Friday, December 14, 2007
Film Whose favorite year?
Posted by Pat Graham on 12.14.07 at 05:15 PM
"One of the best years for all-round quality I can remember ... some extraordinary films," Sight & Sound editor Nick James waxed enthusiastically over the 2007 movie year (click on PDF link for full article download), though you'd never know it by me. But out here in the boondocks at civilization's edge, what passes through the cineplexes isn't necessarily what the arbiters of culture get most wound up about. Plus we're all arguably in remission—or at least I am—from Milla Jovovich's latest, which undoubtedly explains a lot.
Still, with 2007's example to spur him on, the A.V. Club's Noel Murray has decided it's once again time to reflect on what the greatest year in movie history might be. "To qualify as 'the best ever,'" he argues in what's mostly a semantic circle, "a movie year needs to be both bounteous and pivotal," which in his own considered view means 1974—the year of Godfather II and Chinatown and Ali: Fear Eats the Soul (not to mention Celine and Julie Go Boating, which Murray confesses he hasn't seen yet). What mainly disturbs me about all this isn't so much the choice of year, on which I've little to add one way or the other, as the writer's nomination for the year's best film—actually two best, since it's a double-decker toss-up between Robert Altman's Thieves Like Us and California Split. "Minor miracles" is how Murray describes this critical perfecta, though I'm wondering if alleged "bests of the best," however miraculous, shouldn't be more than minor works. Because look at Steven Spielberg in 2002, who gave us both Minority Report and Catch Me if You Can. On a par with Altman's twins, I think, as well as among the director's most precision-crafted and/or thoughtful films, at least of recent vintage—also, not coincidentally, released during my own "favorite" year for movies, if not of all time then at least of the last 15. Arguably nothing groundbreaking about 2002, but there's a lot of rigorously calibrated niche work, like architects' surgical "interventions" in a building-wall facade, pushing the visual and thematic energies as far as they can go. Some career "bests" too from the filmmakers involved—Iosseliani, P.T. Anderson (in keen-edged pre-There Will Be Blood mode), Cuaron, Tian, maybe even Godard in an objet d'art sense—which is arguably a weasel's way of measuring, since even a relative "best" from, e.g., Spielberg might not be all that significant or enduring.
In any case, here's what we got in 2002 Chicago, from my own list of favorites for that year. (Not everything listed is '02 kosher—see dates in parens—but that's when these movies first came to town and I'm not inclined to quibble.) "Bounteous" without being pivotal, I guess you could say—albeit we can only speculate, like blind historians groping in the dark.
1. PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE, Paul Thomas Anderson
2. IN PRAISE OF LOVE, Jean-Luc Godard (2001)
3. MONDAY MORNING, Otar Iosseliani
4. SPIRITED AWAY, Hayao Miyazaki (2001)
5. THE LADY AND THE DUKE, Eric Rohmer (2001)
6. THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE, Manoel de Oliveira
7. Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN, Alfonso Cuaron (2001)
8. SEX AND LUCIA, Julio Medem (2001)
9. RUSSIAN ARK, Alexander Sokurov
10. SPRINGTIME IN A SMALL TOWN, Tian Zhuangzhuang
SONGS FROM THE SECOND FLOOR, Roy Andersson (2000)
Not to neglect other '02 faves, like Takashi Miike's The Happiness of the Katakuris, Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (arguably best in the cycle), Jia Zhang-ke's Unknown Pleasures, Im Kwon-taek's Chihwaseon, or James Benning's completed "California Trilogy." Or '02 releases that didn't show up for another year or so: the Dardenne brothers' The Son, Guy Maddin's Dracula: Pages From a Virgin's Diary, Nuri Bilge Ceylan's Distant, Olivier Assayas's Demonlover, Bill Morrison's Decasia, Claire Denis' Friday Night ... Or Catherine Breillat's contentious, ineffable Sex Is Comedy, about which I've already blabbered on more than enough.
