This is over a year late– the time for my 2014 list has already come and gone– but I am finally posting my list of the best films of 2013. This year’s list is short, partly because of the incredibly long delay, and partly because it was a so-so year for film. Having said that, I fully stand behind these 6 films, and recommend each of them highly. At the time of writing, it has been a long time since I first saw several of these films, so I apologize if the descriptions are briefer than usual…
(6) 12 Years a Slave
Based on a real life story, 12 Years a Slave is a brutal expose of America’s history with slavery, and is particularly apt when considered in contrast to the (tongue-in-cheek) post-racial world that many profess exists today.
(5) Dallas Buyers Club
Undoubtedly the year’s best acting performances come from this film; the Oscars got this one right, with both Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto winning for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor respectively.
(4) Inside Llewyn Davis
This is the Coen Brothers’ tribute to the 1960’s folk revival scene, a combination of director(s) and theme which might just be the most perfect fit possible. Beautiful music together with a compelling character study (which also doubles as a sub-cultural analogue), makes Inside Llewyn Davis one of the softest spoken and most overlooked Coen bros. movies in a long time.
(3) Her
It’s been almost 2 years since I saw this film, so I feel entirely inadequate at articulating the many-layered ways that this film has import at this time. But if I had to pin down this film’s grandest philosophical achievement (though this is hardly its only one), it’s in how it shows where the real limits of love and intimacy lie. Those limits lie not in the possibility of our virtual connections, if you will. But rather, they lie in our embodied ones.
(2) Mud
A coming of age thriller with equal parts grit and magic, “Mud” might most simply be described as a cross between “The Goonies” and “Stand By Me”. I think it deserves to be on the same cinematic mantle, for sure. “Mud” is also wholly unique, though– a genuine American classic in its own right. It’s unfortunate that this film continues to slide under the radar. It’s the movie that officially put Jeff Nichols on my shortlist of favorite writer-directors (though I think his “Take Shelter”, from 2011, may have been a superior film, “Mud” is absolutely lathered in more heart). This is the must-see surprise of 2013.
(1) Gravity
Simply the best all-around film of the year, the aptly-titled “Gravity” is a space-age thriller that puts the awe of life in focus from the grandest of perspectives: Earth’s orbit. Putting some of the physics errors aside for the sake of cinematic appeal, it’s impossible not to walk away from this film without feeling inspired to live. The triumph of its main character in the end is personal as much as physical. Awe-inspiring, tear-jerking, breathtaking, exhilarating, heart-lifting… “Gravity” is the whole package.
I’m posting this incredibly late this year. The reason? I was mostly uninspired. The 2012 film class was extremely weak. In fact, it was one of the worst classes in recent memory. (Which is too bad, because 2011 and 2010 were both strong years.) A number of films which received acclaim this year fell flat (e.g., Silver Linings Playbook was not just bad, it was abhorrent). Even the 7 films that made the cut this year had their faults, but I felt these 7 had enough redeeming qualities to be worthy of mention.
Here it is, the definitive list of the top 7 films of 2012:
(7) Argo
Overall Argo was a well-constructed film; it was an entertaining political thriller. I felt this made it list-worthy. But there was nothing particularly standout about it either. The film also took a fair amount of liberty with the historical events it was portraying. That’s nothing new for film, of course– thus the “based on a true story” label– but it’s a pet peeve of mine when a film like this blatantly embellishes events purely for the sake of its primary target audience. In this case, the story was rewritten to give the American CIA most of the credit, when the real historical heroes were the Canadians. Nevertheless, the film does a good job at building suspense and serves its purpose as an entertaining dramatization.
(6) Your Sister’s Sister
It’s got an implausible, bizarre premise, but somehow Your Sister’s Sister succeeds at tapping into something truly genuine. This could also be the year Mark Duplass officially became an indie film darling. The performances are particularly noteworthy in this film because most of the script was improvised by the actors, and save for a few minor exceptions, you probably won’t notice. Candid and witty, Your Sister’s Sister was a rare pleasant surprise this year.
(5) Amour
A beautiful, haunting film. In some ways, it’s as much a horror story as it is a story of love and dependence. Its only limitation– and sometimes it really is just this simple– was that I found the story rather tedious. Even so, I always do my best to keep my own lack of connection with a film from tainting my overall sense of its aesthetic value. So here it is on the list, despite being wearisome: Amour.
(4) Killing Them Softly
Featuring an excellent cast, and based on the novel Cogan’s Trade, Killing Them Softly has a lot going for it. My one complaint– and its a minor, though omnipresent one– is with the lack of subtlety in the script. Overdubbed political speeches and the film’s final scene, when Brad Pitt’s character most blatantly delivers its keynote address, are a tad too explicit. The symbolism here is barely symbolic at all– it’s obvious. As a result, the motif doesn’t come across as very profound. Even so, there are worse complaints to have. In a disappointing year for film, Killing Them Softly easily distinguishes itself.
(3) The Master
P.T. Anderson rarely disappoints, especially in regards to his ability to pull out amazing performances from his actors. The Master is no exception. It easily contains the best performances of the year. Joaquin Pheonix and Amy Adams are both noteworthy, but Philip Seymour Hoffman really steals the show with his portrayal of a charismatic cult leader eerily reminiscent of Scientology’s L. Ron Hubbard. Strangely, Hoffman is so good here that it might be to the film’s detriment. Pheonix’s character is instead the focus– a primal man brilliantly portrayed by Pheonix– but a difficult point of view from which to connect with the audience. The character had few redeeming qualities from which to relate. The film would have made a stronger emotional connection, I think, if its primary focus was Hoffman’s enrapturing persona rather than Pheonix’s. The result was an emptiness– a vacuousness– that failed to adhere. Even so, the film is worth it for the performances alone.
