Unfortunately, I don’t have a top Ten. I have a top 5. The rest of the movies in my list sort of fall into place as a compendium of great films, but while there might be slight increases in quality none of them push above one another. That’s what was great about this year, movie didn’t fall into place, they didn’t try to jostle their way up the chart. If anything, 2010 was an anti-oscar year, a year that doesn’t have one movie that nearly defines it all, and where everything was contributing. I loved 2010, I think partly because I was much more enamoured with the movies made this year then a lot of other people did this year (I’d say half of the stuff on this list was unnoticed or completely written off by most people), but also because it felt like 2010 was tapping into the world, and drawing great drama and power from the world’s confusion. It’s the themes we face, confusion, the idea of the world becoming large and connected, and how overwhelmed that makes us all feel. The commoditization of technology.
So, here are the movies that missed the cut:
The Social Network (David Fincher) – “Sometimes You’d say two things at once and I don’t know which one I’m supposed to be aiming at.” So flows the most important movie of the year. Sorkin’s dialogue is like a machine gun, and Fincher doesn’t make it cluttered and neat, but messy and haphazard. The dialogue is sharp, but the feeling is not. The Social Network was never about Zuckerberg, or Saverin, or Parker. It was about you, that person sitting on the computer checking his facebook every two seconds as they try to get through other, more important things, the person whose interaction has been divulged down to taking away the intricacies of communication and turning body language into simplistic gestures (You’re not this person? You’re unique.). It took someone who looked at people purely through dialogue to make something like Facebook. The world is layed out through the hazy bars, the dark and sharp nightclubs, the hip offices of Facebook. Sorkin creates, the cast captures, and Fincher observes. That is how this movie works. And so, you see the world that is becoming the norm in the western world. Is it nice?
Shutter Island (Martin Scorsese)- On the opposite end, Shutter Island was pure cinema. But it was built on a bed of intense surrealism which made it a fascinating viewing experience. Scorsese is a master of mood, camera, editing, and structure, but here he turns his attention at a cinematic trick he never really explored, colour. His colours are vivid, but more importantly they’re sharp, with the sharp and clear greys and deep blues and the sharp yellows and red. His colours are not vibrant, they are not loud and bright, nor dark and dull, they are both at the same time, and instead of inhabiting two planes the colours snaps, and his world becomes something so much different. Time draws itself out, and everything is questioned. Leo wanders in search of a soul, or a reason, or something. Shutter Island, I guess, is a wandering movie, where everything is simply a search, but not for what you think. Not for a missing woman, but for the meaning behind it all. Also, it had the best final line of the year.
Fish Tank (Andrea Arnold)- Whether or not Arnold’s minimalistic craft was broken by the strange twists and turns in the final act is debatable, but whatever the case it definitely signalled one thing…Lynne Ramsay she is not. Both come from the same idea of craftsmanship, but they are handed different worlds. Ramsay’s one in Ratcatcher is full of garbage, every image is grey and damp, whereas Arnold’s similar editing and shot composition ideas form a place full of sun, but not as uncompromising. “The Coffee isn’t even bitter, because, what’s the difference” as the bard once said, and that truth is this truth. So Arnold weaves her tale, tracking the world of Mia, a 15-year-old who dances, a 15-year-old who erupts into anger. Her world is of isolation, and of trying to just find…something. She always wants to do something good, she wants to know more. She wants to connect, but when opportunity presents itself she attacks it. A paradox known easily. We can’t know what this life is like, but sometimes, we can feel the pain. The cramped conditions of the flats, and yet this world is quiet, an intimate character drama where there seems to be not many people there. At moments, Arnold’s camera makes this place seem like paradise. But it’s obvious that the sun is just laughing, and that’s the most depressing part of it all.
Of Gods and Men (Xavier Beaufois)- An intense study of violence and how people of a certain nature react to violence. A religious movie which does not care about your religion. It is dealing with religion not in the sense of gods or of scriptures, but belief in beauty, and in the belief in beauty surrounding us. AKA this is a beautiful film. Some of those shots are extraordinary, especially the scenes in the church and the scene at dinner. This movie, before I go rambling on, is just a perfect construction, so immaculate and beautiful, with great performances from everyone. Why this has not been nominated for the oscars…..just kind of makes sense.
