My Top 30 Films of 2010: 30-21

Yesterday I posted that I would soon be making a top 30 list for 2010. I was going to wait until I'd seen the new Peter Weir film, 'The Way Back', before making my final selections, but owing to the fact that I'm not certain I'll even get to see it I've decided to jump the gun and start writing it now. I say "start" writing it because I am going to publish it in three chunks. This is the countdown from 30 to 21 and the rest will follow in the week.

However, before I get that underway I wanted to give a mention to films from the last year that I haven't seen so as to account for their absence. Notable omissions might be the apparently excellent documentary 'Catfish', the Oscar-winning Argentine film 'The Secret in Their Eyes' and the terrorist biopic-epic 'Carlos'. With that caveat, here are numbers 30-21:

30) I'm Still Here, dir Casey Affleck, USA

What I said: "Whether it’s down to a genuine absurdity or to a dedicated genius performer (he’s kept this act up for two years now), I’m Still Here is really funny. I was in stitches for long spells of it and had the best time I’ve had in any film here [at the Venice Film Festival]."




'I'm Still Here' really appealed to me when I saw it at it's preview at this Summer's Venice Film Festival. Then the principle discussion surrounded whether or not it was a "hoax" or a genuine documentary. Subsequently director Casey Affleck has admitted to what many (including myself) had suspected: that it wasn't really the record of actor Joaquin Phoenix meltdown. But full credit to Phoenix, who kept up this act for a really long time and who was seemingly willing to do permanent damage to his public reputation to make this film - on both counts an even more impressive feat than even the characterisations of Sacha Baron Cohen. To my mind, the film works as a look at the savagery of media reporting on celebrity and the callousness of almost everyone when it comes to pointing and laughing at a public breakdown. The real targets of this film are bloggers and gossip columnists who feed off this sort of thing, and in some way I suppose that includes many of the film's audience who came hoping to see a crazy actor becoming a public spectacle.

The film eventually tanked at the box office - and I know more than one person who thought it was utter garbage - but it made me laugh and it had some good things to say about celebrity and the ruthless way we consume celebrity.

29) Barney's Version, dir Richard J. Lewis, USA

What I said: "I don’t know if anybody [at the Venice Film Festival] expected it to be as charming, as funny or as moving as it was. The central reason for this emotional ride is Giamatti, who is transformed to look much younger and much older than he is using make-up, but it’s his posture, voice and mannerisms that make each stage convincing. He underplays things too. There isn’t anything hammy, there’s no scenery chewing here... as far as acting goes, Paul Giamatti’s wonderful and complete performance in Barney’s Version is at the head of the pack."



Still awaiting a January 28th release here in the UK, 'Barney's Version' was another of the films that left an impression on me in Venice. The story follows an irascible - and to many I suspect unlikeable - man as he experiences a life full of loves and losses and missed opportunities. What makes it so compelling is the central performance of Paul Giamatti who left me in tears by the film's end. It's a rich and humanistic story that follows someone who really isn't anyone's idea of perfect with great tenderness. It's also quite funny and it has Dustin Hoffman in it. In the words of today's alternative youth: "win".

28) Kick-Ass, dir Matthew Vaughn, USA/UK

What I said: "‘Kick-Ass’ was terrifically good fun and I highly recommend it to anyone who likes to go to the movies, sit back and get entertained. It is equal parts funny and exciting and (if it performs at the box-office) may provoke a new wave of independent movie blockbusters."



I had (and have) major reservations about 'Kick-Ass'. It is pretty much a right-wing wish fulfillment fantasy in the same vein as 'Harry Brown' (also produced by Matthew Vaughn) and it's representation of society, crime and the criminal leaves a lot to be desired. It is the opposite of 'Barney's Version' in terms of its view of the human condition. As a film it is also shamelessly derivative of Quentin Tarantino and 'Kill Bill' in particular.

Yet I'd be a great big phony if I didn't admit to loving it. I saw it twice, enjoyed it both times and found the action scenes every bit as exciting as I was supposed to. Chloë Moretz and Nicolas Cage were especially funny as father and daughter vigilantes, with Cage doing his best Adam West impression to great effect. I'm still not a fan of comic book author Mark Millar's cruel and hate-filled sensibilities, but 'Kick-Ass' was one of the year's best blockbusters by a mile (even if it didn't end up catching the popular imagination on release).

