Well, its happened, 2009 has ended. I have now seen every movie worth seeing in the year (with the exception of Willem Dafoe in Anti-christ, which never came out here) and many that weren't. So, here's the best of film for the year, from my perspective.
Now, a little complaint I have here: film release schedules. The Academy and its sponsors complain every year that the ratings are going down on the Oscars. So, they think, maybe if the shows were more mainstream? Right? Throwing Dark Knight a bone is what got it to spike last year, yeah? Maybe Twilight needs to be up for an award to get people interested.
No Academy, no. The problem is not that you need to get crap-tastic, lesser films included in your line-up for your pop appeal. The problem is that you, and Hollywood, haven't given anyone a chance to see the movies. Take, for example, Golden Globes nominee Crazy Heart, which has Jeff Bridges up for Best Actor. Now, the Golden Globes will show on January 17th, and I have a press pass to see Crazy Heart's advance screening on... January 19th? The movie doesn't even start for two weeks after that!
And what's in the theater now that's up for Oscars and Golden Globes? The Lovely Bones, playing on 3 screens, Crazy Heart is on 12 screesn, The Road on 311 screens, Precious on 626 screens. To put this in perspective, your average wide release is about 3,000 screens nationwide. Young Victoria is in the Best Actress category, is only on a few hundred screens, and has only been out for 2 weekends.
If you want to know why no one is watching the Oscars anymore, its because no one has seen the movies. They can't care about the titles alone. Studios hope that the Oscars will act as a marketing push for the artsy films, but its become a self-defeating effort. If no one's watching, then who's getting the benefit of the promotion? And looking back at old Best Picture winners, was Ghandi a financial failure? Was American Beauty? Was Schindler's List?
It seems to me that if you make a quality product, and put it in peoples' faces, that it will make money. Keyword: Quality. Sad to think that these days, something like Tom Hanks in Philidelphia would only get 150 screens to play on in the last week of December.
Okay, rant over, lets get to some damn movies (click the links for trailer if you are unfamiliar with the film). Who's going to win the Aristocrat Award? Each winner will, in theory, receive a golden statue of
Stan Lee flipping the bird.
This was probably my favorite film of the year, just for the fun of it, and this had to win something. Happily, it had a really epic score, so I stuck it here. I almost gave this to Moon, for its very personal and haunting music... but I'm a Star Wars fan from way back, and huge orchestral battle scores just get my blood pumping. Also, they managed to mix the original show's music in very nicely at the end, with the revised theme song over the credits. Dug the hell out of it.
Sadly, Trek knocks itself out of Best Picture running for some dumb Harry Potter-esque moments like Scotty in the water pipes. There's a few minutes that could have been left on the cutting room floor.
The last big release of the year was also one of its best. The script had some stiff competition from District 9 and Inglorious Basterds. The Basterds have some of the best dialog driven sequences I've seen committed to film; laughter, extreme tension, mayhem, Basterds was able to accomplish what seemed like an action-packed and suspense-filled movie almost entirely through the power of conversation.
District 9, on the other hand, was a completely new story, full of new ideas, and it managed to thrill and fascinate audiences everywhere, despite the heaviest of studio hot-shots betting against it.
Yet, Holmes was probably the sharpest of wit and verve in its writing. It was able to avoid the sci-fi plot holes that District 9 couldn't help but fall into, and it was just more genuinely exciting than Basterds in its kinetic fury. I tend to not like Hollywood's obsession with franchises these days, but Holmes is one I'll gladly see a sequel for.
A tough call on this one. Oh, quick mention, Horror gets its own genre category as you will very seldom see a horror film make it to Best Picture. There will be plenty of Sci-fi nominees for best picture, but horror always seems to be so schlocky. Its like Hollywood refuses to believe that Horror can be good. And if it is, like The Road, then they dub it a Drama. I hate to have them go without any recognition, though. People need Horror, and I personally love it.
Anyway, I really wanted to go with Zombieland here. That was an enjoyable film that will likely have the greater rewatch value, even above Paranormal. But Zombieland just treads over the same grounds that Shaun of the Dead did so long ago, just with the benefit of more bloodshed and a little Bill Murray action. Also, its bound to spawn some crappy sequels. Just wait.
We also got to see Raimi return to horror with Drag Me to Hell, and then there was the erotic Vampire thriller
Thirst from Korea, which answers some interesting questions about the corruption of the spirit that seems to accompany vampirism in so many stories... but ultimately only Paranormal Activity did what horror is supposed to set out to do: it scared people. Grant you, some people deride it for being so simple, but I think that's the brilliance of it. If you ever watch haunting videos, that's all they appear to be: noises, bumps in the night, things moving at odd moments, and its those things that scare the crap out of you. The feel of the movie, for so many, was just enough to set them on edge, maybe not in the theater, but for sure in the still hours of the night afterwards.
