do what Bale does ... from "The Machinist" onto "Batman."
Nolan even talked about that, and I think it's one of the reasons why Bale is in "The Prestige." I think Nolan really wanted to emphasize that these guy's were fighting to make themselves mythological. In the beginning, Jackman doesn't share that passion, but after the death of the Perabo ... he sure as shit donates his entire life to bettering the man who took her away from him. Suicide was just the last step in a long line of self-mutilating steps for Mr. Jackman. -
2LinebreakBoogaloo!
-
There was no twist. Both twists one could get halfway through. Thus we were left with 'two' ethically challenged losers in a battle to the death. So what?
Movie rule #1: give me characters to care about if you're not going to entertain me. The Prestige did not provide characters I could give a damn about thus having figured both twists out an hour into the damn thing, I was bored to tears with the vindictive monologues towards the end. -
Christopher Nolan could film 2 hours of a dog taking a crap, and some people would still call it brilliant.
-
Obsession. Ahhh ... been trying to think of this one forever now.
Everything that happens in "The Prestige," besides the mechanics of the tricks, can be boiled down to obsession. The obsession of two men, well ... three men, to best one another, to attain some god-like ability in the eyes of mankind. And in that respect, it becomes a much more interesting movie than the other magician piece. We see Jackman's descent into obsession. Bale's cutting off of his own finger.
As pointed out, the metaphor of the bird in the cage is nice, too, and it's very funny and complex if you think about it for a while.
Jackman is originally the guy who wants to get the bird out of the cage safely in order to do the trick, right? Bale cares not at all as long as the magic is achieved.
Well, in the end, Bale (through use of his twin) is like the bird who escapes the crushing cage while succeeding with an illusion. Jackman is the bird who gets killed every night in order to stun the masses.
I think it's funny to think about that reversal of ideologies late in the film ... it's Jackman's headfirst dive in his obsession that causes him to throw his ideas about life being sacred aside. It's obsession that causes him to kill himself over and over again, and also penance for his lost love.
We're beating this movie to death, but it's nice to actually talk about a movie instead of just screaming random catch-phrases, isn't it? -
.
Thanks, MrWinston!!
-
... I think you just described my notion of Heaven:
"it's nice to actually talk about a movie instead of just screaming random catch-phrases, isn't it?"
If only... -
Haven't seen the movie, but I can tell you that most of the "twists" concerning the doubles are obvious throughout the novel. It reminded me very much of an old fashioned horror/scifi story along the lines of Frankenstein - how a man's obsession can drive him to horrible ends.
-
It seems like the whole catchphrase thing is finally dying down a little. I'm sure there'll be someone who comes on and says something insane in just a minute to prove me wrong, but ...
Overall ... this is like that moment that Nirvana's "Smells like Teen Spirit" came on the radio. No longer did everyone worship Bon Jovi, David Lee Roth and MC Hammer's magical hip-hop shoes. Logic, poetry, thinking, guitars that didn't just play for hours on end for no reason ...
The whole catchphrase thing was a relief from thought for about 10 seconds, but it was three weeks too long. And it's about time people started talking seriously about these here movie-films all over again.
All the catch-phrasers were trying to turn this place into Brian Cox's Mastubatorium. -
Talking about THE PRESTIGE is making me think about it all over again. I might have to revisit a third time to see if I can pick up the undertones (and overtones) you guys have picked up. I'm more than willing to admit that a good chunk of this might have gone over my head thanks to some hiccups in the script - maybe I'm not giving it the credit it deserves.
-
I defy anyone to tell me they saw that twist coming--that Hugh Jackman was killing himself night after night and keeping the bodies lined up as a graveyard of his soul. THIS is the twist I am talking about, and it's a fucking doozy.
-
Ken Turan (who I still hate for his retarded Fight Club review) really said it best..."For "Crash's" biggest asset is its ability to give people a carload of those standard Hollywood satisfactions but make them think they are seeing something groundbreaking and daring. It is, in some ways, a feel-good film about racism, a film you could see and feel like a better person, a film that could make you believe that you had done your moral duty and examined your soul when in fact you were just getting your buttons pushed and your preconceptions reconfirmed."Amen, brother, and Amen, Mori. Crash is a hackfest, Haggis is a hack. Xenu is a bitch.
-
Just kidding :-P
-
Never. I hate to revisit this again, but it just bears being mentioned...
