Certified Copy (Abbas Kiarostami, 2010)

In Certified Copy, Kiarostami harks back to his favorite question of the supposed divide between art and originality (divide between cinema and life, as we know them) and skillfully weaves his tale around two characters while examining his central theme that nothing is really original and that we all assume roles in our lives. This is a recall of the themes he masterfully examined in Close Up. James Miller is a British author on a tour of Tuscany where his work on originality in art has been better received than in his homeland. Binoche is the woman who comes to hear his talk, and the two are then drawn together in a discussion of his work. Once the two meet again, the course of the movie charts their discussions over the course of an afternoon, taking in the Italian countryside and engaging with a number of characters along the way who cause them to reflect on their differing viewpoints on author's work. There's a turning point as we approach the halfway mark where one of those characters seemingly mistakes the pair for a married couple. What starts as a role play, set off by the misunderstanding, takes on more and more aspects, and eventually both the pair and the audience are lost in the drama. The whole movie reveals itself to be an intricate construct on this concept, almost every aspect of the theme, the performances or the setting playing with the motif of originality versus imitation. Reflections in car windows sometimes obscure the actors themselves, point-of-view shots ask us to engage directly in the drama almost as a participant and this even extends to the leading pair themselves – The male lead is a renowned baritone, not an actor, and there is a slight but noticeable difference between his performance and that of Binoche, which almost feels like a copy of acting rather than being fully immersed in the role. While this reinforces the concept, it does prevent the audience from fully engaging, being kept slightly at arm's length by the constant artifice. That's not to say that there's not a lot to enjoy here, with the confusions and the tensions making this verge on a romantic comedy at times. Despite the differences in acting ability, Miller and Binoche make an engaging couple at times and as time wears on, you find yourself more keen to believe that the beginning was the illusion and that their relationship is real and not the copy. Much of the credit for this must be placed at Binoche's door, using the language differences to vary mood effectively, but also adding colour and emotion in all of the languages she uses. The only one here who's on familiar ground is director Kiarostami, who's explored these themes before but never to such mainstream effect – worth checking out if you'd like to engage your mind and your heart. Why see it at the cinema: There is a very literal aspect of the visuals which runs throughout the course of the film, which the cinema screen will allow you to fully appreciate. Ultimately, Certified Copy - with its unresolved loose ends - is a mystery box without a key. Kiarostami's best films are profoundly empathetic. By comparison, Certified Copy is a slighter but more ingratiating film and a chance to see a master filmmaker in uncharacteristic playful mode.

Through the Olive Trees (Abbas Kiarostami, 1994)

Welcome to the cinematic universe of Abbas Kiarostami—low scale on effects and plot, but very high on character, Iranian culture, and creative point-of-view camera work. His simple films appear sparse, but the images often profoundly stay with the viewer for a lifetime. Through the Olive Trees is a quintessential Kiarostami film—it exists between film fiction and reality. The purpose of this film within a film is to illustrate the tedious process of filming the a film while focussing in on replacement actor Hossein's romantic pursuit of the stubbornly unresponsive Tahereh, who has been cast as his new bride. The director parallels Hossein's challenges with unreciprocated love with various filming frustrations. Things just don't go according to plan for the director. Some are expected when using amateurish non-actors, while others are caused by cultural hang-ups or relationship problems. For instance, Hossein, the first lead actor stutters when talking to a girl and must be dismissed. Tahereh shows up on the set in a new party skirt instead of the required peasant dress and won't talk to the replacement. Hossein keeps forgetting his lines when he confuses his real life with the scripted one. To call the pacing of Through the Olive Trees slow would be a gross understatement. It is glacial in pace especially when Kiarostami demonstrates take after take after take of the same scene, to the point that we gain the director's point of view and feel like throwing up our hands when an actor screws up. But this hammering approach of the director ultimately achieves something unusual for such a film. We feel like we have been through the directing experience, and by the end of it many of the lines are indelibly engraved into our minds. Despite the sameness of many scenes, small detailed differences surface with each new take—pointing out skill that comes with making a piece of art that is bent on achieving perfection. The final scenes of the film are classic "Kiarostamic", profoundly philosophical and evokes intense curiosity. His camera sits perched on top of a hill, overlooking a breezy valley of olive trees, as Hossein pursues Tahereh. The long shots extend to even longer shots to the point that the two people are tiny white flecks moving across the unspeaking greens of the valley. And yet Kiarostami's camera continues to roll on its tripod for another five minutes. I am yet to come across a film that specializes on long takes and glacial pace, and yet in its culmination point invokes so much calmness accompanied by a sense of uncertainty. I guess that many arthouse lovers will find this film rewarding and memorable. On a deeper level, the film seems to be asking unanswerable questions about the differences between a movie and reality (life as art) and questions the problems faced by filmmakers as they try to tap into cinema's unexplored potential. On that level, the film was stimulating as an intellectual experience. 