27) Cemetery Junction, dir Ricky Gervais/Stephen Merchant, UK

What I said: "‘Cemetery Junction’ is a moving and often funny film which serves as a tight and accomplished filmmaking debut from the Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant partnership. Unlike anything in recent British cinema, it is certainly one of the most exciting films I’ve seen this year so far... there is some ironic humour (“Why are you playing this gay music? Stick some Elton John on!”), but ironic distance isn’t the film’s default position and it is more than happy to earnestly explore themes of friendship, love and happiness without smirking... ‘Cemetery Junction’ may just be the finest thing to have come from the partnership so far. It will be exciting to see what they do next, though they have now set the bar pretty high for themselves. We will have to wait and see whether it heralds a new New Wave of British filmmaking or not, but either way this is a special film."



Wow. What a fall from grace and so very undeserved. 'Cemetery Junction' not only bombed at the UK box office, but then suffered the ignominy of being released straight-to-DVD in the US. It is a shame too as it really is a sincere and tender film with its heart in the right place. It is funny, but not really a laugh-a-minute riot as a comedy. Instead it is a coming of age drama with a few genuinely tear-jerking moments (Emily Watson is, as always, superb). The film's young cast is also really decent. Especially the luminescent Felicity Jones, who I hope is an up and coming star for the future.

26) Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans, dir Werner Herzog, USA

What I said: "writer, William Finkelstein, is a veteran of [the police procedural] on television... But what stops this film from sinking into the mediocrity that writing pedigree would suggest is the collaboration between the film’s two insane geniuses: Herzog and Cage... Cage gives a great physical performance as he carries himself with a slight hunch due to his back injury and looks and sounds increasingly on the edge of full-on, drug-induced breakdown... Herzog is an equally pivotal part of what makes this film, largely, successful. It is hard to imagine that anybody other than the German director wrote the film’s closing lines, in which Cage asks “Do fish dream?” It is equally hard to imagine that the shooting script contained [reference to] ultra close-up shots of iguanas and alligators or the scene in which a dead man’s soul starts break dancing. All these elements must be things which Herzog brought to the party and it is these sorts of touches that elevate the material."



In a busy year which has seen Herzog (depending on where you live) release three feature-length films (this, 'My Son, My Son...' and documentary 'Cave of Forgotten Dreams'), 'Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans' is unquestionably the most commercial of the bunch. After all, the film stars Nicolas Cage, Val Kilmer, Eva Mendes and Xzibit in a slickly made cop thriller which combines sex, drugs and gangland shootouts. The difference though is Herzog's taste for all things odd: all things which subvert and challenge the structured, sanitised way that we are encouraged to make sense of our world. Then add Nicolas Cage to the mix, in the form of his life, acting every bit as unhinged as Klaus Kinski ever was. The result is something that is at once fresh and conventional, a genre piece and an art film.

25) Noi credevamo, dir Mario Martone, ITA

What I said: "Probably the best thing about the film is that, despite the fact that its release is close to the 150th anniversary of unification, it is not celebratory or patriotic. The men we follow see their lives marked by hardship and tragedy thanks to their dedication to a life of violent struggle. At one point the actions of the nationalists are seemingly likened to those of the IRA or ETA, as a plot to blow up Napoleon III in Paris fails to kill the monarch, instead it brings about the massacre of a number of ordinary French citizens. And once the country is unified, the surviving revolutionaries find themselves irrelevant in the new Italy, which doesn’t live up to their original egalitarian ideal (“Italy is petty, hauty, murderous” bemoans one man)."



Long historical epics are more often than not ponderous bores, though when they are done well there is almost nothing as grand and truly "cinematic". Mario Martone's 'Noi credevamo' is one such film that tells a big story on a big scale over a 204 minute running-time. And it is a rare film that needs that running length, yet this one does as it traces the decades running up to eventual unification of Italy as a nation state in 1861, following three revolutionaries through their lives and looking at different philosophies of revolution and resistence, as well as at the events themselves. It is a film of stunning quality which will probably never find a theatrical release in the UK at all. Though anyone with an interest in historical epics or the effect of nationalism on nineteenth century European history should seek it out on DVD when it becomes available.