If you think that film is about racism you've totally missed the point. Totally. Again, I'm not really that bright, but I wasn't misled for one second that the story had anything to do with racism off the most obvious, basic facade.
There are other reasons you could dislike the movie, I suppose, and those could be debated, but to claim that the movie is "about racism" is just dumb. Now all of that is in direct response to Ken Turan and not anyone else, but I find that, generally, people who dislike the movie don't cite any real reason other than that, "Real racism doesn't happen like that." -
Scarlet's ability to keep you from noticing she's not attractive from the neck up!
-
Jan 15, 2007 7:11:53 PM CST
Since there's no Golden Globes thread, let me say here:
by fluffyunbound
For the first time in my life, I was entertained by something Justin Timberlake did. Mocking Prince - and doing it as an ad-lib - is more than I ever expected from him.
-
Now that's a magic trick!
Better yet ... imagining that Hanson and KoRn came from their bleached womb? You speak of backlash, but what was the 80s backlash for? Neil Young, Jimi Hendrix ... no, wait ... that was disco. How's that fair? A decade of disco, and THEN a decade of Flock of Seagulls, Robert Smith, and Def Leppard's One-Armed Drummer? My god ... when Nirvana came along (say what you will), it changed the face of music for the better. Let's have a lyric to lyric challenge between Skid Row and Pearl Jam just to see ...
You 80s dwellers thrived like catfish on the feces at the bottom of the cultural lake. Sorry to break it to ya. Go snort a line of coke off that girl's ass, and it will all be okay. -
And what did it do that Grand Canyon did better?
-
Sorry Mr. Bodet,
But to anyone who really liked the music back then, Candlebox always came across as the Nickelbacks of their time ... tastelass hacks that wrote idiotic songs. And I can't bear to hear their names. Speaking of which, I saw David Lee Roth in a little bar in Covington, LA. It's hilarious to see him struggle for notoriety, still, while he looks decimated and beaten to death by life.
-
That CRASH was about how we find ourselves in a cycle, villainized and then redeemed - often, however, not by anything that we control. It's about how an erred first impression can have a butterfly effect. And it's about how, without thinking about it or ever knowing, what you do can impact a whole series of other people - whether that was your intention or not.
That's my best movie critic answer. I'll stick by it, even though I'd be vomiting if I ever submitted that without a little bit of jest.
It looks to me a hell of a lot like racism was used as a shell, a subtext to get people thinking about the effects we have on each other - not that "racism is all over" was the point of the whole deal. I thought it brought that idea home extremely well. And sure, there are other movies that have approached the subject. GRAND CANYON was one, but thought I liked that film...I always found it a little muted. Maybe it was the 80s, I don't know. I don't think CRASH is perfect, but I liked it well enough, thought the dialgoue was fantastic, but also thought it pandered a little too often. For my money, in this genre, I'll take SHORT CUTS, but CRASH is a damn fine film. -
Grand Canyon, however, was the 90s.
-
Hating "Crash" is the new vogue for the critics these days, I guess.
I still enjoyed the film and thought Ryan Philippe and Matt Dillon's characters in particular made the movie. That stuff was very true to life. -
Sounds like someone is bitter about grunge's death many a moons ago. Sure Nirvana and Pearl Jam are incredible bands, but they couldn't save grunge by themselves. Why is it that 80's songs permeate commercials, trailers, and our movies of today? You can throw away all the hair metal bands of the 80's and still pound for pound the 80's was a golden decade of musical innovation. Have you listend to the radio now? If you're not listening to an 80's cover, your hearing ghetto booty or something straining to be original. The UK is now way ahead of us in terms of innovation. I'll take Michael Jackson and a young Madonna anyday over 50 Cent and Justin Timberlake. Also, the most fucking catchy songs ever were born in the 80's. Techno and rap began to thrive. It allowed acts like U2, Michael Jackson, Prince, Depeche Mode, Talking Heads, and Duran Duran (to name a few) to all coexist. America needs to wake up and catch up with the rest of the world now.
-
Don't want to see Crash. Will never see Crash. If I want to be lectured to by a Scientologist, I'll tune into Tom Cruise during his next visit to the Today Show.
-
I couldn't get through it on a plane.
-
You're right, '91. Had to look it up, though. Seems like it was made earlier than that, doesn't it? Still, I'll stand by my very mild anachronism. To use a more modern slang term, it always felt to me like it was just barely afraid to "go there". That make sense? At any rate, it's still a very good film.