Where is the Friend's Home? (Abbas Kiarostami, 1987)

Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami established his reputation outside of Iran with Where Is The Friend’s Home. Like many modestly budgeted Iranian films of those days, including Kiarostami’s earlier works, this film is a child’s story. Since then Kiarostami’s reputation soared, and he has gone on to receive considerable international acclaim for a string of uniquely stylized successes, including Close-Up (1990), Through the Olive Trees (1994), Taste of Cherry (1997), The Wind Will Carry Us (1999), and The Certified Copy (2011). All these films have been characterized by his signature contemplative and long-take cinematography, along with overt mixing of Iranian poetry and mystical philosophy – all of which render his films a distinctly intellectual air and which has drawn the admiration of intellectual critics the world over. Indeed, Kiarostami has multiple cultural inclinations that include poetry, painting, and graphical design, and these interests are reflected in those later works. Where Is My Friend’s Home? is a modest and straightforward movie, unilke his other pieces. Nevertheless, I think it is Kiarostami’s most accessible piece of work. In Where Is My Friend’s Home?, what we have is a deceptively simple little story that seems trivial: an eight-year-old schoolboy has mistakenly taken his friend’s schoolbook and has to return it to him. But this film benefits from not straying far from its straightforward goal that everyone can understand; and that is what carries the narrative along. As the film progresses, though, we gradually detect a deeper theme: this boy’s sense of “doing the right thing” is almost continually in conflict with the confusing world of rules and duties that are imposed on him by the adult world.The film narrative proceeds in five parts.  In the small northern village of Koker, Ahmed Ahmadpoor and Mohamad Reza Nematzadeh are two boys sitting in the local schoolroom and listening to the stern admonitions of their strict schoolteacher. Mohamad Reza again hasn’t written his homework into his school workbook and is warned that one more such violation and he will be expelled from the school. When the school bell rings and the boys run outside, Mohamad Reza drops his workbook, and in the ensuing commotion, Ahmed mistakenly goes home with both his and his friend’s workbook.At home Ahmed’s mother, busy with housework, continually gives her boy menial jobs and refuses to let him go outside and return Mohamad Reza’s schoolbook. Among the chores, though, is to go fetch some bread from the local bakery, and Ahmed seizes this opportunity to rush outside with the schoolbook in search of his friend’s home, whose location he only knows to be in the neighbouring village of Poshteh. First trip to Poshteh seems to be a couple of kilometres away from Koker, and Ahmed runs all the way there to look for his friend’s house. As Ahmed runs across the countryside, the viewer gets a feeling for the pastoral life in this locale. Once in Poshteh, Ahmed asks around, and we see that the adults have little time to pay attention to the questions of an 8-year-old boy. But by luck Ahmed happens onto a classmate who lives there but who only knows where Mohamad Reza’s cousin Hemmati lives. When Ahmed finally finds that house, though, he learns that Hemmati has just gone off to Koker. So now Ahmed has to run all the way back to Koker. As he runs past a storefront in Koker, Ahmed passes by his grandfather, who sternly questions why the boy has gone outside the village. Afterwards, when Ahmed is out of earshot, the grandfather tells an elderly friend that all young people need to be continually disciplined in order to grow up properly. In fact, he says, it is generally good for a boy to be beaten every two weeks, come what may, whether he has misbehaved or not.A tradesman shows up at the storefront, and during a bit of rural local color as the man tries to hawk his iron doors, Ahmed overhears the surname Nematzadeh mentioned and tries to talk to speak to the man. But here, as elsewhere, the adults pay no attention to the boy other than to give orders and recommend punishments. The tradesman brusquely gets on his donkey and heads off to Poshteh, with Ahmed, thinking that he may have found Mohamad Reza’s father, in hot pursuit. Back in Poshteh, Ahmed finally finds the tradesman’s son, but it is not Mohamad Reza. By this time is has become dusk, but Ahmed does manage finally to find a man who will talk to him and who promises to show him his friend’s house. But it turns out that this is an old man who just seems to be looking for anyone to listen to his tales about the virtues of his former craft, making traditional wooden doors, which, he complains, are now everywhere being foolishly replaced by the more “modern” iron doors, even though the traditional wooden doors (a symbol for the traditional Iranian ways that are being replaced by imported modernity) are more beautifully crafted. Although this old man is friendly, Ahmed begins to suspect that the man just wants a listener and doesn’t really know where his friend lives. He finally discontinues his quest and runs all the way back to Koker in the dark. Back at home, Ahmed’s parents are occupied with their own routines and again pay no attention to him, and he still hasn’t done his own homework or managed to do the right thing by his friend Mohamad Reza. But a schoolboy who has spent the whole day trying to solve a problem is not just going to give up just like that. You can see the film, yourself, to find out how things turn out the next day in school.Kiarostami’s cinematography is straightforward and intuitive in the film. The focalization is almost entirely that of the boy, Ahmed, and we see everything from his anxious perspective, where things that may seem trivial for adults can have considerable magnitude. To maintain this sense of immediate involvement, Kiarostami doesn’t employ the long, fixed-camera takes that characterize his later films. Here instead, the visual continuity is well motivated, and even the many shots of Ahmed running across the countryside are smoothly and naturally executed.There are some interesting moral issues in Where Is The Friend’s Home?. Ahmed is always utterly sincere and instinctively honest towards everyone. But sometimes there are higher principles than literal honesty. His ultimate goal is one of compassion: to help his friend. This is not just to expunge his own guilt, but represents a continuation of his sincere concern for his friend’s vulnerability of expulsion from school. Adherence to this higher goal trumps more mundane and tyrannous rules that one follows or obeys. So although he is instinctively honest, Ahmed, in pursuit of the higher good, does hesitantly make compromises with literal truth at several turns. Initially he is supposed to get bread and pretends to do so, but instead rushes off to Poshteh with his friend’s schoolbook. Later, he effectively lies to the old man by implying that he has found his friend’s house and returned the book. And there is still one further lie to come. In Where is the Friend's Home?, on one level Kiarostami paints a society rooted in authoritarian demands, but on another he reminds how us kids get lost in the grown-up world of business and responsibility.