Buried (Rodrigo Cortes)- 95 minutes of a man in a box. This is somewhat emotional schlock for some of the conversations, but cynics will be cynics, and what came away for me was how well done the schlock was. It got to me. Cortes throws colours around, making a coffin visually exciting and strangely kinetic. A wonderful surprise, so it is.
Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives (Apichatpong Weerasthekul)- The Palmes D’or winner of 2011 is brilliant, a twisting film, a movie which moves so effortlessly between so many different storylines and lengthy scenes that one step wrong could lose the audiences willingness to play along. And it will divide people, but at the same time you cannot deny that Apichatpong Weerasthekul is one of if not the most singular talent working in all of cinema today. Syndromes and A Century was wrestling with the world, but here his sights grow wider, as he begins to infest his mind with the supernatural, with the otherworldly, with the feeling that pervades that area of our bodies which is not there, yet which is so immaculate and overpowering. His style moves on the fly, the movie changes so quickly. Uncle Boonmee was the tightrope walk movie of the year, and Weerasthekul pulled it off.
Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World (Edgar Wright)- 25-year-old slacker gets new girlfriend, who is in high school and very naive about relationships, the jazz, and it’s obvious to us that this is simply a reaction to his breakup with someone who became a stalwart of rock. He then falls in love, but the Cera schtick gets repositioned as the movie surrounding him is no longer convinced they believe his words. He fights, he cracks jokes, he plays bass. All of it is naive, some way of trying to attach a persona to himself which has no true density to it. Scott Pilgrim is artificial in this movie, a fun guy no doubt, but when trying to label him with emotions and ideals he has none. He learns by the end something needs to change, and he goes a step in the right direction, but this movie tries to say that he has finished his quest. The whole movie is how he views himself, he thinks his work is done, and he can ride off into the sunset. But there’s always more to it then that, which Scott is more than willing to avoid. Why? Because humanity is like that. Scott avoids his problems, and wants to believe the simplest of solutions, or the easiest. Scott is a shaky character, always challenged and barely being able to save face, but not without getting his ego dragged in the mud. No one seems to dig deeper. I believe the movie does though, and that’s a strength to it.
Not to mention that, mainly, it’s awesome/hilarious.
Toy Story 3 (Lee Unkrich)- Toy Story 3 is an amazingly crafted movie, but the simple explanation for why it’s on this list is because it made me cry waterfalls. There doesn’t really have to be another reason, does there?
Un Prophet (Jacques Audiard)- Un Prophet is the movie which seems like the entire crime drama avoided, turning a prison into a world of alliances and rivalries, but more importantly, it’s the way this movie creates a world which makes it so compelling. Malik, played by a transcendent Tahir Rahim, is not Pacino. He is watching the contours of his prison, trying to find meaning in the events which transpire in the movie. He’s naive and a common criminal, but he’s also smart, understanding, and ruthless. Fear runs through his eyes at the beginning, but by the end murder becomes second nature to him. The movie begins on a palette, one man in jail gets forced to do a crime, and builds up to the most shocking and brutal scene of the year. Then the craft comes in, as Audiard’s camera captures the beautiful details in the prison as both Malik’s world and the constructs of the film open up. As it opens, scenes become larger in scale, and people become brought in and shut out, as one man’s crumbling world is set against the rise of another man’s. The Godfather is a movie steeped in nostalgia, as is most crime movies, but this one of those rare things: a beautifully unique crime movie which feels precisely of the moment. Not this moment, but everyone moment.
Macgruber (Jorma Taccone)- A slight change in pace. A movie which is built within the strict guidelines of hollywood dumb comedy, yet Built within it is the portrayal of a man who may have been a hero long ago, whether or not he was is enigmatic, but is now a raging, psychotic madman. Macgruber is messed up. Incredibly. That’s part of what makes Macgruber so funny, is this guy is not your normal madmen. He’s strange, idiotic, and inventive, and yet still insane. I know most people have said this, but I don’t how you can be bored or unimpressed by Macgruber. Insulted? most people will be. But some of those comedic bits are pure genius. It’s a movie which has the trappings of hollywood comedy, but then proceeds to take and upper decker on what is essential in comedy.