-
Sure ... a little bitter about the death of those musicians, and I'm not denying that the 80s had great moments. Hell ... Metallica and Megadeth made great music when they began, and that was in the 80s ... "important" music. And I'm not defending today's music either, which is (save a few examples) a mockery or redubbing of Queen's theatrics, mongoloydish interpretations of Punk Rock, or straight-up assinine gangsta rap.
Again though, every decade has it's salvation. And Tool is singlehandedly saving rock these days from total idiocy. Bands like Lifesavas and artists such as Andre 3000 are keeping the spirit of hip-hop and funk afloat.
You can try to redirect my comments about the 80s sucking ass all you want, but deep down, you know it's true. That's what "American Psycho" was all about ... a whole decade of vapid, idiotic self-love. -
Damn ye olde, you have a knack for descriptive phrasing. Even if I can't agree with you on everything, you got me laughing. While we're on music here's my best of music for '06, and notice that almost none of it you'll here on the radio:
Best Rock Album
1. TV on the Radio - Return to Cookie Mountain
2. Howling Bells - Howling Bells
3. The Editors - The Back Room
4. Joseph Arthur - Nuclear Daydream
5. Supersystem - A Million Microphones
Best Electronic Album
1. Nathan Fake - Drowning in a Sea of Love
2. Thom Yorke - The Eraser
3. Logistics - Now More than Ever
Best Rap Album
1. Ghostface Killah - More Fish
2. Subtle - For Hero: For Fool -
Stroker Ace > Talledega Nights.
Go rent it. Lugs Harvey still gotta eat... -
"to claim that the movie is "about racism" is just dumb" -Mr. Winston"The all-encompassing theme of the film is racism." -IMDB.com""Crash" tells interlocking stories[...]all defined in one way or another by racism" - Roger Ebert"...[an] unflinching look at the complexities of racial tolerance in contemporary America." - Crash's official website
-
Just sayin'...
-
There are so many dense people on these boards.
1. Your first quote doesn't say anything different than I'm saying. The all-encompassing theme of the film IS racism; it's the subject that relates all of the stories in the film. That's a long way from the story, at its core, being about racism. Would you tell a friend that THE NATURAL was simply "about baseball" or that THE PRESTIGE was "just about magic"? If you did you'd be missing the point.
2. See above. Each of the individual stories are defined by racism. That doesn't mean that's what the movie is about. I feel like I'm repeating myself. Maybe it's because I'm repeating myself.
3. You notice how they threw the word "complexities" in there? Does that perhaps suggest to you that maybe there's a core idea in here that's deeper than racism? Mull that one over for a bit. Try not to hurt yourself.
God help some of you. -
I saw that movie about a year ago and was pretty impressed. Since then it's clear that the studio just has no idea how to market the film. I know there's a trailer but I haven't seen it at a single movie. And I go to a lot of movies. It's a fine film and deserves more than a small release in January.
-
please go see Babel, a film that is as good as Crash thinks it is, and has convinced so many that it is.for the record, throwing out words like "dense" and "dumb", to describe those that have a different opinion, interpretation or response to a film than yourself, does little to convince anyone of anything other than the weakness of your viewpoint.even though I can't claim to be unbias, since I am so completely against Scientology, in its tenets and its brainwashing, and Haggis is just the most recent beneficiary of its subcutaneous influence in Hollywood, here is my take on Crash:I believe there is a strong separation between intention and accomplishment. but sometimes in film, an audience can be tricked into thinking that one is the other. Crash wants to say more than it does, and wants to be better than it is. to accomplish the trickery, you simply take 20 characters of varying races and varying attitudes about race relations run around and fall into incomprehensibly orchestrated and unlikely scenarios, then throw in some painfully unrealistic pseudo-witty dialogue, and manipulative emotional scenes. people come away from this thinking that if they haven't actually learned something, or the film hasn't actually made a statement, it must be because it's SO meaningful, it can't be encapsulated in words, right? race relations are complicated in LA! you imply (rudely and clumsily) that there are deeper issues here than racism and race relations. but what is there? every issue presented, every interaction, every relationship, is saturated with racial issues. the movie claims, pretentiosly, to be about what is below the surface of race relations in America (well, LA...but that's all that America is, right?) but there is nothing below its surface. it's Magnolia without the heart, Babel without the subtlety, Short Cuts without, well, Robert Altman. all it is is 2 white Hollywood scientologists that think they have something to say about racism.I think Paul Haggis was out of his element the moment he stopped writing for Walker, Texas Ranger.
