My Top 30 Films of 2010: 20-11

This is the second part of my 2010 top 30 films list. If you haven't already read through entries 30-21 then do so here.

The final top 10 is available here.

20) Capitalism: A Love Story, dir Michael Moore, USA

What I said: "‘Capitalism’ is a fiery essay, delivered by a master propagandist and manipulator, but it is never less than compelling and exciting, and is a skillful piece of documentary filmmaking. Even if you come away unconvinced or even angered by Moore’s opinions, I for one am very glad he is airing them in this way. Especially on this subject which usually goes un-discussed, yet has such total and invisible control over our everyday lives. The fact that Moore can turn this discussion into populist entertainment is his unique gift and I for one applaud him for it."



Nothing this year has left me feeling as enraged or as energised as Michael Moore's documentary on world capitalism. Moore's critics point to a lack of "balance" or "objectivity" in his films, but for me they work for this reason. They take a view and argue that point. I don't particularly like the wacky stunts he pulls, such as closing off Wall Street with crime scene tape, as these moments have the effect of trivialising the other more serious points he is making, of which there are many. What I really liked was the sequence that linked the rise of Reagan to the rise of capitalism and advertising, and the bit where he talks about FDR's siding with striking workers over the police, sending the army to protect them (a moment that actually made me punch the air with joy). It is populist and manipulative in the extreme, but "the left" needs a voice like this in a world where shamelessly biased, right-wing media organisations like Fox News dominate the ratings on American cable news.

19) Ponyo, dir Hayao Miyazaki, JAP

What I said: "I loved ‘Ponyo’. It was purely and immensely joyful and if my fandom of Miyazaki has in any way compromised my judgement and rendered me unable to find any negatives in this film, then I am entirely happy with that outcome. In an age where most children's films have a post-modern, knowing cynicism about them, it is really refreshing to find something so sincere in its unabashed enthusiasm and childish naivety."



Miyazaki's most childish film since 'My Neighbour Totoro', 'Ponyo' is a little undiluted capsule of raw fun. It takes place in that recognisable world of his where the sky is the brightest blue and the grass is the lushest green and where there is no such thing as "evil" or "bad guys". As in all Miyazaki films - with the exception of one - the villain of the piece is redeemed rather than killed and everyone is more or less decent. He also continues to be one of the keenest observers of the behaviour of young children in all of cinema. His last film 'Howl's Moving Castle' is richer and more detailed in terms of storytelling, but it is great to see a film aimed a really young children that is so respectful of that audience and brimming with imagination.

18) Lebanon, dir Samuel Maoz, ISR

What I said: "Of course, the film is anti-war, but without seeming like a polemic. Maoz doesn’t stand on a soapbox: he simply presents the events to us as he saw them and in doing so we come to share his viewpoint. You could not sit through that experience and come to any other conclusion than war being a terrible exercise... But the strength of Maoz’s picture is that, confined to the men in the tank and bereft of any political context or discussion, we just see the humanist plight of people in a nonsensical situation asked to wreak violence upon their fellow man."



Sam Maoz documented his personal experiences, during his compulsory time in the Israeli army during the first Lebanon war, in this film which takes place entirely within the confines of a tank. All we see of the world outside is what we are permitted to see by the vehicles viewfinder. As you'd expect the result is tight and claustrophobic. It's a film about the horrible things men do to each other and the immense pressure put on young people to do them - usually for reasons they don't understand.

17) Submarine, dir Richard Ayoade, UK

What I said: "Rarely in a debut feature do you find a director so in command of the form, as you sense that everything in 'Submarine' has been carefully played out in its director's head and translated exactly that way onto the screen... 'Submarine' is as sweet and at times unsettling as it is beautifully made and wonderfully acted. It is funny - but not too funny - and also melancholic and above all truthful, in spite of that fact that it takes place in a reality heightened by its narrator's ego."



Richard Ayoade's debut feature film reminded me equally of Wes Anderson and Stanley Kubrick. It has all the detail and French New Wave inspired mise-en-scène of the former, but with the narrator - a Welsh teenage boy with delusions of grandeur - sharing dark thoughts in a cheerful and amoral way that channels Alex from 'A Clockwork Orange'. It is witty and at times bizarre, yet at its core it's a very sincere family drama and a heartfelt coming of age story.

16) Tangled, dir Byron Howard/Nathan Greno, USA

What I said: "For years I've been a hand-drawn snob who felt that by going over to computer animation Disney had lost their way - along with all of their charm. 'Tangled' has won me over wholeheartedly, putting a recognisably Disney style into computer animation for the first time. If they keep this up, the studios identity crisis might finally be over and the problem of differentiating Walt Disney Animation Studios from their more lauded cousins PIXAR might finally be solved."



