2. The Dark Knight (2008)- These two last films were without a doubt the hardest to order for me. Up until the day before I began posting, I actually had "The Dark Knight" at number 1. Regardless, these two babies are so close that I may as well have flipped a coin for placement in the top two spots on the list. Well...what can I say about "The Dark Knight"? I could write a 20-page essay about how amazing this movie is and why I love it so much. I'll admit, I'm a sucker for comic book movies, but "The Dark Knight" takes comic book movies to a whole other level--in fact, it would be a slight to the movie to label it as such. When it comes to "comic book movies", "The Dark Knight" is simply in a league of its own; its placement on this list should testify to that. Over the past few years with the rising popularity of the genre, comic book movies have been getting closer and closer to breaking the barrier between "great comic book movie" and just "great movie": "The Dark Knight" is without a doubt that breakthrough (sorry "Iron Man" fans, that one's good but doesn't even come close). Never before has a superhero story been made so real and timely and world-conscious without being cliche or cheesy or overwrought. Unlike the awkward terrorism/Middle East plug in "Iron Man", "The Dark Knight" does not force its themes: social upheaval and anarchy, public justice, the corruption of social structures, etc. What makes the story in the movie relate so well is how it is portrayed; the film is cast in shades of gray: there is no black and white here. While The Joker is certainly a horrific, immoral creature, "The Dark Knight" makes you really consider the ideology he spits out to the city of Gothem, Batman, and Harvey Dent. I've mentioned this before, but I'll reiterate it here: Christopher Nolan owes a lot to classic film noir, and "The Dark Knight" is a prime example of how he integrates elements of the genre into his films. I won't get into all of the parallels here, but suffice to say they work to give "The Dark Knight" a realness that is rarely present in the larger Hollywood pictures and most comic book movies. Never before have I seen a film that has succeeded on so many levels in the industry, from being a successful, money-raking Hollywood blockbuster to working as a cerebral, well-written and legitimately great film. I wish I could write more. "The Dark Knight" will be remembered for decades to come and I truly believe it will be one of the movies that defines this generation of filmmaking. Now as to why it didn't get even a nomination for best picture is simply beyond me...
1. No Country for Old Men (2007)- I never ever thought I could love a movie that essentially deals with fatalism as one of its main themes. Cormac McCarthy is an amazing, amazing writer, but his writing doesn't instill any hope or really anything positive at all (excepting maybe "The Road" but I haven't read it). It is bleak, unemotional, incredibly and unflatteringly descriptive, dark and, in many cases, fatalistic. If you're unfamiliar with fatalism, take a moment to browse the Wikipedia entry. Thankfully, when I watch movies I can readily set my own beliefs and morals aside in order to fully immerse myself, unbiased, in the film experience. I say this because I believe most people would not adjust well to this fatalistic ideology that emanates throughout "No Country for Old Men". This is a Coen Brothers movie, but at the same time, this is NOT a Coen Brothers movies. Joel and Ethen Coen have always had a very dark vision, but their movies are often satirical, with a humor that balances and acts as a counterweight to their often dark, bleak storylines. However, with "No Country for Old Men", they drop the humor and comedy altogether, leaving only the dark, chilling shell. Why is this good? Simply put, it perfectly suits the writing style and themes of Cormac McCarthy. It took me actually reading a McCarthy novel ("Blood Meridian") to realize just how amazing and pure the Coen's portrayal of his writing was. "No Country for Old Men" utilizes minimalism at its best: the score is present but bare, placing the focus on the sound mix; the visuals are stark and gorgeous, balancing wide-open, barren landscapes with tight, dark enclosed rooms; the dialogue is sparse, subtle and calculated, as is the plot. Visual and auditory details are enhanced, while plot and character are left hazy and open. The result is an incredibly cerebral and organic film experience that completely absorbs your mind into the movie and leaves you with a million questions. But these aren't the kind of questions that leave you going, "what the fuck? what just happened?" These are the kind of questions that make you want to watch this movie over and over and over and over and...you get the point. "No Country for Old Men" is at its core a pure cinematic experience. When I first saw it, the movie took a while to sink in, and when it did, I knew that I had just seen something great. Javier Bardem is incredible playing one of the greatest villains of the decade (and really of all time), but what really stands out to me is the gray area that surrounds his "villain". Is he really the villain, or is the movie actually about him and not Llewelyn? I have heard people question the ending, saying they like everything about the movie except the ending, but I believe Tommy Lee Jone's dream was really a perfect way to conclude the film. It took a lot of rumination on my part, which I won't go into here, but I think it fits accordingly with the overarching--yet subtly portrayed--themes of the movie, principally the clashing ideologies of fatalism and determinism (and I will say, determinism doesn't fare so well in comparison in "No Country"...). Any movie that can portray such a dark philosophy, almost romanticize a terrifying, horrible villain, be so minimalistic, end on such a bleak and vague note, and yet STILL be so critically acclaimed and commercially successful is a winner in my book. And I actually DID write an essay about this movie. Maybe that's what gives it the slight edge over "The Dark Knight", but either way, "No Country for Old Men" is in my opinion one of the greatest films of the decade and will almost certainly go down as one of the greatest films of all time (if it doesn't already fall into that category).***
There you have it boys and girls: my top 25 films of the 00's. Feel free to give your two cents, I'm quite interested to hear what films other people would put on or at the top of their own lists. If I have related any false information regarding any of these movies, please let me know as well. The last thing I want to do is mislead people in regards to any of these films. And finally, let me just reiterate that these are MY favorite films of the (last) decade and are of course flexible in terms of their order (it took a longgg time and a lot of changes to come up with the current order). This list is sure to change in the future, but for now, I hope you've enjoyed what I came up with.
Here's a quick recap if you don't want to go back and read all the old entries:
25. Up (2009)
24. 21 Grams (2003)
23. Kill Bill 1/2 (2003/2004)
22. Brick (2005)
21. High Fidelity (2000)
20. 28 Days Later (2002)
19. Spirited Away (2001)
18. The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)
17. Children of Men (2006)
16. Gladiator (2000)
15. I'm Not There (2007)
14. Oldboy (2003)
13. O, Brother Where Art Thou? (2000)
12. The Prestige (2006)
11. There Will Be Blood (2007)
10. Half Nelson (2006)
9. Lost In Translation (2003)
8. Mulholland Drive (2001)
7. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)
6. Road to Perdition (2002)
5. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
4. Pan's Labyrinth (2006)
3. City of God (2002)
2. The Dark Knight (2008)
1. No Country for Old Men (2007)
*btw, isn't it funny (and creepy) how my favorite two films have probably the two best villains of the decade?
No comments:
Post a Comment