24) Lourdes, dir Jessica Hausner, FRA

What I said: "To say that ‘Lourdes’ is a slow moving film of subtle observations and small moments would be an understatement, as to many it would probably fit the description that “nothing happens”. There is a story here, but it is slight. It is in the interactions of the characters and specifically their treatment of Christine that the film is strongest. It is odd perhaps that a film that accepts the possibility of miracles could be so matter of fact and naturalistic, but maybe that is the point: in a world where miracles exist (and are indeed scrutinized and recorded by the Church) are miracles simply as banal as everything else?"



'Lourdes' is a subtle and quietly effecting film about a disabled woman named Christine who is on a Catholic pilgrimage seeking a miracle to mend her legs. There is a respectful tone over the whole thing which never overtly criticises the church, yet there is lots of low-key satire directed at some of those within the church and their attitudes towards each other. The film also revels in the banality of the Catholic church as an institution, with rules and bureaucracy to rival any government (as I suppose it ultimately is). The film is also formally beautiful and boasts an eye-catching central performance from Sylvie Testud.

23) Essential Killing, dir Jerzy Skolimowski, POL

What I said: "this film doesn’t talk in platitudes in order to solicit empathy. It doesn’t need to soften the edges and make excuses in order for us to understand its characters’ basic humanity. Instead, like the Chris Morris comedy Four Lions, it asks you to accept more complicated truths about our nature."



'Essential Killing' played in Venice last summer, where it picked up a couple of prizes - the biggest being for Vincent Gallo as the festival's best actor. He certainly deserved it - and that's coming from someone who isn't a huge fan of the pretentious former model. In 'Essential Killing' he is at his intense best, carrying the film with a wordless performance as a Muslim insurgent on the run from his American captors after escaping an Eastern European detention centre where he is tortured. The film brilliantly (and brutally) subverts the Middle Eastern war movie of the last ten years, as we follow the "terrorist" and see his murderous actions through his eyes as acts of survival. The first half an hour is an adrenaline ride which would rival any action film, though for the most part it is a slow and introspective film following a confused and increasingly desperate man in an unfamiliar landscape.

22) The Father of My Children, dir Mia Hansen-Løve, FRA

What I said: "‘The Father of My Children’ is certainly an accomplished piece of work. The performance of Louis-Do de Lencquesaing as Grégoire is everything it must be. Afterall, it is said (more than once) within the film that his character is charming and charismatic, which he certainly manages to be. He is also warm and funny in the scenes with his children (the eldest of which is played superbly and with real intensity and intelligence by his real life daughter Alice), and this is perhaps the most crucial part of the film. But he is also equally adept at getting across the sense of depression and desperation crucial to understanding the character's eventual suicide... [the film] takes a mature and considered look at the roots of suicidal depression as well as its ultimate selfishness and futility, and without being judgemental."



A film about a movie producer who is hit by the threat of bankrupcy and is driven to take his own life, 'The Father of My Children' is an empathetic and unsentimental look at the causes and aftermath of one man's suicide. The first half of the film follows the man and his gradual mental decline and the second half takes the perspective of his family and friends. It is a haunting and moving portrait of a harrowing situation made in an unembelished style which gives the act itself all the more poignance for its being so fleeting and lacking all romance.

21) The Princess and the Frog, dir Ron Clements/John Musker, USA

What I said: "There are some awkward moments, as I felt uncomfortable hearing Tiana’s father sermonise about the value of effort and hard work in achieving success (especially as we are told he works triple shifts whilst never achieving his dream), but whilst the film is a little too “American Dreamy” for my tastes, it is ultimately hard to fault the moral: that you have to work hard if you want to fulfil your dreams. In live-action, maybe I would dismiss this movie the way I have dismissed the last few Will Smith vehicles, about upwardly mobile, hardworking believers in the American way of life. But as a handsome 2D animation, with a fantastic score and a delightful cast of characters - who exist on just the right side of “wacky” – ‘The Princess and the Frog’ is a charming and essential new Disney film, and the studios best since ‘Lilo & Stitch’."