My favourite animated film of the year, which is no small feat when you consider 2010 saw the UK releases of superb return to hand-drawn animation 'The Princess and the Frog', as well as Miyazaki's 'Ponyo'. Not to mention the charming likes of 'Chico & Rita' and 'The Illusionist'. (I didn't care much for Pixar's slide into sequel excess, 'Toy Story 3'.) Walt Disney Animation Studios has finally made a decent computer animated film, something I thought would never happen. The secret seems to be that they have moved forward with the technology (the best hair, water, light and fabric effects I've ever seen), but looked backwards with the storytelling. Like all classic Disney it is a fairy tale (based on Rapunzel). It is also a Broadway-style musical to rival the best of the Disney renaissance from the 90s. The whole thing feels like a hand-drawn Disney movie pulled out into 3D, rather than the sort of charmless, personality-free stuff that came to typify their output of the last decade.

15) Four Lions, dir Chris Morris, UK

What I said: "Whilst nobody in the audience is encouraged to agree with the measures Omar takes to try and register his political dissatisfaction as a British Muslim, in ‘Four Lions’ we are given a humanistic picture which demythologises the bogeyman of the evil suicide bomber. This is arguably a laudable aim if, like me, you see empathy and understanding as crucial to finding a future peace... ‘Four Lions’ will certainly not be to everybody’s taste, with some scenes destined to make audiences uneasy, but long term fans of Morris will find it to be a satisfying and devastatingly funny experience."



"If they're about to blow themselves up in wrong place, you've got to make sure they blow themselves up in the right place" counsels the wife of a disillusioned British suicide bomber on the verge of giving up. The couple's young son is equally encouraging in a scene that reminded me of something from director Chris Morris' unsettling sketch show 'Jam'. I love the way that scene plays on movie convention, as Morris' film picks apart the recognised formula of a Hollywood narrative (here the "hero" has a crisis and is helped by his family) by transposing it onto a group of would-be terrorists. I expected 'Four Lions' to be clever and funny, being from the maker of 'Brass Eye' and 'Nathan Barley', but I never expected it to be so tender and moving as it was in the final minutes.

It is also a deeply humanistic film that looks at the different reasons people go along with Omar's plans: one is brainless, another younger man wants to be seen as a radical and thinks it'll be cool, another guy (Barry) is just homicidal and wants to blow people up and is using his shaking grasp of Islam as an excuse. Omar himself is motivated by sincere conviction, but even then he is not shown to be a dedicated Muslim, but is instead driven by a misguided sense that terrorism is some kind of ultimate form of anti-consumerism. Characteristically, Morris doesn't pander to anyone or sanctify anything, so the practicing Muslims are also satirised, keeping their wives in a cupboard ("it's not a cupboard, it's a small room") and playing football in impractical clothes. The police are equally nonsensical, with a sniper shooting the wrong man during the London marathon ("is a wookie a bear?") Like his frequent collaborator Armando Iannucci (who directed 'In the Loop'), Morris plays up basic human absurdity with a straight face. To both men incompetence and ignorance can be found at the root of all "evil".

14) No One Knows About Persian Cats, dir Bahman Ghobadi, IRN

What I said: "Aesthetically, the film sometimes looks a little amateurish and the music video sequences (whilst clever) can seem a little cheesy. But that said, ‘No One Knows About Persian Cats’ is an enjoyable and at times poignant look at a modern Tehran, which provides a really good insight into the social and cultural life of that city. The film tantalisingly blurs the line between fact and fiction in many ways. For example, the lead actors boast the same first names as their characters and the bands they encounter are real bands playing themselves. But more relevant and interesting is the movie’s opening scene in which a character talks of a great movie that will be made about the underground music scene in Iran. After seeing ‘Persian Cats’ I was left in no doubt that this is that great movie."



An interesting look at the hidden artistic life of a secretive and fascinating country, 'No One Knows About Persian Cats' looks at the great variety and vibrancy of the music on offer in Tehran for those who know where to look. It is a film that shows young people in Iran referencing Western movies and 60s rock music, which reveals something both wonderful and tragic: there is vibrant, modern youth culture here, but it is being stamped on by an authoritarian regime. As you'd expect for a film made on location in Iran which features real footage of underground musicians performing banned music, 'Persian Cats' at times feels amateurish and cheap - with the extended musical sequences looking laughably unsophisticated as they try to ape Western music videos without the glamour or the technology. Yet as a film it is ultimately every bit as hopeful and heart-breaking as the modern Tehran it presents so vividly.

13) Dogtooth, dir Giorgos Lanthimos, GRE

What I said: "For something so thoughtful and demanding of close analysis, ‘Dogtooth’ is also more purely entertaining than it has any right to be: equal parts harrowing family drama and subtly amusing black comedy. The film is sometimes tense, occasionally funny and often disturbing. The performances are perfect across the cast, with Mary Tsoni and Aggeliki Papoulia particularly effective as the two daughters. They imbue their young-adult characters with childlike mannerisms, particularly in one scene where they perform an excruciatingly bad dance for their parents. All the actors transmit a certain coldness and convey that the characters have no real understanding of how to be affectionate."



