After a rough 2000 I went into 2001 without much of a strong opinion on whether the world was ending or if it wasn’t. The film landscape the previous year was a rocky place where my seed could find no purchase. Personally, I had never been worse. Disillusioned with everything that Middle America had to offer, this was the year that I decided to quit college and enter a questionable world of mindless labor and inevitable demise. In short, I really needed a bunch of great movies to come out to give me a jump-start and get me caring about life again. 2001 wasn’t quite that year. Don’t get me wrong, the top four films on my list I completely love, and they went a long way in enriching my life that year, but the bottom three I could really take or leave. And that leaves a lot of film watching below my list that was frustrating to say the least. 2001 was a very top-heavy year. A handful of films that I loved and probably kept me going more than I even know now; but also a wasteland of suck that, on a day to day basis, had me feeling like there was no great meaning to it all, and that soon there was bound to be a raining down of hellfire and brimstone that would rightfully smite us of our weary, needless existences. For me 2001 was a turning point, a crossroads, either an end or a beginning.
This Hughes brothers adaptation of an Alan Moore novel about the Jack the Ripper murders looked more promising to me going into it than it ended up actually being, but it’s not without its merits. Like everything the Hughes brothers make it’s very stylishly filmed and beautiful to look at. The period production design is all gorgeous and Johnny Depp does good enough work as the drug addicted inspector at the heart of the film. Heather Graham was a better choice as the female lead than say Cameron Diaz, or whoever else was probably in the running. Ian Holm is pretty creepy as the creepy rich guy. Ultimately, the film doesn’t have much more to offer than it’s visuals, but that’s enough to say that fans of filmmaking should check it out. Still, that the Hughes brothers started out so promising with their above average street crime films, then made this mediocre film, and then didn’t follow this up until 2010 with the equally mediocre The Book of Eli is a pretty dang big disappointment in my book.
9- Donnie Darko ***
Jake Gyllenhaal is kind of a creepy little weasel. If it were revealed that he was some sort of Michael Jackson-esque pedophile I wouldn’t bat as much as an eyelash. Usually his presence in a film all but guarantees that I am going to be annoyed; Donnie Darko, on the other hand, utilizes the weasely nature of this always looks like he’s going to burst into tears actor in a great way by casting him as a greasy, troubled teen. The role he was born to play! This film gets a lot of play in the “Boondock Saints Rules!” frat boy crowd that it doesn’t deserve, but it’s a decently solid film nonetheless. The soundtrack is strong and well used, it’s well cast and the performances are all strong, and it manages to be legitimately funny a few times. The out there plotting and structure are a bit much and Richard Kelly seems to have gone completely off the rails with it in his follow ups, but this one isn’t incomprehensible enough to be completely sunk. Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
8-Y tu mamá también ***
Y tu mamá también gets more hype and acclaim than I remember it deserving from my viewing way back whenever. It works on certain levels. It isn’t an embarrassing entry in the coming of age film genre. It works as a sort of modern update to the teen sex comedies of the 80s. For me, it works best as a travel documentary through the Mexican countryside. But, ultimately, I didn’t see it as much more than a fairly shallow story shot against a really pretty backdrop. The acting is all serviceable; though I didn’t find the script they were working with to be all that impressive. Gael García Bernal seemed like a real find to me at the time, although he’s gone on to annoy me a couple times in subsequent years. Ultimately, when you get down to the heart of the matter, Y tu mamá también works as a film that introduces a girl with a great wrack, teases us with it for a while, and then pays things off by showing it. It’s pretty hard to complain about that; but I wish I saw the inherent greatness in this film that everyone else seemed to. I would say that I’m a fan of Alfonso Cuarón. There are things I like about this film. I think his entry into the Harry Potter series looked a lot more legit and well crafted than the ones that preceded it. Children of Men is one of my very top films of the decade. Maybe I need to give this one another look with fresher eyes and see if it jumps out at me more.
7-Wet Hot American Summer ****
I was twelve years old when MTV started playing episodes of The State. It’s youth oriented, absurdist brand of comedy seemed mind meltingly progressive to me at the time, and even looking at it with more mature eyes it still seems like it was a pretty progressive, influential show from a talented young group of comedians. The reason I bring it up is that this film’s director and co-writer David Wain came from that show; as did a large number of it’s cast and it’s other co-writer Michael Showalter. Eight years after that show’s debut, Wain’s comedic sensibilities struck a chord with me just as strong as The State did during those very formative years. A broadly comedic takeoff of 80s camp movies, Wet Hot American Summer tries little more than to be hilarious, and delivers with wall-to-wall laughs. That it works as a pretty sharp parody of those old camp movies from my youth only helps to elevate the film a notch. Wain and the rest of his friends’ comedic sensibilities may be a little too out there for a lot of audiences, but people who “get” what they’re doing are pretty much guaranteed to respond to this one. I’ve seen it reach cult movie status in a couple of circles and it totally deserves the love that it gets. Though everyone is strong in this one, special consideration has to be given to Christopher Meloni, who is mostly known for dramatic roles and absolutely kills it as the perverted, perhaps schizophrenic camp cook. A young Paul Rudd also broke out of his guy in the background casting by being ridiculously funny in this one. If you haven’t seen it, just watch it, okay?