(2) Safety Not Guaranteed
First off, I want to say that I’m somewhat embarrassed that I am ranking this film at #2. Let me preface this ranking by acknowledging that this movie, and its script, is filled with flaws. The reason the film is getting such a high ranking in spite of its flaws is that I think it works within its genre. It had genuine heart, despite its quirky plot. (Of course, it also helps that this was a particularly poor year in film; an opportunity to take a little liberty with my top rankings.) These sorts of movies also tend to have the unique quality of being able to wow you in the end, and Safety Not Guaranteed is no exception. As zany romantic comedies go, I’ll take this film over a movie like Silver Linings Playbook any day. The key difference in the case of Safety is that the plot gimmicks aren’t forced, and the ending isn’t a cliche sell out. Quite simply, it was a joy to watch and it struck me as authentic– and Mark Duplass and Aubrey Plaza make for a charming tandem. This is how the genre should look.
This ranking is also a reflection of just how shitty movies were this year. If I’m being honest, the only reason I’m ranking it at #2 is because it’s one of only two films from this year that I wouldn’t mind watching a second time. That should count for something, right?
(1) Beasts of the Southern Wild
In considering the best film of the year, there was never really any competition. Beasts of the Southern Wild stands alone as this year’s only true heavyweight. Beautiful, poetic, captivating, inspiring– a true modern day fairytale. Though it dances in mythology, Beasts is a visceral, authentic narrative that connects. Simply breathtaking.
Well it’s that time of year again: this is the definitive list for the best films of the year. Much like last year, the field of good films runs quite deep, even though it isn’t very top heavy– that is, there aren’t many ‘elite’ films; but lots of good ones. I usually only rank the top 15, or 10 (in down years), but this year I even considered extending the list to 25. That said, this is also one of those years that the Academy Awards are destined to get wrong. Most of the year’s best films are smaller, indie films or far too edgy or violent for Oscar sentiments to handle. In fact, many of the major Oscar categories are filled with mediocre films this year (one perfect example: “War Horse” is not just bad, it is probably Spielberg’s worst film ever). Acting nominations are also awry, as many of the best performances of the year– especially from women– were completely unrecognized (Glenn Close in “Albert Nobbs” instead of Carey Mulligan in “Shame”? Seriously?). If you’re the type to use the Oscars as a guide at year’s end to catch up on some of the best films of the year, you really need this list instead this year.
Before getting to the list, the usual disclaimers: I can’t see every film. While I have a pretty stringent vetting process, there are some good movies that I might have missed. Also, many foreign films are impossible to find and watch until later into the following year, so this list is always up for revision and occasional reshuffling. Secondly, several of my reviews of movies on this list are critical. Those criticisms are there to justify why I have ranked the films as I have, not to suggest that any film on this list is not worth seeing. If it’s listed, it’s a good film.
Now without further delay, here’s the 20 best films of 2011!
(20) 50/50
This is a film I avoided until much later into the year. Any film that advertizes the fact that it’s from the same people who created “Superbad,” but is about a young man who gets cancer, can’t leave many people with high expectations, can it? The good news is this film is actually only barely a comedy, and treats the subject with honesty. Don’t get me wrong, it has its faults, but in the end 50/50 tugs at genuine heartstrings.
(19) Margin Call
‘Margin Call”s biggest strength lies in its excellent script, even though the acting is, with a few exceptions, largely dry. Dialogue is punchy and smart, filled with poignant reflections on the warped values that ultimately led to the financial collapse of ’07.
(18) We Need to Talk About Kevin
Tilda Swinton is the first notable actress among many from the movies on this list that got snubbed by the Academy this year. She easily deserves a nomination over all those who did receive one, with the only exception being perhaps Michelle Williams. ‘We Need To Talk About Kevin’ is an edgy, creepy thriller, beautifully shot and edited, and as said, well acted too. It falters, however, in the non-linear way with which the storyline unfolds. The narrative gets a bit lost for the concept, and for this reason I found myself occasionally bored and disconnected from the plot. Even so, the film brilliantly unfolds like a nightmare– and may leave you laying awake at night pondering its premise.
(17) Tyrannosaur
This is one of those obscure little gems that come from out of no where to leave an impression. Paddy Considine’s directorial debut is rough around the edges, but soft on the interior. It never tries to be anything more than what it is, which is just enough. Acting is also superb: each character is deeply damaged, but somehow retain the best of intentions.
(16) My Week with Marilyn
Among those nominated for best actress this year, Michelle Williams is the most deserving. This is a side of Marilyn Monroe we’ve not fully seen before, a vulnerability that Williams captures flawlessly. Ironically, though, the film’s biggest asset is also its biggest obstacle– Williams’ performance. Quite simply, filling the role of one of the greatest sex symbols of a generation is no simple role call. As wonderful as Williams’ portrayal is, she just doesn’t carry the allure that the role demands. This is no fault of Williams– who transcended her own boundaries in many ways here– but the shoes are just too big to fill, and as a result the film fell a bit flat.