An incredibly rich film that you could probably read as being "about" three thousand different things. For me it was about the arbitrary nature of language and meaning, as it looked at three "children" (now adults but still treated as infants by their parents) who have never left their high-walled family home and whose socialisation has been left entirely to their strange parents. They are taught different meanings for any words that imply an outside world. It is explained to them that cats who enter the garden are dangerous and evil creatures and that passing airplanes are made of paper and thrown into the air by their parents as a game. It all goes "wrong" however, when the father invites an outsider into the house to teach his son about sex. Soon the siblings are consumed with a curiosity to discover more about sexuality and this mysterious outsider. 'Dogtooth' is unsettling, darkly funny beautifully shot.

12) Micmacs, dir Jean-Pierre Jeunet, FRA

What I said: "[If] you are one of those who didn’t get swept up in the whimsical charms of ‘Amélie’, then I would suggest you will not find much more to enjoy in ‘Micmacs’. If you hated that film's sensibilities (as a great many seem to do) then I don’t think this is the film for you. Conversely, I think fans of that film will find much to recommend about ‘Micmacs’, as it has the same oddball sensibility, along with many of Jeunet’s familiar visual motifs and thematic preoccupations."



Like ever other Jeunet film before it (including 'Alien 4'), 'Micmacs' follows a set of quirky oddballs - social misfits who find strength in banding together. It feels like exactly the sort of film Terry Gilliam would be making if he was French and if he was given money and control. It's a highly visual modern fairy tale about a group of homeless people fighting to destroy two major arms corporations - a sort of slapstick, silly 'Mr Smith Goes to Washington' for the modern age. It's sweet, warm and sentimental (just as Capra was), and its heart is so definitely in the right place, that it is just such good, uplifting fun from beginning to end. Along with del Toro, Gilliam and Burton, Jeunet is a modern auteur who fully embraces imagination and the possibilities of cinema as a visual medium. Also, French comic star Danny Boon is brilliant in the lead role, especially during one pantomime scene of which any of the great silent clowns would be proud.

11) Life During Wartime, dir Todd Solondz, USA

What I said: "By far the best reason to see ‘Life During Wartime’ (aside from the performances, the drama and the directorial precision) is for the riotous black comedy. As with Chris Morris’ ‘Four Lions’, some may squirm uncomfortably in their chairs, but I personally found it struck the right note throughout. Solondz never pulls back, never flinches. We are always taken right to the dark core of his chosen subject matter and we laugh along the way. It is often said that if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry – that laughter is the best medicine. In Solondz case this is true, as he examines difficult social problems which, without his wonderfully comic writing, might prove too much to bear."



Chris Morris and 'Four Lions' is perhaps the best point of comparison for Todd Solondz 'Happiness' sequel. Both directors take a knee-jerk social issue and run at it head-on, seemingly without fear. For Solondz that subject is arguably even more controversial than a comedy about Islamic terrorism: he is looking at sex in suburban America and even paedophilia. And just as Morris aimed to understand the terrorist by looking at him as just another flawed, complex human being, Solondz give a matter of fact representation of a paedophile as a man driven by desires that have ruined his life (time in prison, break down of all his family relationships and shattering of his reputation). Again, as in 'Four Lions', we are not asked to sympathise with or support the vice itself, but to feel some empathy for the man who (for whatever mental reason) commits that act. Finally, both men use razor-sharp comedy to look at these issues, to get to the core of the absurdity at work in the human psyche and to avoid the despair that would otherwise accompany such an honest look at what lies within all of us. In Morris' film that takes the form of more obvious jokes and wordplay, whilst Solondz gets laughs from social awkwardness and a very real desperation which operates at the heart of all his very sad characters.

It's not an out and out comedy, but rather it's funny because people are funny, even in their blackest moments. The film is equally a visceral punch in the guts, especially in a key scene in which the paedophile attempts to reconcile with his now adult son.

The final part of this list, detailing my top 10 films of 2010, will be online tomorrow. If you haven't read the first part (films 30-21) then you can do that here.

If you want to see the top ten, then that is now available here.

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.

'Of Gods and Men' review:

In 1996 a small group of French Trappist monks were abducted from their Algerian monastery by Islamic terrorists. The monks were later found beheaded, but it remains to this day a mystery who actually killed them. The killings were claimed by The Armed Islamic Group of Algeria, but many suspect (based on French secret service documents) that it was in fact the Algerian army that killed the monks in error. Such a controversial near-contemporary incident, touching on inter-faith conflict and Islamic terrorism, may seem like an obvious set-up for a movie of our current political moment and indeed this horrific episode has now been made into a French language film directed by Xavier Beauvois entitled 'Of Gods and Men'.

Yet rather than focus on what you could (quite crassly) call "the action", Beauvois film takes a slower, more introspective and intellectual approach. He chooses not to dissect the incident itself, and the controversy surrounding the fatal final moments (stopping short of showing them altogether), but instead details the weeks leading up to that event as the monks discuss whether to stay in the monastery or go back to France in the face of the escalating tension in the region. It is a film of thoughtful pauses, haunting Gregorian chants and long, earnest conversations about ethics. 'Of Gods and Men' is not a film that states an overt ideological position, but instead it is about the nature (and perhaps the practicality) of ideology itself.