So: any more "favorite" years out there? Or are we all gonna get stuck on 1939?
Comments (33)
Showing 1-33 of 33
I haven't seen most of the 2001/2002 movies you mentioned above, but I did love "Minority Report" when it came out -- easily my favorite summer popcorn movie of the past decade. It reminded me how much fun those movies can be when they're smart yet they also deliver the action the 14-year-old inside you craves. "Minority Report" made $132 million at the box office, but I was surprised it didn't do better. P.T. Anderson apparently is an extra in that movie in a scene set on a subway train, as Tom Cruise's character is fleeing from the police. I'm guessing it's the same scene in which Cameron Crowe plays a commuter who spots Cruise and realizes he's a fugitive. Anderson and Crowe had both directed Cruise at that point -- say, where were Brian De Palma, Ron Howard, and Sydney Pollack in that scene? Maybe they were on another train car.
like
dislike
Oh, as for favorite years, I remember 1993 being very good, and I remember some critics saying it had been the best year since the '70s for films. 1993 gave us "Schindler's List," "The Fugitive," "What's Eating Gilbert Grape," "Baraka," "Short Cuts," "Groundhog Day," "The Firm," and "Six Degrees of Separation," all of which I still like.
ROBERT--re first point: trapped on a runaway POLAR EXPRESS seems the likely explanation ... only that one wasn't released till 2004! * as for my inner 14-year-old: bound & gagged and thoroughly thwarted ... i'm blaming zemeckis for that too re 1993: top o' my list for that year was THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS ... but maybe i should give everything a closer look
I'm not necessarily buying into the notion of 2007 as one of the best movie years *ever*, but I do think it's probably the best in my moviegoing lifetime (though here it should be noted that I'm in my early twenties). I'm a bit offended by your implication that here in Chicago we're missing out on the good stuff (you're just reinforcing New York elitism, here). Of the films that have made it to our city in 2007, I've seen more excellent ones than I can count. The Assassination of Jesse James, Zodiac, Eastern Promises, Knocked Up, Gone Baby Gone, Sunshine, Bug...too many to list here, and in a dizzying variety of genres. (And I'm eagerly awaiting There Will Be Blood). Also I'm not sure what your issue with Noel Murray's criteria; "bounteous and pivotal" makes perfect sense to me (lots of good movies and a sense of Importance, both of which apply to 2007). I can't say I agree with your assessment of 2002 as a great movie year, though I would add Road To Perdition (Sam Mendes' best film, to my taste) to that list.
For the record, the high point of Philippine cinema was probably 1976, with Insiang and Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos, MInsa'y Isang Gamu-Gamo and Ganito Kami Noon, Paano Kayo Ngayon? among many others coming out that year. Coem to think of it 1927 wasn't so bad.
I know, it is only two films, and the first one gets older every time I watch it, but 2001 saw me inside a cinema every time to watch "Moulin Rouge" and "Artificial Intelligence" again and again and again.
The awful truth is that 1939 isn't that great a movie year. (although it did contain Stagecoach, Rules of the game, Le jour se leve, Love affair, destry Rides Again, of Mice and Men, Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, Midnight,Drums along the mohawk,Ninotchka, and The Story of the Last Chrysanthemums) I like 1950 alot(Winchester '73. The Furies, Adam's Rib,Born Yesterday, All about Eve, Father of the Bride, La Ronde,Stars in my Crown,Harvey,King Solomon's mines, The Third Man,Caged,Flame and the Arrow, In a lonely Place,Rashomon,where the sidewalk Ends, Panic in the Streets,Born to Be Bad,Baron of Arizona,Rio Grande, Wagonmaster,No Man of Her Own,Armored Car robbery, annie Get Your Gun, Asphalt jungle,Aventurera,Sound of Fury, los olvidados, Cinderella,Broken Arrow,Branded, union station,D.O.A.,Bright Leaf, Breaking point,Gunfighter, and Gun Crazy
The reason 2007 has being called a great year, the some goes to 99, has a lot to do with the amount of actual decent prestige fall films. It's a pretty good year but not necessary greater than 2006 or 2005.