Plus, my name is in the DVD credits, so it gets points for that.
I really wanted to pull for Coraline on this one. Coraline certainly has superior animation, and was much more meticulous and time-consuming of an effort. I love the artistry of a hand-constructed animation, in this case stop-motion, as opposed to the computer animation.
But in the end, Coraline just wasn't all that entertaining. It had some great gags surrounded by a ton of dull, and despite its amazing look, it failed to have enough whimsy for adults, and it scared the piss out of children. Coraline's audience is precious few who adore animation of old and gothic set design.
Up, is far from Pixar's best. Its far behind Incredible s and Wall-E. But, its still heads above so many other animated features. If nothing else, the opening five minutes or so are a tear-jerker to the extreme. While the later movie is a bit weak, the opening act is a good film on its own. Just goes to show, even 'not their best' for Pixar is still better than most.
Also winner: Best Trailer. Yowza. 2009 was a pretty weak year for films in a lot of categories, but Comedy seemed to struggle the most. The Hangover was the one real bright spot for many, and it was an amazing shock-value comedy. Looking forward to seeing what Director Todd Philips puts out in the future. Not looking forward to The Hangover 2. Christ, Hollywood, just leave well enough alone.
But, A Serious Man is the one I can't get out of my head. And of course, it was criminally underplayed. The Cohens won 2 Oscars for Best Direction and Best Picture not 2 years ago, and this thing gets maybe 300 screens. It IS dry humor though, and bizarre humor, and it takes a certain type of perspective to really appreciate it. But its a movie that is funny, and thought provoking, and uses the nature of film to turn the story back upon itself. The Cohens again prove themselves to be among the finest masters of the craft, and here is a VERY Jewish comedy that both inspires belly-laughs and deep introspection simultaneously. Brilliant.
Two at once! Might as well talk about these together, since there's really no way to analyze just one performance on its own; these two are far too intertwined.
Also, the trailer does not do this movie justice. It looks like another Dangerous Minds knock-off from the trailer, but this is a painful, painful goddamn movie. There's no easy, Hollywood ending, but there are a lot of decent laughs, a lot of real emotion, and a lot of... not hope, but inspiration in the film. Inspiration to keep fighting like the girls in this movie do.
But none of it would have worked, were it not for Sibide and Mo'Nique. At my showing, the credits rolled, and there was not a dry eye in the house. Even my cold-hearted ass was fighting back tears. Its takes a moment or two to get completely rolling, but just before little Abdhul is born, the girls bring it together. It starts with a really subtle character-building moment, where Mo'Nique forces Precious to cook her dinner, fried pigs feet, fried chicken, pork and beans, basically cholesterol on plate... and then she refuses to eat it. Instead, she forces Precious to eat it, watching as she swallows every bite. Its never said, but you read it from the expression of satisfaction on Mo'Nique's face, Mom is forcing Precious to eat, to fatten her up, so she has just one more weapon against her daughter; hoping that no one will find her attractive. From here, it only builds to the explosive fight over the baby in their apartment, and finally the dramatic confrontation in the SRS offices... all of it breathtaking, all of it only possible with this particular pairing.
Other noteworthy's include Melanie Laurent from Inglorious Basterds for a great scene about eating apple tart with the Nazis and Carey Mulligan in
An Education and I really wanted to give something to Vera Farmiga in Up in the Air... but ultimately their roles were just comparatively boring. I always have trouble with the Best Actress categories, because I don't think women carry their movies as well. Now, I grant you, it could be the writing not punching it up enough for the ladies, but there's something to be explored here. What women draw other women to theaters? Sandra Bullock, Julia Roberts... but they generally play in fluff movies. Even Blindside, Sandra's big one this year, is still a pretty fluffy, schlocky movie, despite its crowd-pleasing ability, its totally by-the-numbers. Its pretty seldom that a woman captivates in the way so many strong male roles have... in fact most women AND men follow actors more than actresses. But there are Cate Blanchetts Audrey Tautous in the world... and with young ladies like Sibide being discovered, maybe we'll continue to see that change over time.
There is no other nominee in this category, its Christoph or nothing.
The Character of Hans Landa, the Jew Hunter, dominates the screen with every moment he's on it. At once, Waltz manages to be funny, charismatic, and intensely menacing. He bridges the spectrum from brilliant conversationalist to monstrous killer and back again through the film, and does so IN FOUR FLUENT LANGUAGES. French, English, German, Italian, whatever, this guy can act in all of them.
Christoph Waltz seems to have an infinite range and, I don't care if Brad Pitt's name was on the top of that poster, Waltz was the star of this movie.