In it similar questions are raised as were earlier this year in Claire Denis' post-colonial drama 'White Material'. In that film a white family decides to stay on their African farm in the face of Zimbawbwe-style ethnic tension, placing themselves in clear danger. Both films ask us to contemplate where the line exists between stubbornness and bravery, between principle and stupidity. But whereas Denis' film seemed to be critical of its subjects (who were either willfully ignorant of the severity of their situation or else completely mad) in 'Of Gods and Men' the monks are portrayed sympathetically and their ultimately fatal decision to stay put is explored in a calmer, more rationalised manner. Though whether that makes the monks actions any less foolhardy is left to you to decide.

The seven monks are played brilliantly by an ensemble of terrific French character actors and the dynamic between the men is nuanced and rich. Each man has his own reasons for staying put and you sense that not all of them are grounded by their religious belief as much as by a mixture of peer pressure and loyalty to their fellow monks. One monk reveals that he will stay because he has nobody else outside of the monastery, having given up his old life to adopt the religious lifestyle. Other men (like Michael Lonsdale's affable doctor Luc) seem too frail or ill to move on. At least at first, it is really only the de facto leader of the group Christian (Lambert Wilson) who seems to be resigning himself to the idea of martyrdom born from an uncompromising sense of moral conviction.



Christian ponders the morality of every decision he makes. He refuses the offer of armed guards for the monastery so as not to align himself with the "corrupt" Algerian government (a decision he comes to without consulting the others) and telegraphs his obvious reluctance to shake the hand of a guerrilla leader even if it will buy the group some temporary assurance of protection from harm. When told at gunpoint to give up all the monastery's supplies and medicine, he refuses. "You have no choice" he is told. He replies calmly with the film's key line: "Yes I do." To what extent do we have choice? Is Christian blinded by a self-righteous sense of faith that will doom his religious brothers needlessly? Or is his adherence to a strict moral code something which assures their eternal salvation? Those are some of the questions posed by 'Of Gods and Men' and there are probably many more. Your answers to them may depend on your feelings on religion and the concept of moral absolutism.

Any good film is a film of ideas, even if those ideas are transmitted through seemingly disposable entertainment. But rarely are films so consciously about ideas whilst remaining so unpretentious. Usually a film's "hero" is motivated by a desire for material wealth, love, revenge, power or survival. Christian and his brothers desire none of these things and as a result this is a rare film where the goal is to determine the worth of principle. The fact that it does this so compellingly for just over two hours is nothing short of astounding. Especially as there is nothing in the way of light relief or humour. Another of this year's outstanding French films, 'Lourdes', was similarly slow and thorough in its exploration of faith and morality, but did so with an element of satire that is wholly absent here. Yet 'Of Gods and Men' assuredly manages to command our attention whilst being unrelentingly po-faced.



'Of Gods and Men' lives up to its billing as one of the year's strongest films, with its sombre, contemplative mood as captivating as it is a profoundly moving experience, reaching a creshendo as the monks' tearfully listen to Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake" on the eve of their final trudge in the snow. As they disappear from view and into the mist, we are aware of their fate and you suspect that they are too. In a film that doesn't shy away from showing violence, in one startling and visceral instance, it is even more commendable that Xavier Beauvois chooses to leave the ultimate and most obvious question of "what happens next?" up to historians. In 'Of Gods and Men', what we think about what happens is more endlessly facinating than the event itself.

'Of Gods and Men' is rated '15' by the BBFC and was released in the UK on December 3rd.

'Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale' review:

There is something Spielbergian about Finnish horror-comedy 'Rare Exports'. The fact that the action surrounds a mountain brings to mind 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind', whilst the film's child protagonist Pietari (Onni Tommila) is reminiscent of the child from... well just about every family movie the director has ever made. However, the films that it most resembles from the Spielberg stable are not those he directed, but those anarchic and violent family films he produced in the mid-80s: 'The Goonies' and 'Gremlins'.

As with 'Gremlins', in the UK 'Rare Exports' has been hit with a '15' certificate. Which is a shame because, although there is a little swearing (though not as much as the apparently kiddy-friendly 'The King's Speech' which got a '12A'), some violence and some nudity, 'Rare Exports' is essentially a children's story. It is a coming of age tale which sees Pietari making the gradual change from a scared boy to a young man. It has a dark aesthetic and a macabre sense of humour, but nothing that would be out of place in the world of those Spielberg films mentioned. Like the title suggests, it is also a rare phenomenon: a good Christmas movie.



'Rare Exports' is the first feature film by Jalmari Helander, who has expanded on an idea which he first gave life to in a couple of short films: 'Rare Exports Inc.' (2003) and 'Rare Exports: The Official Safety Instructions' (2005). The film is a sort of prequel to those shorts, which took a comical look at how hunters in Lapland track down and capture wild and dangerous Father Christmases in order to train them for safe export around the world. Many of the original cast return for the feature, which shows how they originally discover the homicidal, rampaging Santas after they are unearthed from an icy tomb deep within the Korvatunturi mountains by a team of American archaeologists.