-
Just have to say it: Return to Cookie Mountain is such an awesome album. It's the numero uno on my MySpace page's Top 10. So, there you have it ... we don't agree about the '80s, but that doesn't mean we don't see eye to eye on what the good music is today.
On the rock of Portland radio station, they even had a phone-in contest to see which decade was the best - 60, 70, 80, 90, or 00. Didn't hear who won, but it had me laughing, thinking about this message board.
Now, I'm going to bury myself in SunChips and watch "American Movie." I hope it's inspiring. -
Damn you Jar Jar Binks
-
I'll stand by what I said: if you're claiming the film is "about racism", then I do believe you're dumb. And you apparently didn't read or didn't process my previous statements, which makes you dense.
I'm not at all against a different opinion about this film. If you didn't like it - and you presented a few reasons as to why you didn't, most of which seem based in the fact that Haggis is a Scientologist, something I wasn't even aware of and couldn't care less about - that doesn't make you stupid or dense in the slightest. In fact, I was very clear in stating this before. You thought the dialogue was pseudo-intellectual? Fine, I disagree. In fact I disagree with most of what you're saying, but that doesn't inherently make you stupid.
Here's what I would ask about this film: why is there so much anathema towards the way the film was cast (ie what races were used)? If you didn't portray characters from varying races with varying viewpoints...this kind of story wouldn't be very interesting. I've heard some people complain that, "Everyday racism doesn't exist on these levels...it's a shout across the street or a strange look in a grocery store." Fair enough...but you can't make a movie about that. Just because someone's collected worse acts into a film doesn't mean they don't exist.
For that matter, this film isn't trying to tell us that that these people are the only people in the world. These aren't the only viewpoints that exist. Why some try to reduce it to such is beyond me. I don't think it ever tries to make a commentary on race in America at large - it's a commentary on the mindsets of these people in that location at this point. Why is that so difficult to digest?
You say that the coincidences in this film, the intersections between the actors are "incomprehensibly orchestrated and unlikely". What qualifies you to say? In fact, I'd believe that, if we stepped back from our own lives and isolated certain parts of them, we'd find that these situations occur far more often than not. Just because it's not something we think about in as part of our macrocosm doesn't mean it's not a part of the microcosm.
To me, the film is about how there is always more below the surface than we initially let on - not only in our daily interactions with others but in our own heads, the parts of us that no one else ever sees. Race is the catalyst for all of the dynamic situations in this story, but it's far from what the movie is about, and I feel sorry for anyone to whom this didn't compute. If you checked out at the racial slurs, like I said, you missed the point. -
I read all your comments, and I do believe the movie is about racism, and I don't think I'm dumb or dense. but if you'd like to think of me as such, that's fine. it is a talkback, after all, and it is hard to disagree on here without insulting, it seems.I guess I am still stuck on your insistence that the movie is not about racism, and that it's about "how there's always more below the surface"...that, to me, sounds even more pretentious than Haggis thinking he has something truly legitimate to say about racism. now he's commenting on our collective subconscious? WALKER TEXAS RANGER...
and I recognize that contrived coincidences and setups can be part of a decent film, and even used to good extent, but come on, they only exist in Crash as an excuse to tie these characters together loosely enough to be sure they're in the same filmic reality. I would have liked it a little better if it had just been 4 or 5 seperate vignettes, since there was no real reason to tie them all together. (as you imply, it's all about the deep over-arching points, right? we shouldn't worry about anything as useless as plot development or narrative)I didn't check out at the racist slurs (very weak little jab, by the way...come on, man), I checked out because I don't think pretentious, white Scientologists from Hollywood should make movies like this. because this is what you get. a movie that says little, and doesn't teach us to ask anything new of ourselves. it's a cinematic tic-tac, yet Hollywood congratulated itself on grilling up filet mignon.if Bobby gets nominated for an Oscar this year, maybe we'll see a repeat this year of the travesty that was Crash's Oscar win. lots of actors + no point = Oscar gold.and for the record, Mr. Winston, you are acting like anyone that doesn't like Crash doesn't get it (certainly that's how you seem to address me). and I had to laugh, because I remember when it was announced that Crash was nominated for Best Picture. if you missed the talkback, you really should look through it, at least scroll through and read the comments about Crash. pretty funny stuff. and it turns out that most people (not just my dense, dumb ass) saw through Crash's mysticism. as one TB'er put it, it was the latest case of "the emporer's new clothes"...Mori, if you're still reading this, can you weigh in? I read your Casino Royale review, but I never heard too much about Crash. as a fellow Haggis disliker, I need someone to help me convince Mr. Winston that there are others out there besides me (since I'm dumb and dense) that see through Haggis veil. Xenu, help us! -
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/22347?semperex-search
-
Jan 16, 2007 1:21:55 AM CST
"... Gondry is a filmmaker who cannot be underestimated
by voxmillennium
I think you mean "overestimated" unless you mean to say his work is no good?