A Face in the Crowd Aparajito Sweet Smell of Success Wild Strawberries The Hidden Fortress (and The Lower Depths) Paths of Glory Nights of Cabiria The Searchers White Nights
I was coming to talk about 1957, but I was just beating to the chase! (although I think The Searchers is 56). I'd also add for that year Will Success Spoil Rock Hunter? The Seventh Seal The Bridge on the River Kwai 12 Angry Men Two other great years are 46' and 48'.
Oh, if it's titles we're talking about-- College The General The King of Kings The Lodger Metropolis Napoleon Sunrise The Unknwon Wings
1939 also benefited with Only Angels Have Wings. Not to say 1939 was the best ever, but I love that movie. As well, that is a terrific list of 02 favorites.
Actually, no Atanarjuat/The Fast Runner? Thumbs down, or did I have my years mixed up?
"Minor miracles" does not equate to "minor films," by the way. The "minor" in the former case compares to, you know, actual miracles. Anyway, thanks a bunch for first pissing all over my idea--"a semantic circle" indeed!--and then basically ripping it off. Slick work, that.
This year seems mostly good but flawed movies. I thought '02 was weak, and liked ABC Africa and Ararat best. Murray neglects possibly the best '74 movie: Monty Python and the Holy Grail! I might vote for '94: A Moment of Innocence, Chungking Express, Satantango, Ashes of Time, Red, Dumb & Dumber, Dear Diary, Portrait of a Young Girl from Brussels, Hoop Dreams, The Troubles We've Seen, Exotica, Shawshank Redemption, Through the Olive Trees, To Live.
1954 - better than 1939 Sansho the Bailiff, Seven Samurai, The Sound of the Mountain, Johnny Guitar, Rear Window, The Barefoot Contessa, Salt of the Earth, Viaggio in Italia, La Strada, Senso - to mention only the 10 best: any match to a year like this one?
Even more so than 1927, 1928 was the pinnacle of silent film for so many great directors: Dreyer (Passion of Joan of Arc), Lang (Spies), Chaplin (The Circus), Keaton (Steamboat Bill Jr. and The Cameraman), Vidor (The Crowd and Show People), Pabst (Pandora's Box), Sternberg (The Docks of New York and The Last Command), Stroheim (Queen Kelly), Ford (Four Sons), Borzage (Street Angel), Hawks (A Girl in Every Port), Eisenstein (October), Murnau (his lost film 4 Devils), Epstein (The Fall of the House of Usher) and many more.
NOEL--sorry if i seemed to be ragging on you, but all "bounteous" necessarily implies is that, for a movie year to be considered best ever, it has to have "a lotta good movies" * well, duhhh ... ditto w/pivotal: that if a year's important, its movies have to be important too * which we can probably take for granted ... but yeah, i ripped off your idea (except you got the credit, right?)--because i LIKED it * so kudos to you for that
Any given year can contain great movies that had little impact on the cinema to come. It's the *combination* of those two that I was referring to. And I'll grant that this observation is hardly piercing, it's also kind of rude on your part to pick on it. Although because I'm a faithful reader, I know that dismissiveness is part of your shtick. But if I may offer a collegial piece of advice: You don't *always* have to let your readers know how above-it-all you are before you get around to making your point. Try and mix it up every now and then.
In the light of day, the above came off touchier than I intended. I apologize for the tone.
VILLAINX--sorry to have left you hanging so long ... but yes, you're right, ATANARJUAT (2001) first played in town in '02 * problem is, i'm not much charmed by it--though in the view of cinema history it probably deserves its own footnote * or maybe more than that ...
" 'Minor miracles' is how Murray describes this critical perfecta, though I'm wondering if alleged 'bests of the best,' however miraculous, shouldn't be more than minor works." That's funny. I was wondering whether your own "favorite year" should be one that has "arguably nothing groundbreaking."