(15) The Artist
Oscar bait. Odds are strong that this film will win for Best Picture this year. First, what worked: cinematography is stunning. Really beautiful. Acting is also top notch– Jean Dujardin deserves to be in the discussion for best actor. Lastly, the film’s concept is extremely clever. The problem, though? Who wants to honestly sit through a silent film anymore? Sound does get incorporated into the film incrementally, but this technique is too under-utilized. If sound had been more consistently incorporated as character development escalated and the plotline progressed, I think this movie really could have transcended itself. But instead it just embraced itself as a silent film. It just didn’t follow through with the concept enough to engage me with it. In the end, the antique aspects of the genre just won’t appeal to the modern movie goer.
(14) The Skin I Live In (La Piel Que Habito)
Before saying anything about the film, take note: If you’re watching the trailers I’ve posted for these movies, this trailer is one of the worst, most amateurish trailers I’ve ever seen. Best to ignore the text in it entirely– it’s awful. Please, do yourself a favor and don’t judge this movie based upon its trailer. That said, on to the movie itself: anyone who is a fan of Pedro Almodóvar will probably think this film is another masterpiece– and they wouldn’t be terribly far off. The narrative is a bit zany, but there are some poignant philosophical quandaries explored here. (Think along the lines of gender being only ‘skin deep’).
(13) Carnage
I found myself laughing out loud throughout this film. The escalation of the dialogue is like a symphony into chaos, carefully stripping away the facade of civilization into the raw carnage that lies underneath. The cast here is fantastic, with excellent acting by each. If one performance stands out, though, it belongs to Kate Winslet (another actress this year who may have deserved an Awards nod). The first half of the film is far more effective than the second half– it begins to lose its authenticity, or believability, as things progress (and by this, I don’t mean in the way that the film had intended to descend into chaos– I mean that the dialogue and character swings became unrelatable). This isn’t a long film, you can watch it in a little over an hour, but you may want to watch it again.
(12) The Tree of Life
As a huge Terrence Malick fan, I went into this film with the highest of possible expectations. This was supposed to be his magnum opus; an all-encompassing epic that would profoundly answer all of nature’s mysteries about humankind’s place in the cosmos. In other words, I was pretty much destined to be disappointed. And by comparison to those expectations, and to Malick’s body of work, this film did fall short. First, though: the cinematography in this film is some of the most beautiful I’ve ever seen. If you go into this film thinking of it more as a videographer’s portfolio than a film with a real narrative, you’ll have your breath taken away. The problem with the movie comes with the narrative. The narrator’s dialogue is extremely vague and abstruse– it adds almost nothing to the progression of the narrative, or to the imagery (basically, the narrator only asks the vaguest of questions throughout the film, things like: “Who am I?”, “Why am I here?”, etc. with little nuance). I’d rather it just have been left out. Several other aspects to the narrative, such as a few brief scenes at Sean Penn’s character’s workplace, are left completely undeveloped. In the end, the ethereal aspects of this film’s narrative just leave you floating aimlessly in thin air. For those who require something to grasp onto here: don’t overthink it. The entire plotline is really just a story about a family coping with the death of a child– trying to make sense of it in the grand scheme of life on Earth. That’s all this really is, at heart. It’s a beautiful film, but also a tad overarching.
(11) Midnight in Paris
Many people are lauding this as the best Woody Allen movie in over a decade. Not quite. “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” was easily superior, but it was a few years ago and how quickly we forget. It’s true that Allen hasn’t left us with many memorable films in these latter years, though; Allen has been shooting blanks for a long time. So ‘Midnight in Paris’ was a welcome relief! The script is endlessly charming and endearing, and the plotline is original and well-executed. Where this film can be criticized, it’s in the acting. Owen Wilson does a half-hearted Woody Allen impersonation– he was poorly cast. Most of the supporting performances are forgettable too. But overall, this is an endearing film. It’s nice to have you back, Woody Allen.
(10) Martha Marcy May Marlene
What’s this? An Olsen sister that can actually act? Elizabeth Olsen doesn’t just act– she delivers one of the best performances of the year by a female lead. It’s yet another great female performance that went overlooked by the Oscars this year. This film is extremely smart as it unravels psychologically– even the viewer is likely to mix up dreams and nightmares from reality– much as a cult might weave its way into a young woman’s vulnerable psyche. I’ll guarantee you one thing about this film: it’s got an ending that you’ll never see coming.
(9) Incendies
Technically part of last year’s Oscar class, “Incendies” wasn’t released to most audiences until later into 2011, so for me it’s included in this year’s class. A haunting, haunting film that is as engaging as it is poignant. And poignant it is. Conflict in the Middle East is tragic for many reasons, but perhaps the most devastating is the fact that when you strip away the veneer of history, it’s really just neighbor killing neighbor; or maybe an even closer relation than that.
(8) Beginners
An endearing script, “Beginners” is director Mike Mills’ autobiographical dramatization of his own life. But you don’t need to know that fact to enjoy this film. Non-conventional modes of storytelling are interwoven seamlessly throughout the film, such as a dog which gets its own subtitles, and narration that gives the story both a place in time and a generalized, universal relatedness that is timeless. In the end, it’s just a sweet story about people finding their own value in each other. Christopher Plummer has the noteworthy performance here, as a man who “comes out” to his son at the age of 75.
(7) Take Shelter
This is one of the true indie gems from this year. The way the drama escalates is done to subtle perfection, ultimately climaxing in a riveting final 20 minutes. The film seems to end in a flawlessly-executed faux-resolution, until that ending is usurped by the true ending, one which ties it all together brilliantly, and will leave many audiences both perplexed and enlightened. It’s simply great filmmaking. Michael Shannon deserved an Oscar nod for this performance, but was overlooked. The thing that really makes this film transcendent, however, is in what it represents. Few films better capture the insecurity and restlessness of the current American psyche. Is it really so crazy to prepare for a coming storm?