6- Ghost World ****
My radar doesn’t usually get thrown off. It’s not often that I’m expecting to be annoyed by a film and it ends up really impressing me. Ghost World looked from its advertisements like it was trying too very hard to be ironic and cynical. They featured a mulleted hillbilly attacking a convenient store with a pair of nunchucks; a joke too broad and hackey to possibly be funny. It’s protagonist was a girl in cat’s eye glasses and vintage clothing; surely she would be preachy and annoying in a way that above it all art school girls can only be. When none of this turned out to be true I was shocked and ecstatic. The hillbilly character actually worked. The art school girl’s above it all attitude proved to be a fragile shell that got broken through to reveal actual character development. And, above it all, Ghost World was damn funny and a pretty insightful spoof of a lot of the ridiculous people you may come across in everyday suburban life. And, on top of all that, the huge triumph of the film is Steve Buscemi’s Seymour. His problems are much more adult than the snarky teen comedy I thought I was going to be seeing going in. His character is both sad and loveable in a way that demands your heart to break for him. Buscemi’s performance is masterful, and this is my favorite thing I’ve ever seen him do. Like Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson’s relationship in Lost in Translation, Seymour and Enid’s old guy/young girl relationship manages to be touching and real without delving into any pervy or ludicrous territory. Their friendship, and the way it helps them both fill in the gaps in their lives is the heart of this film and I can’t imagine it being handled any better than it was. Also, this is the film that introduced me to Scarlett Johansson, and hey, she’s pretty dang cute, huh?
5-Made ****
Swingers, as you know if you’ve read my 1996 column, made a pretty big impact on me when I first saw it. My friends and I were quoting it incessantly, working its lingo into everyday conversation as often as possible, and re-watching it at probably an annoyingly frequent level. In 1999 that movie’s director Doug Liman followed it up with Go. It was billed in its advertisements as Liman’s big follow-up to Swingers. I was pumped, I went into the theater giddy, and I walked out completely let down. That was probably the day that I learned that just because someone is the director of a project, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are the creative force behind it. Two years later, the guy who appeared to be the real man with the plan when it came to Swingers, its writer Jon Favreau, finally wrote the script to Made and made it his first directorial effort. Now this was more like it. This film, while not quite as hip and perfect for its moment as Swingers, is still funny, filled with good performances, and manages to reach places of greater emotional depth than Favreau’s first script. The on screen chemistry between Favreau and Vince Vaughn is back in full effect here, their banter as quick and clever as ever, their adversarial relationship as infinitely amusing as it was the first time. Here though, the dynamic is changed a bit in order to keep things fresh. Vaughn is still the fast talking conman, but here instead of the other characters buying into and celebrating his act, they treat him as if he’s obnoxious and incompetent. Favreau, instead of being the insecure protégé like in that first film, plays the guy with his life together who has to put up with his loudmouth best friend. It’s interesting how they play characters so similar to their characters from the first film, but by changing the way they are reacted to by others they are able to completely alter how we perceive them. Vaughn goes from hero to idiot, Favreau from puppy dog to straight man. The rest of the film is filled out by some strong comedic performances by people like Faizon Love, Peter Falk, and P. Diddy, who first showed off his comedic chops by busting Vaughn’s balls in several key scenes. Five years after Swingers I finally got a worthy follow up. Eight years after this and Favreau gave us Couples Retreat. Oh well, I guess nothing lasts forever.