Mother (Bong Joon-Ho)- Mother is about a mother. This mother has nothing but devotion to her son, as a mother does. Her son is a mentally impaired young man, who at the beginning you begin to be on edge about. He doesn’t really know what he’s saying, what he’s thinking, or what he did (memory is a huge part of this movie). Bong Joon Ho is known for how he melds genres, here creating a drama/crime drama/mystery with multiple comedic elements. But what comes away is the way he uses his ability to twist audience perception. He knows how we feel about every person on display, and so he asks us to question it. This is leads to moment of sublime beauty, of simplicity, but not for us. Not for the mother. We want to try to simply just feel the beauty of dancing in the reeds, but the world will not let us have such pleasures. We are too conflicted. We have too much on our minds. The revelations in this movie hit your soul with such power, that nothing can really be simple anymore. Kim Hye-Ja is a revelation.
Tron: Legacy (Joseph Kosinski)- Black isn’t some horrible creature in Tron: Legacy, instead it’s a viable force all itself, a vivid colour. The blacks in Tron:Legacy are deep, the neon blues are stark, and the reds are bright and fearful. The characters are new, no heroes are allowed in this world. Instead there are rockstars, zen masters, wordless soldiers. They all traipse around looking for something, validation of their path, power, revenge, money. Leverage. Jeff Bridges doesn’t want that, but is forced to look for it. In the middle are the two youngsters. One has cycles, a naive young man trying to figure out the world he’s been given, and where his world is going from there. He has the true power. Of choice. He is the fly in the wrench, and he changes it all. The girl is but a strange being, in thought and mind, to the audience, and is the epitome of the world created. They play off each other, as they are opposites but understanding. “Bio digital jazz” seems to fit us nicely. Escapism was never so beautiful.
And My Top 5:
5. Inception (Christopher Nolan)- I missed the buzz. I missed the insane buzz about this movie, and ironically only caught it on the last weekend or so it was in cinemas. What surprised me is I came away with something different from most people. A lot of the arguments, the eventual backlash went over my head. The characters are great, with wa wonderful set of actors and actresses working at the top of their game (Tom Hardy, wow). The structure is immaculate, perfect. The ideas, the themes, the emotions, are wonderful to behold and to watch unfold. Everything is perfect, and that was what was debated. The characters were perfect, but not flawed. Conflicted, emotionally scared. Not flawed. A person’s flaws allow someone into their head. To understand their thoughts, you must understand what makes them unique. But people also argued for how smart, how well realised the movie is. How fun. How exciting.
For me, Inception was a case of people arguing about a movie I didn’t quite see. I mean, I get how this movie inspired those thoughts, but it’s always a movie steeped in these images, and they seem so antithetical, all trying to go in new directions, all moving in strange places. Like it’s all just these beautiful images strung together. I love that. I love this movie. Every part of it, but it’s the image of Leo standing in front of the bursting walls of water, it’s paris being turned on itself, it’s the city eroded by a beach, it’s the spinning top, deciding your fate with a simple fall. It’s those, and so much more, which gives Inception its rightful place.
4. The Illusionist (Sylvain Chomet)- Jacques Tati could have never directed The Illusionist. His writing is to intense, to personal, that he wasn’t the person to bring it to life. He knew this better than anyone, allowing the script to be unproduced as he went on to direct one of the greatest comedy films of all time . Chomet showed talent on his debut, The Triplets of Belleville, for a sense of melancholy, of capturing emotion, pure, unadulterated emotion. However, with its big city, it’s oddball characters and pear-shaped villains, Triplets of Belleville was a movie stepped in quirk and oddities.
On The Illusionist, Chomet has gotten rid of all of that, and has turned this script into a perfect movie. It’s hilarious, sure, but you won’t be able to tell through all the tears. More people need to see this film. If you haven’t, go find it now.
3. Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik)- It is amazing that this was nominated for best picture. this is heady stuff. This is watching a director suck you into the deep and dark greys of the skies, the browns and dull greens of the trees. A camera which observes these details that they capture something beyond human imagination. This is a person giving a performance so immaculate, so able to keep up with the skill being brought by a director, so able to embody such a compelling character, and to make her even more compelling, that you wonder how any other performances can possibly match up to this. This is a movie which defies the words you are reading right now. And it’s only at number three.
2. Monsters (Gareth Edwards)- This movie was bogged down by comparisons to Cloverfield, then bogged down by people telling people it was not Cloverfield, and that it was actually a good movie. I saw one person describe it as “Before Sunset with Aliens” this criticism showcases something prevalent in modern-day criticism….in some cases, if something new is presented, people will try to attach elements of it to other movies in order to quantify what it truly is. It’s called Monsters, and it has giant monsters, so it’s Cloverfield. There’s a central romance, Before Sunset surely. Aliens with humans, touching scene? Surely he’s just doing a Spielberg and making War of the Worlds. Low budget sci-fi? District 9, obviously. this is sad, because Monsters, taken as its own movie, is one of the greatest cinematic achievements of all time.
So many colours. So much beauty. One of these moments, the broken town, the flooded tank, the gas station romance, the mayan temple, the vigil for people killed, in any other film would be The defining image of that movie, but here they are part of a whole. I’m hoping this is just an overlooked classic and one day people will realise how much love this film deserves.
1. Exit Through the Gift Shop (Banksy)- There was no other option.
Whether or not Banksy planned it, he pulled a beautiful trick with Exit Through the Gift Shop. He made a film about the street art movement, capturing its revolutionary ideologies, its artistic tendencies, but he also made a movie about art. Who is it for? Should everyone be an artist? (Will be answered later) He created a movie which dealt with all these problems better than anything else out there, better than anyone else. Because more than any art form, at least at the moment, Street art is the one which is the one dealing with the idea of art, should “vandalism” art? Using the civilised world as your canvas? Banksy made a movie questioning everything, a fascinating story about a man who should not be a street artist because everybody on the scene agrees that he doesn’t have any. But who should say that Banksy and co. were able to declare that Mr. Brainwash was worthless?
But then something weird happened.
Suddenly, the idea came out, and spread, that it might all be a hoax.
People came into the film with this idea, and suddenly everybody was talking about it because they were in on it. It was the official stamp of cool, of knowing that you’re on Banksy’s side, the side of the true artists. Of asserting your position over the rest of people. Like getting into an exclusive club by “knowing” that it was all a hoax.
And then people probed deeper. Well, if it’s a hoax, how much of it’s a hoax? How much is fake? Is it just that Banksy pulled strings behind Thierry’s back, or was he in on it the whole time? Was it simply a decision to show people they were saps by simply saying Thierry should put an exhibit, or was it a grand conspiracy?
The film was then parsed through with a comb, people searching for the evidence for one side or another. As if they could somehow find an answer to all of this, as if Banksy could somehow tell everybody exactly what they need to think. As if he had planted the answer somewhere. So arguments began. Debate happened. and it led to that ever eternal question, what is art, what is good art, and why does it spark such an emotional reaction in us?
I don’t care whether it’s a hoax or not, but it opened the thousands of brilliant details contained within this movie. Suddenly, the true depth of whatever Banksy is doing opened up, even if it was just a story to be told. People though Banksy was too well spoken, but I’ve never heard anyone quite as confused, even though he knows he’s being an enigma, as he is at the end of this film. “I used to encourage everyone I knew to make art. I don’t do that so much anymore”. There is no answer, if there was, Banksy would feel no need to make this film, but after all his acclaim then after the acclaim of Mr. Brainwash, he needed to ask these questions, to see if someone knew. Because he didn’t. Because there is, and never will be, an answer.
But all of that feels like a wonderful addition. The movie comes alive for me when we see people making street art, because it reminds me that people are still making provocative works, that people are still challenging ideas and it makes me want to pick up a can of spray paint and then destroy every rule written. It is the only movie which has infected my life in this way that was made this year.
The Thoughts on the World 