(6) Young Adult
This film really shows the maturity of screenwriter Diablo Cody (“Juno”), and is her best work to date. Charlize Theron also deserves recognition for putting on a fantastic performance– she was perfectly cast. Theron plays an author of books in the ‘Young Adult’ genre– a label with meanings on multiple levels within the movie. Aside from being funny, this script is devastating (in the best possible way) during its protagonist’s final redemption. Despite a few plot bumps (why was Mavis’ mother and father at the party at the end?), the script completely floors you by the time it’s over. There’s no holding back here, no time for pleasantries. The dialogue is cutting and honest, especially in the film’s last series of scenes and interactions. (The last conversation in the film is brutally authentic!). Anyone with ambition who has a hometown that they have left, but occasionally return to, will find this film poignantly relatable. On the other hand, those who live ordinary lives having never left their hometown may want to be forewarned: this film will kick your ass.
(5) The Descendants
Alexander Payne has quickly become one of my favorite screenwriters (Sideways, About Schmidt, 14e Arrondissement), and I really, really wanted to rank this film higher than fifth. In the end, though, I couldn’t do it in good faith. The film has all the wonderful elements characteristic of a Payne script: character faces a major change or life moment, goes on some kind of journey to find resolution through a series of missteps, then reaches an existential resolution. Part of what makes his scripts so charming is that he finds this resolution in otherwise ordinary characters. With “The Descendants,” though, there were a couple of elements in the script that just didn’t fit right. Namely, the comedic elements. Case in point: the young man who Matt King’s daughter brings along on the journey. The character is meant to be a comedic element, but instead his placement throughout the film is just awkward and doesn’t really make much sense. A number of other comedic moments also fall short. Where this film earns its top 5 ranking, however, is in its dramatic elements. Payne is simply a master at creating authentic dramatic climaxes that are gut-wrenching and true, and which are relatable to just about anyone. “The Descendants” is no where near the level of the brilliant “Sideways,” but it was still one of the best films of this year.
(4) Moneyball
Aaron Sorkin has done it again: turned a story which has no business being made into a film, into a really good film. Last year, he somehow turned out a script about Facebook into one of the best films of the year. This year, he turned a book about baseball statistics (baseball statistics!) into a complex, brooding character study. How does he find these stories buried underneath otherwise un-filmable content? Anyone who hears the premise of this movie would be forgiven for being turned off– but you’d also regret it. “Moneyball” is layered with value. The best movies also find a way to wow you in the end, and that’s exactly what “Moneyball” does. The final scene with Pitt driving in his car contains so much value in such a subtle moment– a moment which is set up deliberately throughout the whole film. You just have to appreciate great screenwriting when you see it.
(3) Shame
Not a flaw to be found in this filmmaking. “Shame” is a penetrating character study which uses sexual addiction as its metaphor; and it’s simply captivating. It also contains the two best performances of the year. If I had my way, both Michael Fassbender and Carey Mulligan would win for best actor and actress respectively (unfortunately this film might be too dark and real for the Academy to handle.) Mulligan, in particular, takes it to another level. Her performance absolutely blew me away. Not just the best performance from an actress this year, but I would now place Mulligan atop a shortlist of the best actresses in the business right now– from this performance alone. I can’t speak more highly of it. Beautifully filmed and utterly heart-wrenching, I wouldn’t fault anyone for ranking “Shame” as the best movie of the year. For me, though, there were two others…
(2) Like Crazy
Every once in a while a film comes out of no where, totally unexpected, and just floors you by how right it gets it. Few films have captured at once the beauty and destructiveness of first love better than “Like Crazy”. It’s simply one of the best films on the obsessiveness of young love that I’ve seen in a long, long time. Anyone who has dealt with the ambiguity of a long distance relationship on top of it will find this film crushingly relatable. Acting is also great, with Felicity Jones being another overlooked actress this year. There are a lot of good films. There are a lot of great films. But I think the best films are the ones that somehow, someway just get it completely right. This film hit me there, in that place. Also, the trailer for this film might be the best trailer of the year. I dare you not to watch this film after seeing that trailer.
(1) Drive
In a year when many of the best films turned out to come from no where, it’s appropriate that ‘Drive’ should be #1. When I went to see this film, I didn’t go with high expectations. I knew it had received trustworthy reviews, but in my head I just assumed it would probably turn out to be an arthouse attempt at “Fast and Furious,” or something. Instead, I got blown away. Unfortunately, this film is likely too dark and violent for the Academy– which is a shame, because it was the clear-cut best film of the year. Thematically, this is simply a classic anti-hero character study done to perfection. I suppose the highest compliment you can afford any movie is just to say that it was goodcinema. Yes, this film has great acting (notables: Carey Mulligan, again… as well as Albert Brooks), a great script, beautiful cinematography. But it was also just damn goodcinema. This is what people go to the movies for. Did I mention that it was beautifully filmed? And just damn cool?
All in all, I thought this year was a good one for film. Although there are only a couple of ‘elite’ films, the amount of films worthy of mention this year runs relatively deep. For those who are uninitiated, I am a big film buff and do these rankings every year. Here’s a quick look at my ratings from the last couple of years– you can find my 2009 rankings here, and my 2008 rankings here. Sometimes I rank 10 films, 15 films, 20, or some other number, such as this year’s 18– it all depends on how many films I feel are worth recommending in a given year.