As for bashing the Hannibal prequel, in this case it follows the book so it's different from those other remakes in that respect. You may not like the fact that Harris painted a background for Lecter, but personally I thought it was fascinating and didn't make the character any less scary or demystified, but I guess it's a question of taste. -
I think he means "cannot" as in "should not"...as in no one should underestimate Gondry...you know, like when someone says, "the Saints cannot be left out of discussions about the playoffs"...they mean to say that they should not be left out, not that it it's impossible for them to be left out.
-
... I amended it to "should not be underestimated," which is what I meant in the first place.
And regarding the Hannibal prequel, I have read it, and I think Harris has finally lost me as a reader. I hate the demystification and overexplanation of these characters, and I think it's a huge mistake. I think it's a rotten trend, and I see it getting worse before it gets better. -
goddamned good. And the aftermath, with the whole, "Just kill me now." "What do you think I'm doing." Just wonderful. Also, the date scene with Damon, Farminga, and that chocolate dessert is also wonderful.
-
Well written, Mori. I agree with every choice you made for the list (although I haven't seen STREET FIGHT yet and I was slightly disappointed with TALLADEGA NIGHTS). Looking forward to the main list.
-
phantom edit of the two 1-shot action scenes...you know thats it...like the start of private ryan.
-
Fair enough; I do wholeheartedly agree in a case like Zombie's Halloween remake which I believe to be completely insane and disrespectful of the original.
On a different issue, I'm very ambivalent about Yang Zimous recent turn to the martial arts genre and away fom socially relevant movies. Sure, his latest pictures have great stories and look amazing, but I do miss his early more cutting edge stuff like already mentioned "red sorghum", "raise the red lantern" and "ju dou".
Still, looking forward to his latest. -
My feelings on the subject of demystification may be exasperated since I actually read the Zombie script this week. I'm trying to remain open-minded about the film itself... but it's not easy... it's really... really not easy...
And in the case of Zhang Yimou, I think he's a different guy than he was when he made RED SORGHUM or RAISE THE RED LANTERN. I think his attitudes about China are different. HERO exists almost as a refutation to some of his earlier films. I think he's one of the most visually acute filmmakers working, and I think he's still talking about the China he lives in, just using the remove of history or the distraction of martial arts to do so. -
Sorry, I wanted to do that just one last time before your damn catchphrase aruguement completely makes sense to me and I stop doing that from now on.
-
You said:
"I checked out because I don't think pretentious, white Scientologists from Hollywood should make movies like this."
And that's why this argument is going nowhere - an absurd bias like this. I'm the absolute last person on the planet to be a Scientologist apologizer - I live about five miles from their HQ and I feel like I need to be a lot further - but if I were ignorant enough to pretend that because someone was a Scientologist and white that they can't be affected by or have anything intelligent to say about people of different ethnic backgrounds I'd be in trouble.
Again, if you don't think there's depth in the story past racism, that's you're opinion and that's not why I'm calling you dumb; ditto for your feelings on the dialogue, the coincidences, and the way the story played out. But yes, I'm calling you dumb if you think the film is about racism. I'd go so far as to say that racism is akin to a McGuffin in this film. Not everyone who dislikes the film didn't understand it - not even close, in fact, and I never once said that. I was, actually, addressing you specifically. No, I don't think you get it, but it's not due (it seems) to a lack of intelligence - it's due to a sort of unwarranted bigotry, and THAT is dense. -
KNRK? or KUFO? Portland Oregon or Portland Maine? I'm so confused...
-
Sorry about leaving out that Portland, Oregon part. I'm retarded to think that there's no Portlands beside this one.