One of my favourites of the year, without doubt. I have since seen this delightful return to Disney hand-drawn animation a number of times on Blu-ray and it continues to thrill me. The animation is fluid and detailed and the Randy Newman songs are brilliant, revealling a lot of hidden depth that rewards repeat viewing. 'The Princess and the Frog' also has one of the best "Prince" characters in Disney history, as he isn't a dull pretty-boy, but an amusing character in his own right. Not only is this one of the best Disney animations of the last ten years, but I am increasingly starting to think it is better than most of the films of the Disney renaissance, including Ron Clements and John Musker's own 'Aladdin' and 'Hercules'. Hopefully, this proves that the last decade has been - like the 1980s - a temporary blip for the studio's in-house animation wing. One that looks set to come to an end.

Next up: numbers 20-11.

The point of making arbitrary lists...

I'm a serial list-maker. There is an obsessive compulsive part of my personality that enjoys sorting things into groups and thrives when it comes to forming arbitrary lists, especially when it comes to film. In the last few weeks I have given a lot of thought to my own end of year list, which is now veering towards being a "top 30" due to the fact that I have seen just over 130 new films so far this year. But what, you might ask, is the point?

Can one good film ever be definitively said to be "better" than another? How do you go about comparing works as different as 'Pinocchio' and 'Citizen Kane' and 'The Apartment' and 'Jaws'? What possible use is there in making these sorts of lists? Aren't these lists just cheap and easy disposable articles in an age of lazy journalism?

I understand - and even slightly agree with - those academics like David Thompson who routinely ask those questions, yet I am ultimately still drawn to these lists. For one, I find them fun to compile. There is a simple joy I get from taking an otherwise abstract concept like "taste" and making it something tangible or even quantifiable. A second reason why I enjoy these sorts of lists is that they are great starting off points for discussion. On an annual basis I find myself discussing the results of Sight and Sound magazine's end of year critics' poll with friends. A list like that can also encourage you to seek a film out that you might have overlooked. For instance, off the most recent S&S poll I haven't yet seen 'Carlos' - a French-made biopic about "Carlos the Jackal" - and its inclusion on the list will almost certainly result in my seeking the film out.



Perhaps that is the most compelling reason for the existence of these lists. They can perhaps inspire others to seek things out that they may never have even heard of, or may even have dismissed out of hand. I avoided 'In Bruges' (above) on account of its incredibly naff poster and it wasn't until I saw the film popping up in a few "best film" lists in 2008 that I tracked down a copy on DVD and subsequently discovered that I loved it.

Sometimes these rankings don't hold up over time. A look in an old notebook drew my attention to the fact that I once felt 'Garden State' was one of the best films ever made. I don't even like that film anymore. Likewise, my end of year list will doubtless contradict my earlier list, made in July, of "the best of 2010 so far". I'm sure if I return to my final 2010 poll in twenty years I'll have grown fonder of a few films and perhaps developed a dislike of others. All any personal list like this can do is provide a snapshot of a moment in time.

Accepting for the sake of argument that these lists are relevant and interesting (if only to me), I need to decide on a format for my 2010 "best of". Last year's list didn't include 'Ponyo' and 'Micmacs' even though I loved them and saw them at last year's CineCity Film Festival. The logic behind this was that they hadn't been officially released in the UK at that point. But making that judgement poses a few problems to the list-maker further down the line. For starters, both those films might have placed highly on last year's list, whilst they were fresh in my memory, whereas now they feel "old" to me. There is a reason the prestige pictures come out in the run up to awards season and not a year before the Oscars are nominated.



There is also another less fickle reason why I might have done better to include those films in last year's list. If I restrict myself only to films released in the UK in 2010, doesn't that mean I can't include films that are unlikely to get a UK release at all? In Venice I saw several good Italian films that won't receive any sort of release over here and I think I will include at least one of them in my final poll at the end of this month. And what about re-releases? Should I consider 'Rashomon' and 'Breathless' and 'Five Easy Pieces' too? Probably not, or this could get messy.

Considering all of this, I will draw my "best of 2010" list from every new film I have seen this year. I won't consider re-issues, but I will consider 'Micmacs' and 'Ponyo' from last year and I will also likely award places to films scheduled for UK release next year, such as 'Black Swan'. Expect to see the top 30 up on this blog as we get closer to the new year.