Without further ado, here are the best movies of 2010, ranked from last to first (the links lead to the film’s trailer). Also, I criticize some of the films at the top of this list mostly to justify their worse ranking; but all films on this list are still worth seeing and at least partially exceptional.
Although the film fell short of my high hopes, Peter Weir’s latest is still worth a spot on this list. Based on a true story of escapees from a Siberian prison camp who walked over mountains and deserts, as well as through history, all the way to India for their freedom, “The Way Back” could have been as epic as the story it portrays. Unfortunately, the characters are stoic and largely expressionless for most of the film (until a young woman joins their ranks), leading to a pervasive lack of real connection to their individual plotlines. And too much time was spent early in the movie regarding their escape, when it would have been better spent focusing on the trials of their inspiring journey. Nevertheless, this film will inspire you.
Well done, accurate dramatization of the Valerie Plame leak scandal, and how WMD ‘evidence’ used to bring the USA to war with Iraq was done so fraudulently and deliberately. Bush administration apologists will undoubtedly find some fault with it. Sean Penn delivers a fantastic performance.
The depth of the content of this film can be far better appreciated in Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel of the same name, which the film is based on. The film seems to border on this depth throughout, but never seems to shove the viewer fully in. Instead, the movie has a slow pace and a depressing payoff which will likely leave a lot of viewers feeling let down. This is a depressing movie, and it does seem to be missing something essential that’s difficult to articulate, but Carey Mulligan puts together a fantastic performance and the film has subtle, beautiful connection to the human condition that will impact you long after the credits roll. You will probably forget that this is a sci-fi film entirely.
A movie about dealing with grief, “Rabbit Hole” is a well-constructed script and Nicole Kidman delivers a fantastic performance. The film can be difficult to watch in parts due to its content; it’s a film about learning how to move on without completely having to let go. I’m still not really sold on Aaron Eckhart, but overall he does a pretty good job here.
This film might seem out of place on this list, but for me it was quietly one of the biggest surprises of the year. It’s a bit of a spoof of the comic book/superhero genre, and much in the spirit of the charming ’99 movie, “Galaxy Quest,” it manages to be incredibly funny and entertaining, with a genuine heart, despite its outlandish premise. Though it is meant as a spoof, this film may quietly be one of the best superhero movies ever made. You heard me right.
A delightful script and excellent performance from Paul Giamatti make Barney’s version of his own passionate life shrewdly entertaining and, in parts, touching.
When the Coen Brothers make a movie, it’s almost always a shoe-in for my top 10 of the year. Though True Grit falls just outside of the top 10 this year, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t still a damn good flick. It just means it’s not up to snuff for the Coens. Jeff Bridges, one of the best actors in the business, offers a fantastic performance which might have landed him the Oscar for Best Actor this year if it weren’t for a certain stuttering Brit (to be mentioned later in this list). Hailee Steinfeld also delivered one of the best performances from a young actress of all time, as the sharp-witted, and revenge-driven Mattie Ross.
This was one of the best constructed films of the year. The subtlety and pace of the character development is pure poetry– and I mean that with the highest praise possible. That character development is the movie’s shining strength; the film only falls short in its rather bland payoff in the end and the seriousness with which it takes its metaphysical and spiritual aspects. Those aspects would have been just fine as metaphors, but ultimately the film’s payoff seems to rely heavily upon its viewers taking its metaphysics literally. Nevertheless, don’t let this discourage you– the way this film develops its characters is like a subtle, elegant, perfectly paced dance. Really beautiful.
This film probably contains the best overall acting of the year. Look for “The Fighter” to sweep the Oscars for all the supporting actor/actress awards this year. Christian Bale is almost certainly going to win the supporting actor award, and Melissa Leo is probably going to take the supporting actress award. Amy Adams is also nominated here; outshined only by Leo. These are fantastic characters, and they make the movie what it is.
One of the indie film surprises of the year, “Winter’s Bone” is a very real film with excellent performances from everyone involved, particularly Leo and Lawrence. Chilling, frightening, intriguing and brave, the movie will takes you into the corrupt culture of meth dealing, economically depressed Appalachia, a culture just as sick the addicts it manifests.
Don’t get me wrong, this is no “Lost in Translation”, but anyone that enjoyed Sofia Coppola’s masterpiece will immediately find “Somewhere” recognizable. Coppola is simply a master at subtlety. The beauty found in the most ordinary and simple moments throughout this film not only make it exceptional, but those unexpected scenes are also the places where its characters make the most sense. Like with “Lost in Translation”, Coppola somehow finds an untranslatable, subtle understanding in what almost seem like accidental moments. She lingers on those moments, once found, as if to let them speak entirely for themselves. To me, it demonstrates incredible conceptual control.
I’m still surprised an entire feature film could have been made from this story, but Boyle pulled it off. Brilliantly directed and edited (this film deserves to win the Oscar for best film editing), with a great performance from Franco, “127 Hours” is an inspiring testament to life. It’s worth at least one of your arms to see.
This film piqued my interest when it was initially given an NC-17 rating– a sign that it was quite a bit braver and more poignant than the cheesy hipster romance I first assumed it would be. Even though Gosling’s hipster lameness was painful to endure in parts, this film impressed me in every other way. Of course, it’s not really a film about romance– it’s a film about a relationship, and a marriage, that has run its course. It’s brilliantly real and poignant in its portrayal– a very well constructed film. Michele Williams makes up for Gosling’s woes– it’s time to recognize her as one of the best young actresses in the business.