-
There's a Portland Maine?!?!
-
In honor of today in Portland, I will put in this classic Cuba Gooding Jr. movie. Yay. And unlike school, I know Blockbuster won't be closing for the snow. Fuck me.
-
"Fudge? Packer?" Good thing I don't work today. For those who wouldn't know Portland snow is similar to Tim Burtonesque snow with HUGE flakes falling slowly yet driving people insane. In conclusion, "Let's Build a Snowman!"
-
the upspray of blood onto Leo from MartySheen after he fell from the roof. That wicked shit totally caught me by surprise. Don't you guys agree that was the coolest death in the movie?
-
I didn't know this.. and I've seen the movie. A Cuban Snow Day must be infinitely worse. Or did you mean.. the movie where he plays with dogs?
-
please don't ruin that fantastic one-shot car scene in Children of Men for me. It was partly why I liked the movie so much.
-
...were all great. I guess it is natural to compare Illusionist and Prestige in one "category" but I think that is a mistake. One had a touch of scifi in it, one did not. I think the Prestige haters probably did not like the scifi element, primarily. I felt that Illusionist was much more predictable, and the big 'reveal' was more of a 'confirm'. Departed was such a welcome change from all the other films of this year, and I agree with the poster above about the date scene: "I'll arrest You right now" was such a great line, and perfectly delivered, very natural.I would include The Fountain in a top ten list, not so much because it was great, and certainly not because it was accessible, but I enjoyed the ambitious willingness to be different and unapologetic. It dances right on the line between Serious/Deliberate and Laughable/Absurd, keeps its balance, and lets the viewer choose. They did not shy away from scenes that could alienate or disengage viewers. Prestige took a similar chance with the mechanism, and probably both films lost half the folks because of it.
-
Considering the FACT that The Prestige and Bond are way better than Rocky Balboa, I pray to Christ in hell that it doesn't make it into Mori's top 10.
-
For several reasons. The first one was opening up the page and seeing Talladega Nights right off the bat. I got maybe a chuckle or two out of the whole film, but I think that as a movie it borders somewhere between mediocre and outright bad. Will Ferrel's schtick is just completely tired at this point, the writing was sloppy and formulaic, and while I can dig what you're saying about the Americana elements to it I don't think they place this film above all the others that came out this year, save 19. My next big surprise was that three of my favorite films of the year (placing second, third, and about seventh respectively) failed to make it into your top ten. The Departed, The Prestige, and Casino Royale were all excellent. I can currently only think of one title that I enjoyed more than The Departed and The Prestige, and that is Children of Men. (I still have yet to see Apocalypto and Pan's Labyrinth, but I'm almost caught up besides those two as far as possible contenders go) I imagine that you're going to put The Fountain (my number five) and Pan's on your list, maybe Letters from Iwo Jima, hopefully not The Queen. I was also absolutely shocked to see Happy Feet place higher than The Departed. Subtext or no, Happy Feet looks utterly unwatchable to me, along with the 30 other animated films about talking animals/inanimate objects that came out this year. I'm just sick of these movies, and nothing can be said to sway me towards this glut in the market. I have only enjoyed one animated film of this ilk to date, and that is The Incredibles. Anyway, I'm a little bit taken aback by this list as I usually agree with you on most of your reviews. I respect your opinion but I feel this has been a very strong year for cinema and including films like Talladega Nights and Happy Feet verges on blasphemy.
-
Regarding HAPPY FEET, I'll just say this: I judge films based on how well they do what they set out to do. I think HAPPY FEET was entirely successful at what it tried to do, and I think George Miller's track record demands at least some consideration. Yes, there have been a number of awful talking animal movies lately. I agree completely. But this is the director of the deeply underrated BABE PIG IN THE CITY, and I think his work on HAPPY FEET is equally subversive and clever.
And regarding TALLADEGA NIGHTS, it's a comedy. You can't argue comedy with someone. Either it makes you laugh or it doesn't. All I can do is explain why I reacted the way I did.
And remember, this is not a list of the "best" of anything. I think you have to be an arrogant fuckstick to say that you can rank the "best" films of any year. These are simply my favorite films of the year, and as such, I don't expect this list to mirror yours.