As with the short films, Santa Claus murders whoever he suspects is naughty. He also, in a twisted re-imagining of the folklore, eats little children - a fact which young Pietari learns from some old books and which terrifies him into taking precautions, including fashioning his distinctive suit of padded armour. When the boys and girls of the village go missing, it is up to the boy and his father, a reindeer hunter, to rescue them. There is a father-son subplot at work here, but unlike that in 'Tron: Legacy', it feels like more than a functionary narrative device. The relationship between Pietari and his father (Rauno played by Jorma Tommila) is in many ways the film's real focal point, with two thirds of 'Rare Exports' focusing on the way they interact with one another and featuring very little action. What action there is takes place in the final twenty minutes and is brilliantly exciting and funny.



'Rare Exports' has been likened to the early work of Tim Burton and it isn't difficult to see why with the film feeling like a dark, contemporary fable in a similar vein to 'Edward Scissorhands'. In the illustrations of ancient Santas devouring children, it is also possible to detect traces of Guillermo del Toro's 'Pan's Labyrinth'. Yet Helander's preference for humour which combines the sinister and the silly is more like something out of a Roald Dahl book. In fact the dishevelled Santas themselves, rake thin and with unkempt beards, look like Quentin Blake illustrations come to life.

The concept of these wild 90 year-old men running around the woods ripping people to shreds is the stuff of black comedy in itself but Helander adds to this some brilliantly funny ideas which help to elevate 'Rare Exports' above being another exploitative horror-comedy: Santas can be distracted by feeding them freshly baked ginger bread cookies; among the things they consider naughty (as well as the likes of smoking, drinking and swearing) is people who haven't washed behind their ears; and in order to ward off Santa, Pietari sellotapes and then staples shut the penultimate door on his advent calender. There are loads of other great ideas which I won't spoil here and also some very funny lines of faux action movie dialogue.



'Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale' is practically begging to become a cult seasonal favourite. If it were Spielberg produced and directed by Joe Dante then it would probably have already found that audience - one that might, sadly, be excluded by the film's being in the Finnish language (notoriously one of Europe's least widely spoken and least accessible tongues). It will also be limited by the fact that some of its content (which includes matter of fact nudity as a Santa takes a shower) will prevent children from being able to see it in more conservative countries like the UK, which is a pity.

It's admittedly not a film for very young children, but it certainly has more appeal for the under-15 crowd than 'The King's Speech' and is arguably less violent than a lot of recent "tweenage" blockbusters which boast lower age ratings. And whilst the likes of Michael Bay's 'Transformers' series objectify women and indulge in horrible racial stereotyping for a '12A' audience, 'Rare Exports' is actually a pretty savoury story about a young Finnish boy growing up, abandoning his tattered teddy bear and proving that he has more courage than his bullying peers. What's wrong with that? Don't bother to ask the increasingly inconsistant likes of the BBFC.

'Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale' is out now in the UK and playing at the Duke of Yoir's Picturehouse in Brighton. It is rated '15' by the BBFC.

'Tron: Legacy' review:

It seems that 2010 is the year when Hollywood decided all 1980s entertainment properties needed to be re-tooled for the modern age. We've already had 'The A-Team', 'Clash of the Titans', 'Predators' and 'Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps'. We also got Sylvester Stallone's nostalgia reliant, berk-fest 'The Expendables'. Now it seems it's Disney's turn with 'Tron: Legacy', a sequel to the 1982 movie 'Tron' which explored, using then pioneering computer effects, what happens when you zap Jeff Bridges into an arcade game.

Whilst the original now has a certain campy charm, with its fluorescent world of all-in-one jumpsuits, it certainly isn't "cool" in a conventional sense (if you're in doubt, see YouTube phenomenon "Tron Guy"). By comparison, this sequel has re-imagined "The Grid" (the world inside the computer) with the aesthetic of an especially chic, modern car ad. Like the swanky flat of a Soho trendy, it's a world characterised by clean, minimalist designs and set to a pulsing Daft Punk soundtrack. Watching 'Tron: Legacy' is like spending two hours in an exclusive night club, only here your headache comes as a result of RealD 3D glasses and not as a result of too many blue After Shocks (though if 'Tron: Legacy' were a drink, you suspect that would be it).

Fittingly for a sequel that's 28 years late, 'Tron: Legacy' picks up some years after where the original left off. Jeff Bridges' game designer and arcade owner Kevin Flynn ended that film as head of ENCOM, the shady company that had stolen his computer programs. Apparently between the two movies Flynn fathered a son, this film's protagonist Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund), and promptly disappeared leaving Flynn the younger desperately in need of a father - a role filled by Alan Bradley, his business partner and designer of "Tron" (an independent program and hero of The Grid).