Colin Firth should easily win the Oscar for best actor for his exceptional portrayal of stuttering royalty in this incredibly well-constructed film. There are really no flaws in this movie at all, and it is one of only three real competitors for the best film of the year by Oscar measures (along with two others to be mentioned later in this list). The speech at the end of the film is truly breathtaking, and so well acted that this might actually be one of the best performances of the decade. Firth should finally get recognition from the Academy for this role.
I never thought a film about Facebook could draw such a great script and such great talent, but somehow this might be the first iconic film that belongs solely to the 21st century. This is Fincher’s best work since “Fight Club” and “Seven”, a great improvement over the disappointing “Benjamin Button”, and probably the best movie of his career. He should win the Oscar for best director. Although I personally rank it as the third best movie of the year, I predict that “The Social Network” will also win the Oscar for best picture.
My favorite movies usually have the best scripts– I’m a screenplay-oriented movie goer– and “The Kids Are All Right” had the best script of the year. It helps that all of its actors delivered brilliant performances– the best overall acting of the year, maybe only behind “The Fighter”. Annette Bening is a serious contender to win the best actress Oscar, and Julianne Moore deserved (though didn’t get) a nomination too. Mark Ruffalo is also deservedly nominated for supporting actor, and he was superbly cast. But this film truly shines in its script and its story; it is endlessly witty with extremely well-imagined characters, and genuine heart.
Not only the best film of the year, “Black Swan” is also probably one of the best films of the decade. I’m not sure everyone who sees it will fully appreciate the ambition of what this film is doing artistically. The film ends with its main character experiencing “artistic perfection”. For that to work, the film itself needs to portray that sense of artistic perfection too– and it succeeds. Surrealism done to perfection, this movie is also the best horror film in years. Portman delivers the best performance of her career, and deserves to win the Oscar for best lead actress. I didn’t think Aronofsky could ever outdo “The Wrestler”, but now I think it’s time to consider him one of the best directors in the business. He, and this film, deserves to win at the Oscars, but I suspect it will go to Fincher and “The Social Network” instead.
As an annual tradition, here’s my rankings of last year’s top 10 films. Usually my lists extend to a full 15 films, but this year I had an incredibly difficult time even finding 10 films worth commending. To put it plainly, 2009 was a miserable year for film. My list this year, therefore, had to be cut short. Furthermore, this year’s list is probably unlikely to surprise too many people. Quite simply, there were so few decent films this year that a lot of critics’ lists are likely to look similar.
Moreover, as always, I like to include a few disclaimers before getting on to the rankings: (1) I don’t include documentaries in my lists, simply because I think they’re a completely different kind of film and can’t be rated alongside feature films. Having said that, this year was actually a very good year, relatively speaking, for documentaries (‘The Cove’ and ‘Food, Inc.’ are must-sees!), and my condemnation of 2009’s movie class doesn’t carry over to documentaries. (2) I try to see all the movies which I think qualify that I can each year, but I haven’t seen them all. Most notably– many of 2009’s foreign films are not always easily accessible this early into the next year, and I simply haven’t seen a wide variety of critically acclaimed foreign films this year. (3) This list is always subject to change and revision.
Now on to the list (links are to each film’s trailers)!
Although the gang sequences were filled with a number of cliches, the personal and cultural subplots are woven together well to deliver a gritty, moving and very real film. This was the only foreign language film I’ve seen this year which moved me at all, though my selections this year have been limited.
Fantastic acting from unexpected talent is this film’s greatest highlight. The filmmaking joy here lies in the juxtaposition between dream/fantasy sequences and reality, and the way transitions are made between them. But the film flounders overall thematically, promising to portray a harsh reality, but often times just leaving the audience with perverse racial stereotypes. Those stereotypes are redeemed only briefly with hints at commentary on social perception– and, frankly, those moments are far and few between. I’m not so sure how much reality is really contained in this supposedly ‘real’ film.
This is a good complimentary movie to this year’s much superior film, “The Hurt Locker”. While the film shines in portraying the psychological struggles and burdens of a soldier returning home from war, and in showing the grief of dealing with what was lost from it, “The Messenger”‘s real strength lies in the performances of its supporting actors, Woody Harrelson and Samantha Morton. Harrelson delivers confident, witty dialogue which is only a veneer for a lonely, desperate man, and Morton superbly plays a grieving housewife in an unconventional casting of a romantic lead.
If 3D ever officially crosses over from being the latest trendy, Hollywood ploy to gaining mainstream notoriety, then it will have Avatar to thank. Visually, the movie is enthralling and otherworldly, a real masterpiece. Where the movie goes wrong is in its script. Let’s face it, this script is mediocre at best. While I quite enjoy its overall themes of nature worship, environmentalism, anti-militarism and anti-corporation, this film isn’t likely to move any cultural mountains– at least, not in any sophisticated way. But as a compliment for anyone who already shares its sentiments, Avatar is a visual treat and an exceptional moviegoing experience which genuinely pulls the viewer in and makes them wish they never had to take the 3D glasses off.
Carey Mulligan deserves to win the Oscar for her nomination as best lead actress here. She’s my pick. Although the film seems to struggle in finding– and delivering– its occasionally ambiguous message, Mulligan shines in portraying an intelligent young woman’s coming of age.