Tough tough tough category this year. Not only were there a lot of good performances that were in about equal standing this year, they were all also outshined by supporting actor Christoph Waltz. :P
Clooney was great in Up in the Air, but ultimately was just playing the same character he always plays... grant you, thats one very believable and lovable character (like Jimmy Stuart, one character, but you never get tired of him). Michael Stulbarg was great in A Serious Man, and sadly, we'll probably never see him again unless we happen to need another wormy Jewish guy for a dramatic lead... I guess Woody Allen made it work. Viggo Mortensen is the driving force in The Road, as is the immaculate Downey Jr in Sherlock Holmes... but I had to go with Rockwell, anyway.
Here we see Sam Rockwell playing his character twice. What he does that's interesting is that while each iteration of the character are supposed to be the same man at the same time, he's able to play them in completely different ways, as different aspects of the character's personality react to the same crisis. Both versions are totally believable, and logical, and distinct for the audience. Also important is how much the film depends on Rockwell, other than Kevin Spacey's voice through a speaker from time to time, Rockwell is almost the only actor in the film. Everything in Moon depends on him remaining sympathetic and fun to the audience for this 90-minute one-man show. While Moon didn't blow my sci-fi loving mind in the way I had hoped, I can't deny how great the performance was; its been fantastic watching Rockwell get better and better over the years, hell, we first saw him in the original Ninja Turtles movie, and then he popped up in The Green Mile. Pretty amazing.
Oh, I've heard Colin Firth in
A Single Man is Friggin' Incredible, and might top all of these guys.. but ya know what? Its on 46 screens, all in CA and NY. WTF, Hollywood?
Not the best movie of the year, but certainly, the biggest.
I can do nothing but applaud Cameron for taking on a picture of this magnitude, and pulling it off well. Huge FX, great 3-D work, and years upon years of work... and in the end, it really pleases audiences everywhere. Worldwide, this film has already surpassed the tremendous box office of last year's Dark Knight, and to nothing but stellar reviews. Its spectacle, its appeal, and its still a pretty good picture under all the gloss. Maybe not the best, but the most ambitious by far. Applause to you, Cameron. I hope Avatar knocks your old biggest, Titanic, off the top box office spot. Avatar is a bit more worthy... if not entirely deserving.
Not at all what I expected... nor what all the old people at my screening were expecting. They went in looking for Saving Private Ryan, and got Nazis being beat to death with baseball bats, British spies playing drinking games, and some crazy alternative history.
In a way, I kind of hate that this was the best picture of the year. Its certainly not even Quentin Tarantino's best, that being the combined masterpiece Kill Bill. Usually, I want to pull some film that has some sort of very personal resonance for audiences, or an immediate social impact. Best examples are things like No Country for Old Men for dramatic effect, or There Will Be Blood, for inspiring "I drink your milkshake!" T-shirts... nothing like that this year. Even emotionally effecting films like The Road had some really crappy editing flaws and pacing issues that couldn't be overlooked. Precious had some weird crap like this one white character suddenly entering the film and gaining a speaking role in the last 20 minutes, with their introductory scene being edited out... a total mystery as to their reason for being in the film.
So, standing above the crowd remains Inglourious Basterds. QT, as always, is a superb director. He gets the most from his audience, every scene is meticulously edited, perfectly timed; every scene is able to draw from the viewer its intended emotion. The opening is tense and dramatic, the drinking games are hilarious, and the violence cringe-worthy.
Ultimately, the Basterds stands out as an almost perfectly crafted film, that is at moments moving, and always fun. Its worth multiple viewings, and houses a few performances that are worth applauding, and furthermore quoting. After GIJoe and Transformers 2, it totally salvaged the summer for me.
That's what we've got for 2009! congrats to all the winners! Feel free to leave your thoughts below, thanks for humoring my hubris with your visit.
Next: The first film of 2010, a preview of Youth in Revolt!
Of course, that's kind of the whole issue that makes the movie feel a little jumbled and weird is the editing. Its terrible. People just looking for a night out and a few laughs won't notice, really, but the cinema-philes will hate the bad cuts and the lack of continuity. This is becoming more typical in the post-Apatow era of comedy movies. Film the thing, ad-lib and whole bunch of different lines, and cut and paste a movie together from the favorite takes. Sometimes the lines dont' fit in certain scenes though, and sometimes scenes get excised as all the constant ad-libbing changes the flow of the movie. Its noticeable. You get things like lines in the trailer that aren't in the movie, some jokes that seem to get cut-off half developed, and other ones that maybe go on a bit too long. Continuity errors result, the most notorious one being a spear that magically appears next to a previously captured and unarmed Isabelle, just before she uses it to kill a major bad guy. There was probably supposed to be a sequence in there where she got the spear, but it was likely cut around in favor of other jokes, or the joke in that scene got ad-libbed in somewhere else. I get the feeling there are a lot of these that will pop up upon multiple viewings. 