Bradley is again played by Bruce Boxleitner who, with his distinguished grey hair and glasses, resembles a sort of budget Richard Gere. 'Tron: Legacy' begins with an aimless Sam Flynn pulling a juvenile prank on the board of ENCOM (now re-cast as a sinister analogue of Microsoft) after which he is visited by Bradley who, after giving a half-hearted ticking off, tells Sam that he has received a mysterious message on his pager, apparently from Sam's father. After this revelation, Sam is persuaded to visit his father's old arcade, where he finds a hidden room which teleports him onto The Grid via a laser beam.



Once there Sam is promptly undressed and more appropriately attired by what look like a gang of automated perfume counter saleswomen. (Wearing vaguely exploitative sci-fi clothing and ridiculous high-heels, the women are literally objectified as they walk out of sockets in the walls to cater to Sam's needs.) He doesn't know it, but he has been prepared for "games": iconic events directly lifted from the original film and then improved infinitely by current computer effects (as well as this new film's sexed-up styling).

The discus throwing duels now take place in a glass box, suspended in the air and ever diminishing in size as the flying discs smash it to bits. The computer world's liberal grasp of physics means that the duels are enhanced further as fighters are able to run around the walls and across the ceiling as they smash things up. The discs themselves are now not only thrown but also used in hand-to-hand combat and the defeated combatant no longer turns into a cosy beam of yellow light but crumbles into thousands of tiny pixels, in the film's most eye-catching effect. Likewise the "Light Cycles" of the original have been given the Tron 2.0 treatment, now operating in a multi-tiered, translucent arena, with riders now combining the ultra-sleek future bikes with their discus. The result of these changes is set pieces that easily surpass anything seen in the original. Though sadly they are few in number.

Although the original film was considered something of a flop back in its day, Disney have clearly pitched this film to a young audience seeing this sequel as a fully-fledged franchise re-boot with the ambitious cross-promotional platform for the movie including a video game, an animated series and, of course, the Daft Punk composed soundtrack album. But whilst "the kids" will want to see Sam to smash people into little blue bits with his discus and ride around in a cool, neon motorbike, what they will actually see is a few imaginative and high-octane action sequences buried amongst drawn-out scenes of plot exposition, flashbacks and parent-child angst as Sam catches up with his aged father.

Kevin Flynn, it transpires, has been trapped within the program since his sudden disappearance all those years ago and the role is reprised by Jeff Bridges. There is, naturally, a romantic sub-plot for young Sam which springs from nowhere in particular, as Quorra (Olivia Wilde) emerges as our hero's capable companion. Though whilst Wilde is fun to watch and delivers her lines with a disarming playfulness, in truth she is given little to do. Also underused is Jeff Bridges himself, with Kevin Flynn's Grid-bending powers (as seen in the first film) used far too sparingly.



Bridges appears as two characters in 'Tron: Legacy'. He is of course Flynn the elder, who has become more like "The Dude" of 'The Big Lebowski' since we last saw him (he now ends most sentences with the word "man" and at one point exclaims "radical!"). But he is also CLU - a program version of himself that he created to oversee The Grid in his absence and the film's villain. CLU is a CG motion captured version of Bridges, meant to closely resemble his appearance in the original film. It is a bold move to use CGI to animate a human character in a live action film, where he must appear alongside actual people, and the film almost pulls it off. Yet you can't help feeling that he's rolled into town on the Polar Express and doesn't belong. There is something not quite right about it. It doesn't help that the first time we see this effect, it is used to portray the real, younger Kevin Flynn interacting with his son outside of the computer world. Though it is unquestionably state of the art for now and the idea itself - of the young and old Bridges facing off onscreen together - is compelling enough for Disney to have taken the gamble. I'll say this for it: the more you see the effect the less weird it seems until by the end of the film you've accepted the whole thing.

The story itself is logical for this follow-up and serviceable, if nothing new, but the dialogue is below average. It's one of those scripts that consists only of clichés and exposition. "What is it like... the sun?" asks Quorra at one stage. "It's warm, it's radiant..." replies Sam before looking her deep in the eyes and adding "... it's beautiful." "Tron! What have you become!?" shouts Kevin Flynn during one encounter with his old cyber-buddy, now in the services of CLU. This poor writing could be forgiven. I didn't go into 'Tron: Legacy' expecting an Aaron Sorkin screenplay, after all. But 'Tron: Legacy', the maiden effort of director Joseph Kosinski (until now best known for video game commercials), forgets to be escapist fun for much of its length and bad dialogue is left to provide most the laughs.

You certainly won't get laughs from the one sequence in the film intended to be purely comic, which falls embarrassingly flat as Michael Sheen (no stranger to camping it up) makes an appearance as an effete nightclub owner in one horrible car crash of a scene. He plays air guitar with his cane, dances about and shouts ridiculous things throughout one fight, seemingly on a one-man quest to ruin the entire film. I hope it was worth it Sheen (though I guess it's at least a step up from 'Underworld: Rise of the Lycans' and 'Twilight: New Moon'). Thankfully, Jeff Bridges does manage to come out of things with his credibility in tact. Especially when he sees his son for the first time in years, as he delivers his lines with almost tear-inducing sincerity above and beyond the writing.