The Coen Brothers never disappoint, and ‘A Serious Man’ is the first film on this list which doesn’t warrant any sort of substantial disclaimer or criticism to weigh against its highlights. Executed rather flawlessly, this existential film over Jewish angst only really falters in that it’s occasionally rather boring. That flatness, however, is nevertheless a shining example of great tonal control– something the Coens excel at. This isn’t going to be your favorite Coen Brothers movie, but it won’t be a let down either.
I’m a bit surprised by the fact that this film has been largely overlooked among critics this year– perhaps they missed its deep layers in the film’s subtlety. It was one of only 4 movies I considered as a candidate for best film of the year. Well acted, particularly by Mortensen, though there’s also a noteworthy role played by Robert Duvall too. The film undoubtedly struggles to compete with the book, but taken on its own merits, it touched me more than any other in this year’s class.
This is Tarantino’s best work since his masterpiece, Pulp Fiction. Although the film is far more playful than poignant, a problem which plagues the whole Tarantino’s catalogue other than ‘Pulp’ and perhaps ‘Jackie Brown’, it’s easy to forget these flaws amid its brilliantly escalating dialogue. The opening sequence is so wonderfully executed that I was nearly prepared to declare it as Tarantino’s finest moment while in the middle of it. Extremely entertaining film. I wouldn’t mind if it won for Best Picture, though it isn’t my first choice among the nominees this year.
A stunningly well put together film from Tom Ford, ‘A Single Man’ would be a fantastic accomplishment for any year. Colin Firth is perfectly casted and delivers a striking performance, and the film’s dialogue walks a near flawless tightrope between being over-intellectualized and being visceral and deeply emotional. Rather, the movie is intellectual in the most genuine way– as a complex, existential, aesthetic, abstract and layered character story touching in equal parts with sensuality and despair.
This is a movie about the thrill of war, yes. But it’s more about the thrill than it is about the war. The story will touch you in a far deeper and more abstract way than its gritty, intense war scenes would at first imply. Walking away from this film, it’s difficult not be struck with an echoing undulation and, frankly, acute sense of banality with one’s life– that, or a longing for something more. The film’s most poignant moment does not come during any of the intense battles and suspenseful moments, oddly enough, but rather in a few short scenes that happen when Jeremy Renner’s soldier returns home. A short scene in a supermarket and another cleaning out a gutter, while seemingly out of context from the whole rest of the film, are actually the moments that give the film its character and meaning. Subtle, though extremely powerful, the juxtaposition that is established in only about 5 minutes of this feature length film show incredible control by its filmmakers and writers, shaping ‘The Hurt Locker’ into the best movie of 2009.
In response to a similar list posted on a blog by Brian Leiter which I found to be disturbingly skewed from the perspective of the analytic tradition in philosophy, I have decided to make my own list of the top 20 most important philosophers of the modern era. I’ll give a brief reason as to why they’re included and ranked as-is after their listing:
1. Immanuel Kant: My listing here doesn’t deviate at all with the list posted by Leiter. I don’t think there’s any reason to debate Kant’s place at #1 on any list.
2. Martin Heidegger: Heidegger is the only philosopher in the modern era who comes close to having as comprehensive a philosophical system as Kant. This is the first and possibly most substantial deviation I have from Leiter’s list. Notice Heidegger doesn’t even make that list. Unbelievable!
3. Edmund Husserl: The father of phenomenology is also not mentioned on Leiter’s list. That list isn’t even trying to hide its incredulous analytic bias. Phenomenology is kind of an important movement in the modern philosophical era– and without it, it’s probably doubtful you have a Heidegger.
4. Isaac Newton: One of the most influential thinkers and natural philosophers in history, let alone the modern era. Since he isn’t classically taught as a philosopher, per se, I can’t fault Leiter’s list for perhaps not even putting him up for consideration. I can only assume that’s the reason Newton wasn’t included.
5. David Hume: The most important and advanced of the British Empiricists, impossible to ignore his influence on anglophone philosophy, let alone on the #1 philosopher on this list, Kant (it’s also no surprise he gets placed #2 on Leiter’s posted list– so this isn’t a controversial ranking). Hume also gets points for essentially defining what it means to be intellectually honest (this is entirely my own categorization).
6. Karl Popper: Totally underappreciated. Philosopher with incredible scope, from philosophy of science to political philosophy. I’d say that he was the most important philosopher of the 20th century aside from Heidegger (Husserl lived most of his life in the 19th century). He’s essentially the uber-Hume. I think history will rank him much higher in influence and import than the credit he seems to get today (I imagine most people’s lists would not include him there). Also not mentioned on Leiter’s list.
7. Søren Kierkegaard: “The father of existentialism” is a fair label– though I think you could include Nietzsche in on the label too. His influence as a precursor for postmodern thought shouldn’t be understated either. Made Leiter’s list at #15– far too low.
8. Ludwig Wittgenstein: I struggle with how to rank Wittgenstein. I think his personal journey through philosophy essentially amounts to getting it totally wrong and then ultimately crawling his way back to square one. His genius is unquestioned and his work has been an unmatched catalysis for creative thought in the 20th century. I list him more for his later work than his earlier stuff; I’m certain that Leiter, who ranks him at #4, prefers him for the early work.
9. John Locke: Locke’s influence is pretty undeniable. As the first British Empiricist, he influenced Hume and Berkeley. His notions of the social contract and the self influenced everyone from Rousseau to Kant. Leiter’s list had him at #5, undoubtedly for most of these reasons. I’m fine with throwing him in wherever.