4-The Man Who Wasn’t There *****
One year after O Brother, Where Art Thou? the Coen brothers returned with this absurdist homage to classic noir era black and white photography and completely knocked my sock off again. The Man Who Wasn’t There doesn’t really get talked about much these days from what I can tell, and in that respect I find it to be ridiculously underrated. The layered complexity of the script, what is to be taken seriously, what should be looked at mock-heroically, what is just there as an inside joke to amuse the brothers, and how it all blends together seamlessly into a filmic journey is completely astounding. When it came out, much was said about the photography and look of the film, and rightly so. At the same time a throw back to a different era and a slick, timeless piece of motion photography, The Man Who Wasn’t There is the type of film that makes you wish color film had never been invented. The rich, almost otherworldly look of the film is something that could only be accomplished in black and white. On top of that, the movie is hilarious, and the kind of subtle hilarity where a person with the wrong sensibilities could sit through the whole film and not even realize that they were supposed to be laughing. Billy Bob Thornton is absolutely amazing as the still faced, icy blooded non-hero at the center of the film. It is my very favorite performance by him and I can’t imagine anybody else doing nearly as well in the role. The way he calmly, nonchalantly accepts all of the outlandish nonsense that he comes across over the course of the film without so much as a question or a second look is cheek-squeezingly adorable. In typical Coen brothers film fashion Thornton is also surrounded by a plethora of character actor geniuses that delight in even the smallest roles of the film. Special attention should be given, I suppose, to the usually frumpy Frances McDormand who was able to vamp it up in a quintessential femme fatale performance, James Gandolfini, who looked completely at home playing a big dumb goon character that seemed to be ripped out of the past and thrust into this modern update, and Tony Shalhoub whose small but unforgettable role as hot-shot lawyer Freddy Riedenschneider should be celebrated, studied, and entered into some sort of filmic hall of fame. If you managed to let this under looked Coen brothers gem get past you then run, don’t walk, to your nearest Netflix queue and get this thing to your house pronto.
3-Amélie *****
I walked into an empty afternoon matinee of Amélie knowing that it was getting a lot of hype from film buff circles, but not really having any idea what to expect. I hadn’t at that point saw Delicatessen or The City of Lost Children and didn’t know what I was going to get from Jean Pierre Jeunet. It was only about two minutes into the opening montage and I was completely in love with the film. Its hand crafted design work, its tonal whimsy, its fairy tale representation of Paris, its cherubic protagonist; it all came together like Voltron to create the cinematic version of sunshine and puppy dogs. I defy anyone to watch this film and leave it in a bad mood. If you’re able to, then probably you’re a really bad person. I expected coming out of this one that I was going to be able to devour Jeunet’s entire catalogue and love every bit of it, but he’s not that kind of filmmaker for me. Visually, there is a very definitive style that shows up in everything he makes, but Amélie is the only film that he’s made so far that also completely grabs me through character and story. I can find something to appreciate about everything he makes, but Amélie is his only film that I love. Audrey Tautou proves herself to be a wonderfully magnetic screen presence and has no trouble shouldering the weight of the film as it’s lead. Similar to the Coen brothers’ films, the main character here is surrounded by a legion of quirky side characters that are brought to life by a great ensemble cast of character actors. I think that there are probably a lot of people who have avoided this one because they have some sort of idea of it being too cutesy or too chick oriented, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. There’s something for everybody here and if Amélie isn’t able to get past your reservations and push your joy button then probably you’re worse than Hitler.
2-The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring *****
There are a lot of geek things that you have to talk about when you discuss something as beloved by nerds of all different ages as the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Are you a fan of the books? What do you think of the changes to the books? Where does Fellowship rank with you compared to the other films? So I guess I’ll start by answering those sort of questions. No, I’m not a fan of the books. I got about three-fourths of the way through the first one and found it to be too tedious and masturbatory to continue. I imagine that any changes that were made in the adaptation were changes for the better; streamlining the story and making it something that could be enjoyed by everybody and not just fantasy fetishists. Fellowship is my very favorite of the Lord of the Rings films and the only one that I gave a perfect five star rating to. Contrary to my opinion of the books, that they were too indulgent, not focused enough; the reason I like the first of the films over the others is it’s laid back exploratory feel, it’s ability to not adhere to strict story structure, wander off on it’s own for a while, but still remain interesting. Is that a contradiction? Is that hypocritical? I don’t think so, I contain multitudes and so must my opinions. Fellowship watches less like a cookie-cutter Hollywood production and more like a sprawling, David Simon television show. But bottom line, the film is gorgeous to look at. It’s a wonder of special effects, production design, and photography all coming together in a coherent vision to create a true work of visual art. The performances, top to bottom, are all award worthy. The action is all well placed and thrilling. The emotional moments all hit hard and succeed where most films in this genre would fall completely on their face. The trilogy, as a whole, is a wonder of filmmaking talent and execution. It very well may be the most important achievement of this past decade. Probably it is best to view it all as one long narrative; one long movie. They were all conceived together, they were all shot together, and they don’t really work as stand alone stories so much as essential parts of a whole. That’s not how they were released though, and if I had to watch one of them right now it wouldn’t be the non stop battles of Two Towers or the never ending emotional climaxes of Return of the King; I’d go for that lazy sense of wonder and discovery in Fellowship of the Ring.
1-The Royal Tennenbaums *****