'Tron: Legacy' has the distinction of being the first film since 'Avatar' to use that film's high-end 3D cameras - with every other major 3D release of 2010 subject to a controversial post-production conversion process. As a result the 3D is better than that seen in the likes of Disney's own 'Alice in Wonderland' and seems to suffer less from motion blur than any other live action 3D film I've seen. Perhaps this also has something to do with the less busy visual design of the Tron world, which may have been designed as much with 3D in mind as anything else.

Though for all the polish, as with every other 3D movie I've ever seen, I forgot it was in 3D after twenty minutes of watching and its most positive attribute was that it was subtle and unobtrusive in its use of the extra dimension. All of those words of faint praise lead to the obvious question: "what was the point of it all then?" (aside from the bump in ticket prices and security against piracy).

Unlike some of those other denizens of 1980s popular culture recently thrust into renewed relevance, 'Tron: Legacy' is a sequel nobody asked for, to a film that I suspect nobody below the age of twenty-five even remembers. With a week to go before its release I find it hard to imagine that it can be anything like the hit that Disney needs it to be in order to consider it a success. Who exactly is it for? It's too slow (and possibly too complicated) for young children, whilst it's a little too juvenile for adults. It looks and sounds excellent and it would not be any kind of scandal if it picked up a few technical awards in the new year. Plus there are two or three genuinely awe-inspiring set pieces and some really imaginative touches here and there.

But the central problem is that the world of Tron, which must have seemed so exotic to those who went along to the cinema in 1982 when computers were young and promised a world of seemingly infinite possibility, now seems to raise too many questions (with "why are these programs people?" the first among them). It is even a sequel that beats its original, yet baring in mind the limitations of the original 'Tron' that is no exceptional boast. Yet in spite of 'Tron: Legacy' being in many ways so deficient, I'll be sad if it tanks at the box-office. Disney have taken a massive gamble and, in Hollywood especially, that sort of daring should be rewarded. Also, Light Cycles are pretty cool.

'Tron: Legacy' is out on December 17th and is rated 'PG' by the BBFC.

'Tangled' review:

The last decade hasn't been especially kind to the Disney animation fan. The annual triumphs of the folks at PIXAR aside, the in-house output of Walt Disney Animation Studios has been lacklustre as the once dominant studio have struggled to remain relevant in the 'Toy Story' inspired age of computer animation. Prior to this year, the 2002 film 'Lilo & Stitch' was probably their last genuinely good feature. Then, after the commercial disasters of 'Treasure Planet' and 'Home on the Range', Disney began making their own forgettable computer animations: 'Chicken Little', 'Meet the Robinsons' and 'Bolt'. Things seemed bleak until, earlier this year, Disney restored a lot of faith with 'The Princess and the Frog' - a return to the type of hand-drawn animated musical which defined the 90s renaissance - which did well with critics and at the box office. Given this success, it seemed a shame that their next film 'Tangled', an adaptation of the Rapunzel Grimm fairy tale and the studios 50th feature, would be yet another computer animation... and in 3D.

But as with buses, you wait for ages only for two to show up at once. 'Tangled' is brilliant, possibly better even than 'The Princess and the Frog' and certainly one the best Disney animations of the last ten years. Unlike the studio's other computer animations, which lacked any real character and seemed to bear little relation to the Disney style of old, 'Tangled' feels exactly like a 1990s classic in the mold of 'Beauty and the Beast' or 'The Hunchback of Notre Damme': in terms of the film's design, the quality of the animation, the timeless appeal of the source story and with the songs composed by Alan Menkin. Like all classic Disney the pacing is exactly right too with action, gags, musical numbers and romantic sequences all balanced well, leaving the whole thing feeling like an example of perfect story telling economy. Uncle Walt himself would approve.



This telling of the Rapunzel story has it that the titular girl's long, blonde locks possess magical healing properties. It is for this reason that she is stolen from her parents (here a king and queen) as a baby and spirited away to an isolated tower by a vain old hag named Gothel, who wishes to use Rapunzel's hair to keep herself forever youthful. Running parallel to this story is that of Flynn Rider, a scoundrel who has stolen a valuable crown from the palace in his latest daring heist. On the run from the guards - and from a couple of gangmates whom he betrayed - Flynn stumbles upon the tower and is soon a bewildered Rapunzel's prisoner. Rapunzel, who has been told that the outside world is far too dangerous for her, hides Flynn's valuable prize and forces him to escort her safely out of her tower so she can see the world outside. Gothel comes back to find she has gone and pursues, whilst Flynn continues to evade the law.

If I was surprised to find a computer animated in-house Disney film of this high quality, then I was even more surprised to find that it was in many ways technically the most advanced computer animation I've yet seen - dare I say it, even surpassing PIXAR. The lighting, water and fabric effects are staggeringly well done in 'Tangled' as is, perhaps unsurprisingly, hair. Though the charm of character animation is what really sets this film apart, so in keeping is it with the studio's traditions: a transformative melding of the old with the new. Generally human people look best in animated films if they are heavily stylised, whilst realistic people, such as those seen in the ugly rotoscope animations of Robert Zemeckis ('The Polar Express', 'Beowulf' and 'A Christmas Carol'), suffer from the uncanny valley effect and look unsettling and unappealing.