10. Friedrich Nietzsche: Like Kierkegaard, big early influence in existentialism and postmodernism, critical thought, etc. His influence as a cult-like figure is also worth noting. Leiter ranked him at #13, so not a big difference.
11. Jean-Paul Sartre: Sartre didn’t make Leiter’s list either. It’s a joke to me that someone like Kripke makes Leiter’s list, but not Sartre. Sartre’s influence in philosophy is well-established and he should also be noted as a cult-like figure. He basically defined existentialism (insofar as he coined the term, I mean). He loses some points because the vast majority of his major work is just a derivative of Heidegger’s– which Heidegger essentially took for rubbish. I disagree with Heidegger though: Sartre is a personal favorite. So he prominently makes the list!
12. Rene Descartes: I wouldn’t mind if someone wished to rank Descartes higher. His importance in the modern era is paramount– most historians mark Descartes as the “Father of Modern Philosophy”. So he probably at least deserves mention in the top 5, right? I ranked him lower because I think you could as easily paint Descartes as the villain of the modern era as anything else. His influence was more for the sake of rebuttal. Thus, it’s unfortunate that he is often the starting point for discussion of philosophical issues in the modern era, since in my opinion his thought lacks sophistication. Leiter ranked Descartes more predictably at #3, though.
13. Karl Marx: I don’t think it’s uncalled for to consider Marx the most important political and social philosopher of the modern era. You might make a strong case for Rousseau, Hobbes or maybe if you stretch it, Mill or Rawls too. Though Marx’s thought seems to have moved history in a way that still can’t be measured. Leiter put him at #14, so no big difference there.
14. Baruch Spinoza: Evoked by Wittgenstein, revered by Hegel and highly regarded by Nietzsche, Spinoza’s place on this list could be much higher. He might be the modern era’s most important early rationalist. Leiter placed him at #11.
15. Maurice Merleau-Ponty: Appreciation for his philosophical contributions are growing rapidly; and this is a personal favorite. Not really surprising that he’s not included on Leiter’s list.
16. Arthur Schopenhauer: One of the biggest influences on a number of names already mentioned– like Nietzsche and Wittgenstein. The quintessential pessimist, Schopenhauer is also one of the widest ranged systematic thinkers on this list– his philosophy is relevant to everything from psychology to politics, art and sex. Somehow he also avoided mention on Leiter’s list.
17. G.W.F. Hegel: I really, really dislike Hegel. But as one of the creators of German idealism, he’s been remarkably influential. I’m definitely with his detractors (Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Peirce, etc), but here he is anyway, at #17.
18. Charles Sanders Peirce: The founder of pragmatism. Difficult not to list the influence of pragmatism in the 20th century, especially in American thought.
19. Thomas Hobbes & Jean Jacques Rousseau: Yes, I’m ranking them both at 19. I don’t know which to choose. Both monumentally influential with political philosophy, but also with notions of human psychology and motivation.
20. Michel Foucault: I feel like I should include a deconstructionist somewhere on this list, and I don’t have the heart to include Derrida. Foucault is a personal favorite, particularly for his critical studies of the human sciences, and psychiatry in particular. I think he’ll be lent a lot of influence when history looks back.
————————————————-
The first things to clarify are the names not included on this list, but which were included on Leiter’s list: Frege, Mill, Leibniz, Russell, Berkeley, Quine, Kripke and Rawls.
First of all, Frege ranked #6 on Leiter’s list. I don’t think he belongs anywhere in the top 50. That one is the biggest joke on his list. If anything, that name at #6 is the best evidence of the list’s supreme analytic bias. As for Leibniz and Berkeley, I find most of their philosophical contributions to be patently absurd, so they don’t belong there.
I like Mill, but a top 30 list would be better fitting for him. Rawls is too specialized, only really being a political philosopher. But he’d probably make a top 30 list too.
Quine and Kripke are analytic/academic favorites, but I hardly suspect they will have enough influence to be seriously remembered with these other names as history unfolds.
That leaves an explanation for leaving off Russell: Let’s face it, Russell was more of a popularizer of philosophy than anything. In considering him, I felt more like his inclusion would be like including Carl Sagan as one of the greatest physicists of the modern era. As a logician, put him in the top 5. But logic isn’t philosophy. To Russell’s credit, he at least tried to connect the two enterprises– albeit in vain. He talked a lot about just about every other topic too, though he was hardly a system builder for any of it.
So there you have it; there’s my list. How would your list be different?
An impactful video called “The Minature Earth” asks just that question, examining what the world would look like if we could turn the entire human population into a small community of 100 people, but keeping the same proportions we have today. Check it out here:
Kind of an exciting time for one of my articles over at Ecoworldly. The article, titled “11 Extinct Animals That Have Been Photographed Alive“, has gone absolutely ballistic. It has somehow attracted well over 230,000 viewers since being posted, so I thought it’d be worth referring from here. Crazy!
If the content sounds depressing to you, wait until you get to many of the comments. You may find some cynical amusement in reading them. The internet is an amazing thing, but it sure can be a compository for idiocy too. Ah well. Check out the article!
The picture above shows the extinct Tasmanian Tiger, one of the 11 featured in the article.
An article I wrote for EcoWorldly was just syndicated by The Guardian. If you check out the front page of their ‘Environment’ section, you can find my article there under ‘Comment & Analysis’. You can link directly to the article here, titled “Japan Airlines trial biofuels on 747 flights“.
Meandering with Intent 