JIM--partly it's because i'd rather steer clear of historical judgments: (a) because i don't have sufficient overview (not to my liking anyway, though i wonder who ever would, what standards they'd consider relevant) and (b) it's about an allegedly "objective" dynamic, not immediate personal response * not sure how critics can pretend to speak on "history"'s behalf, and arguably the ones who do will inevitably be proved wrong--or at least beside the point * anent which, this cautionary factoid: that in the view of early 19th-century connoisseurs (as determined by then-current art market prices), the "greatest" painter of all time was . . . canaletto!
incidentally, i think NOEL VERA's first comment above makes an identical point in a much cleverer way ...
"* anent which, this cautionary factoid: that in the view of early 19th-century connoisseurs (as determined by then-current art market prices), the 'greatest' painter of all time was . . . canaletto!" So much for steering clear of historical judgments. For what it's worth, my favorite year for movies was easily 2011. Oh baby. If all it had was Michael Haneke's film version of Scott Smith's THE RUINS, Kiarostami's long-awaited return to celluloid (with Christopher Doyle as DP!), De Palma's audacious web installation GITMO HAYRIDE, Pedro Costa's FANTASMO NEW ORLEANS (the compositions really pop in IMAX 3-D), and of course Todd Haynes' five-hour split-screen biopic GODARD LE FOU—the performance by Lindsay Lohan is uncanny, as are the scenes with the animatronic Balthazar and Jerry Lewis as Bresson—it would have been a banner year. But even they were overshadowed by the restoration of the missing reels of THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS. I can't believe it took people that long to look in Agnes Moorehead's garage!
JIM--lindsay lohan as godard? ... yeah, i think it'd work: "helas, pour moi!" but not costa in 3-D: nothing to get lost in if you can pick your way through the salvage ...
I must add to your 2002 selections my choice for best of that very self-assured and exhilarating year - Laurent Cantet's devastating TIME OUT! How was this over-looked? And DePalma's return to form FEMME FATALE, Spike Lee's symphonic 25TH HOUR, the sober-but-addictingly-melancholic THE HOURS, against-type Jennifer Aniston cynical THE GOOD GIRL, disturbing CAPTURING THE FRIEDMANS, ambitious and dark THE RULES OF ATTRACTION, and lastly Haynes' repressed-yet-overwhelming FAR FROM HEAVEN. Did I get the year wrong on these?
...by the way, I love PUNCH DRUNK and RUSSIAN ARK, two examples of that year's swinging balls, but hated that pretentious DECASIA, and, please!, FELLOWSHIP was the best of Jackson's LOTR trilogy (and why won't he direct THE HOBBIT!?). Must see the Denis, Breillat, Godard of that braver-than-most year. 2007 sucked, and worst of 2002? IGBY GOES DOWN.
MATT--not a fan of TIME OUT, a dull, gray, constipated movie in my opinion ... but for versatility, color, resourcefulness, i do agree with you that FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING has THE TWO TOWERS beat * it's the relative minimalism of part 2 that gets to me though: this dark, groaning, monolithic thing--with the single most delicate effect in the trilogy, of a winterlike sun spilling over an enclosed castle stairwell, a low-albedo moment that brings the clash of armies to a metaphoric halt as for FAR FROM HEAVEN, it came up just short of the cut; unfortunately i had to stop somewhere ...
Um, 1959? Shadows The world of Apu Anatomy of a Murder Rio Bravo North By Northwest L'aventura Breathless Hiroshima Mon Amour Thread over.
Kifah has the right sentiment, but I'd take it a step further. Why does it have to be so many films? 1965 had Chimes of Midnight, in my opinion Welles' masterpiece; it was also the year of Gerardo de Leon's Daigdig ng Maga Api (World of the Oppressed), which is my holy grail of lost films, and by accounts of people who've seen it the best thing De Leon ever did--which would rank it as among the greatest films anyone ever did. Case closed.