PIXAR have had their own trouble with this in the past: when we see people in the original 'Toy Story', they are stiff looking and unconvincing. It took almost ten years before they felt confident to make their first feature length film about recognisably human characters, 'The Incredibles' in 2004, and then they were highly stylised caricatures. Tellingly for 'Wall-E' PIXAR chose not to animate the film's recognisably "human" character at all, and instead used a live-action actor, only using computer animation to bring to life the devolved, more cartoonish, future humans. Similarly, for 'Tangled' the approach has been to create cartoon characters rather than humans, but even better than that: unlike those present in 'Meet the Robinsons' (who could sit comfortably in a Nickelodeon TV series) these are recognisably Disney creations. These characters go well with the bright and lush world in which they are placed, with its blue skies and green grass and the design of the whole picture manages to create a vibrant fantasy kingdom that feels as though it has burst from the pages of a Grimm fairy tale, very Disney whilst definitely retaining something Gothic at its core.

Rapunzel herself (voiced by a disarming Mandy Moore) is wonderful to watch, the picture of girlish "cuteness", with her disproportionate eyes in her huge head. She is an incredibly expressive and entirely likable creation, and one of the most fun Disney princess characters. She is sharp, funny and, as is typical of the modern heroine, extremely feisty. Her "prince" is equally good to watch. Voiced by Zachary Levi, Flynn Rider narrates the tale and is our post-modern anti-hero. He refuses to sing and dance and isn't taken in by all the warmth and sentimentality. If Rapunzel is a less helpless version of Belle or Ariel, then Flynn is Aladdin combined with the more recent Prince Naveen. He is quick-witted and agile, stealing to survive (and for sport), but he is also extremely narcissistic. With Naveen in 'The Princess and the Frog' and Flynn in 'Tangled', Disney have successfully rejuvenated the once dull "prince" character, so long considered a thankless task among animators.



The obligatory, toyetic animal sidekick characters - a violent, yet cowardly chameleon and a determined and moralistic white horse - are likewise superbly well animated. Particularly the horse, who is terrifically funny with his proud stride and his vendetta against Flynn, whom he hunts prodigiously. 'Tangled' allows itself some truly silly moments no longer really seen in animation as things have become more sophisticated and less exaggerated. In one scene Flynn has a sword fight with the horse, turning to Rapunzel and saying proudly, "You should know that this is the strangest thing I've ever done!" Whilst another very funny sequence sees a group of murderous ruffians burst into a brilliant song called "I've Got a Dream", in which they all state that they'd rather become interior decorators or concert pianists than tough fighters. It is a song that recalls Howard Ashman's lyrics for "Gaston" in 'Beauty and the Beast' as much as the animated sequence channels Monty Python and Mel Brooks.

Then there is the evil Gothel, who Rapunzel believes to be her mother for the majority of the film which leads to an interesting dynamic between them - one that seems to be of very genuine love between the hero and villain. Gothel is one of the most properly horrifying Disney villains. After all, she abducts a child whom she keeps locked in a tower for eighteen years. Also the fact that her power is derived from years of manipulation and brainwashing is far scarier a concept than magic or violence.



'Tangled' shares one of its co-directors, Byron Howard, with Disney's last computer animated, 3D film 'Bolt' and, like 'Bolt', the use of 3D in 'Tangled' is restrained and tasteful rather than eye-popping. With the exception of some floating lanterns, things are rarely made to fly out of the screen at you and instead the extra dimension is employed to allow depth. As with 'Bolt' 3D is also occasionally used to make self-referential jokes (it is harder for a chameleon to hide in a 3D cartoon than a 2D one after all) but this is still not done so overtly as to be distracting. Does this film need to be in 3D? Of course not. Nothing needs to be in 3D - or at least nothing worth watching. But the 3D does add depth and, for the moment at least, is still a fun gimmick when used with animated films (live action 3D tends to give me a headache and the motion blur is awful during action).

For years I've been a hand-drawn snob who felt that by going over to computer animation Disney had lost their way - along with all of their charm. 'Tangled' has won me over wholeheartedly, putting a recognisably Disney style into computer animation for the first time. If they keep this up, the studios identity crisis might finally be over and the problem of differentiating Walt Disney Animation Studios from their more lauded cousins PIXAR might finally be solved. I'm still glad to see that Disney have hand drawn projects in the works, as next April sees the release of the beautiful looking 'Winnie the Pooh', for instance. But now I don't think the studio's future depends on taking that old fashioned route. In fact alternating between computer animation and hand-drawn (hopefully as material warrants) might keep both art forms from out staying their welcome a second time on Disney's watch.

'Tangled' is released in the UK on January 28th 2011 and has been rated 'PG' by the BBFC.