If nothing else, maybe I can persuade you to at least check out HAPPY FEET on DVD and be open-minded. You may still decide you hate it, but I always try to wait until I've seen something before I decide if it has any merit or not. -
Well atleast not in an intelligent discussion about cinema, but I agree with you that there isn't a best, just individual taste that sometimes accumulates into some sort of undeniable status. I also agree that comedy is a mysterious fish. The funniest movie I saw this year was Blackballed, but it's a few years old anyway. I also didn't see some the comedies that looked the most appealing to me this year, like Idiocracy or Borat. I did see Talladega Nights and Nacho Libre however, and I found them both kind of vaguely amusing when I wanted something hysterical like last year's 40 Year Old Virgin. Talladega Nights was just continuing the long string of bland "frat pack" comedies (Wedding Crashers, Anchorman, You Me and Dupree.. etc etc) that still seem to satisfy people somehow. Anyway, it's cool if you liked it and I've been known to love plotless race movies myself (Vanishing Point anyone?) but Talladega Nights was basically anchorman with a change in occupation. As for Happy Feet, I can see what you're saying. It's a kids movie with a brain. OK. So was Babe. I'm just not into that stuff anyway. I know George Miller as the Road Warrior guy, and for that he is cool in my books. Maybe it's because I am a 23 year old male with no desire for children until I'm 30 or rich, and you're already a family man. I have never really dug children's movies, even when I was a child. I was watching The Thing when I was 8, not the Little Mermaid. My dad just raised me that way. I watched lots of stuff that kids enjoy, like Star Wars or the Goonies, but I skipped the whole family movie phase altogether. Subversive is nice, but the movie has to grab me in other ways. And that's just it, I like it when a movie grabs me by the nuts and twists. I see what you're saying about a movie achieving what it set out to do, and if I reviewed films professionally I would make more of an effort to embrace the few genres I don't like and rate them based on their individual criteria. As of now I just knows what I likes. I also think the potential for artistry in children's films is much higher than these digital animators have been able to provide so far. We are still getting the same plasticy, generic character designs and the same animals with their cutesy cartoon faces. No one has thought outside of the box yet. Consider Miyazaki and what he does with animation, or even Walt Disney. These new animated films lack soul, they may achieve photorealism in their background matte shots or maybe the characters move with a convincing fluidity, but there is no imagination in the conceptualization of the characters. Even in the Incredibles, a movie that I liked, the character designs are all very bland and simple. I might eventually check Happy Feet out just based on your recommendation. I really respect your opinion, out of all the reviewers on this site I find that I agree with you the most and when we differ you usually explain yourself quite well. I also like the work you've done on Masters of Horror. I'm surprised by your list this year though, all I'm saying. You saw way more movies than I did, so it's not a surprise our lists are different. I remember them being quite similar last year. Cheers Drew, looking forward to your top 10.
-
Neil Burger did NOT use cgi for the magic tricks in The Illusionist. He claims that 90% of the tricks were not cgi-enhanced. He wanted them to feel real, so he brought in Ricky Jay, the famous magician/actor, to assist the tricks as they would be exhibited in that time period.
-
... not at all.
I'm saying that's why I don't call my look at a year the "best of," since I wouldn't presume to say that you can quantify what is or isn't "best."
I got no beef with you, my brutha. We're just talking movies is all. -
... I think you may have that backwards. I know Ricky Jay was a consultant on THE PRESTIGE, and even appears onscreen in the film. But whether he worked on THE ILLUSIONIST or not, there is definitely a fair amount of low-budget CG in that film that stood out stylistically.
-
No order:
Babel, Children of Men, The Fountain, United 93, Pan's Labyrinth, The Proposition, The Queen, that little indie flick that suprised you from the other day can't remember title, Dreamgirls, and....... ? -
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it, but this was Bond movie that got influenced by everything around it instead of making its own mark. I recently got those box sets of all the Bond flicks and was reminded how 'License to Kill' was in no way a Bond film and really just an extended 'Miami Vice' episode that sampled from 'Lethal Weapon', 'Scarface' and every other American narc fiction of the day.