The "Worst Movies Ever"?

It's official! A new poll has found to be true what we'd hitherto only suspected: Joel Schumacher's 'Batman & Robin' is the worst film of all time. That is, at least, according to the readership of the UK's Empire Magazine, the votes of whom have formed the basis for a "50 Worst Movies Ever" poll on the magazine's website. Aside from the winner, the list includes the likes of 'Transformers 2', 'Year One' and 'The Pink Panther 2' from the year just gone, aswell as high entries for the 1980 film 'Raise the Titanic' and 'Highlander 2'. Ok, now I know that such reader polls are to be taken with a pinch of salt. But I'm not going to diminish this list, but instead I think it is worth our consideration for a number of reasons.

Firstly, if anything this list is more interesting as an indication of what is currently very unpopular rather than what is really historically the "worst movie ever" as the title claims. Most bad films are, of course, seen by very few people (Michael Bay's output seemingly acting as the exception to the rule) and hence a really bad film will only appear on the list if it has achieved a certain notoriety as "so-bad-its-funny", a type of film ably represented on this list by such camp favourites as 'The Room' (must-see trailer below!), 'The Avengers', 'Battlefield Earth' and 'Plan 9 From Outer Space'. Generally, though, the films on this list are of a certain technical standard, with reasonable levels of acting and direction (though sadly not in the winner's case). Therefore the list is really "which big studio movies didn't people like?"

Secondly, the list provides an insight into the watching habits of readers of the magazine and gives a decent impression of the publications target demographic. Aside from the aforementioned "Plan 9", there aren't any films on the list which pre-date the 1980's (that's right: the first eighty years of cinema were near faultless). It's really gone downhill since the eighties though: a whopping thirty-seven of the fifty films listed (that’s 74%) were made in the last decade! However, this is an understandable lack of perspective in the list, given that Empire’s readership are probably reasonably young and have seen more films from this period than any other (or at least remember them more vividly). We can see this "last thing you saw" syndrome in full affect in earlier lists too. Michael Medved's reasonably famous book "The Fifty Worst Films of All Time (And How They Got That Way)", published in 1978, features numerous films from the 1970's, including films like 'The Omen', 'Exorcist 2' and the innocuous disaster sequel 'Airport 1975'. Doubtless a similar poll conducted ten years ago would have included ‘Waterworld’, a film absent in this new list and seemingly forgotten (or reclaimed) now. Of course, these lists need to have well-known, contemporary films on them if they are to appeal to a wide audience, so in that respect they are brilliant for their publishers. A reader who finds some obscure, straight-to-video horror film or a forgotten silent movie in the list is likely to feel alienated and may stop reading altogether.

Thirdly, it is perhaps most interesting to consider the oldest films on the list as being there on merit, as enduring examples of bad film. George Lucas's ill-fated 1986 adventure film 'Howard the Duck' features, as does 'Superman IV', 'Jaws: The Revenge' (the one starring Michael Caine) and the disastrous 'Heaven's Gate'. The 1990's throw 'Showgirls' and 'Street Fighter' (one of four video game adaptations on the list) into the mix. These films seem to have earned their place on this list. There also seems to be a number of people who have used this list to express an agitation with the diminishing returns offered by many sequels, a sort of protest vote: 'Spiderman 3', 'Matrix Revolutions' and 'Blade Trinity' are all examples of instances where a once-popular franchise has run out of goodwill from the cinema-going public the third time around.

Finally, if the films on this list are representative of which sort of bad films people have paid to see, and not simply the definitive "worst ever", then it paints a depressing picture for UK cinema. Only two UK films make the list ('Swept Away' and 'Sex Lives of the Potato Men'), whilst the remaining forty-eight are American imports. You could see this as evidence that American films are inferior to those imported from elsewhere, or to those made on these shores, but in reality this seems to confirm the dominance that Hollywood enjoys at the UK box office. Yes, it seems funny to decry UK film and wider world cinema not making more of an impression on this list, but it would have been encouraging to find that people had been drawing from a deeper, more-varied pool of movies.

All in all, an interesting list, whatever you think of the choices.
To read the full list for yourself visit Empire's website here, and then kindly return and share your thoughts on the results on this blog!