I think Casino Royale was so successful for this reason. Its exactly like everything else right now and therefore totally accessable to a huge audience. This movie riffs on Bourne, Ronin, and ends up doing very little distinct and very little in the Bond tradition but making a good American-style espionage flick. I thought Craig played the role exactly like Timothy Dalton, who I also never accepted as James Bond.Again, I was entertained by this film. But didn't leave feeling I'd seen a James Bond film, I just felt like I saw a fun espionage flick. I'm sure that by the time the next generation of Bond films start with the next actor in the lead role people will want the cheese of this franchise back and in full form. -
"unwarranted bigotry"...that one made me chuckle...http://www.xenu.net/
-
"unwarranted bigotry"...that one made me chuckle...http://www.xenu.net/
-
The talk of the difference between best film and favourite film is an interesting one. Personally, I say "Best" even though I mean it's my "Favourite". Perhaps next year I should be more accurate. But this is a good time to pimp my show The Bazura Project, because we begun our Wrap Up of 2006 with a discussion on the difference between best and favourite:
http://www.bazuraproject.com/videos/2007/01/104_review_outro.php -
We don't deserve to know Mori's top 10.
-
There you are! Where the &#@# can I find "Henri?" If you don't want to spam, at least give me an encoded clue where to find it. Best film of 2006!
-
... I have three more entries to write. Sorry, but I really wrestled with the order of the top ten.
It'll be up by Thursday morning at the absolute latest, but hopefully before then. -
I think it will hold up over time. I liked what they tried to do with Timmy Dalton and just dislike Roger Moore's Bond. As a little kid, sure ate that shit up, but it's crap. Just like Brosnan's turn got progressively worse and became more and more silly. I don't want all that nonsense back in my Bond movies. The world has changed and has gotten more deadly and I want my Bond to reflect that.If I want my Bond to be over the top I'll throw in Austin Powers.
-
Here's hoping "Rocky Balboa" is nowhere near your top ten.
-
Yet seeing as how I'm in rural PA, I can legitimately only have a Top 5 without delving into date movies like Grudge 2(shudder) and Saw 3(again, I shudder). ============= 5. The Fountain 4. The Departed 3. Casino Royale 2. United 93 1. Children of Men *** I envy those who got to see Pan's Labyrinth. I'm actually considering driving to Cleveland (closest big city) to see it.
-
Crash is a great film, and Crash is about racism. The end. I mean, everything that the movie is about, every action that happens, and every thing it is trying to show the viewer is about the complexities of racism.
-
wow! since you asked, you can find "Henri" here: http://tinyurl.com/y9t7wa I've got some other new short films up there too, check them out.Henri just got accepted into 2 short film festivals, and it's playing right now in the preshow program at all the Warren Theaters in Wichita. fun stuff. thanks for the support!
-
DAM YOU ROB ZOMBIE
-
any chance of seeing the list tonight, or should i just go to sleep ..
-
given that the success of film is generally subjective, don't you think if a film aims higher and accomplishes its aim, or partially accomplishes its aim, it takes on greater significance than your run of the mill, well executed, paint by the numbers genre piece. Otherwise, Dickens would be on the same literary level as Joyce, Blake Edwards on the same level as Kubrick. Not to say that taste doesn't come into play, but there are times when you see a movie so great that its greatness is hard to deny. And in the cases of films called great that I haven't gotten, I go back for repeated viewings to see what others saw. I guess, what I'm saying is this: I believe there is a place where personal taste and objective greatness meet. That is to say, if you made a list of the best movies, I think you might have to back it up as in an academic paper, but I wouldn't call you an arrogant fuckstick. I'd call you a film scholar.
-
Wouldn't be surprised if it is. I haven't witnessed Street Fight or The Host (I really wanna see that), but otherwise your upper list is respectable. Casino Royale is higher on mine.
-
SPOILERS, obviously. The key to this movie is doing the work of figuring out in each and every scene which twin is which. And to do that, you really have to see it a second time, even if you got the twist midway. I think a lot of folks are saying, OK, I get it, but are still viewing the twins as one unit rather than two different people.
Because if you do separate the twins, the film no longer lacks a likeable character and is no longer emotionally cold. The level-headed twin, the one who never cheats on his wife and wanted the feud to end, becomes a completely sympathetic character, and his reunion with his daughter moved me to tears the third time I saw it. And have you noticed that the only morally questionable thing he does is kill Angier, while the only morally admirable thing his rash twin does is try to save Angier (well, his copy) when he drowns? The movie is full of brilliant strokes like that. No film I've ever seen has rewarded repeated viewings more, which is why it's the best film of the past five years.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 209 total posts 207 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 97 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 144 total posts 77 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 68 total posts 68 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 64 total posts 60 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 480 total posts 55 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 53 total posts 50 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 118 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 182 total posts 27 posts