Taste of Cherry (Abbas Kiarostami, 1997)

Taste of Cherry comes close to being a great film. Its much discussed ending that breaks the fourth wall to reveal what has just been witnessed is all a film, is one of the worst conclusions for a film of this high caliber. The basic problem with the ending of Taste of Cherry is that the big revelation that intentionally alienates the viewer from the medium comes after we have been emotionally prepared for more than ninety minutes to probe a question of deep philosophical nature. The unfortunate ending emotionally deflates the whole story. Many claim that in Taste of Cherry, Kiarostami consciously renounces the role of a preacher, rejects formulaic tearjerking plots, or he wants to embrace indeterminacy as the film’s major motif. Yet, before the ending of the film, it is not preachy, jerks no tears, is clearly fictive, and the penultimate scene spells out indeterminacy far more powerfully and cogently than the ending does. The fact of the matter is that Kiarostami did not believe enough in his film to let it end at its best point. The narrative is rather simple. A stony Mr. Badii drives about the outskirts of a small Iranian desert town in a Range Rover. Mr. Badii is looking for a help, of course, in exchange of a princely sum of money. The job is to check up on him the next morning, in a grave that he has dug. They are to see if he is dead or alive, after he has taken a bottle of sleeping pills. If alive, they will assist him out of his grave. If dead, they will heap dirt on his corpse. Kiarostami makes is to never reveal the source behind Badii’s suicidal anguish. Manifestly, Badii does not really want to die. If he wanted to die he would kill himself and not care what happened to his corpse. As Badii drives, he picks up is a young Kurdish soldier, barely out of his teens. When he is driven to the freshly dug grave he runs away as fast as he can. He is similarly rejected by a young seminarist from Afghanistan, whom he meets when he arrives at an abandoned factory. Finally, Badii finds the man and Kiarostami consumes several minutes before we see the man’s face, which shows Kiarostami building tension. We want to see what sort of man or monster would assist Badii. He is just an old Turk taxidermist, Mr. Bagheri, who needs the money for his own child’s medical bills, and regales Badii with a joke and a tale of how he was prevented from suicide, himself, in 1960, by the taste of cherries from a tree. It is worth noting that the three would be executioners Badii picks up are all not ethic Iranians or Persians, but minority groups from other countries, a point that no published critic I’ve read seems to have noted. As the film ends, Badii seems to have second thoughts, for after dropping off the old Turk at his job, he pursues him and asks him to make extra sure he is dead before heaping the dirt on him. He then walks off, satisfied, and watches the sun set. He then makes his way to the grave, gets in, then the screen goes black for a while, and we seem to hear rain, the sign of life’s renewal. Then, the fourth wall is unfortunately, and superfluously, broken. While most critics have picked up on the rightness or wrongness of suicide as being a theme of the film, the deeper question is really whether or not a person will violate their own ethical and moral codes to help another person in immense pain? The latter question seems to have itself answered in the affirmative, even if it takes some effort to find a human being. Some critics claim that the film’s ending is anti-escapist, when in fact, the ending is the ultimate escapism, for all that the viewer has been asked to emotionally invest in beforehand is revealed as nothing of deeper consequence than a philosophical posit. Some may claim, though, that Kiarostami wanted to dispassionately analyze the broader question at hand, much like a philosophical question dipped in logic. Taste Of Cherry has moments of pure cinema where images speak for themselves, and indeed do last longer than the lesser parts of the film. The ending does not completely ruin the film, but it makes it fall short of achieving greatness. Taste Of Cherry’s resolution is a startling one; Kiarostami has had to defend its seeming illogic and eeriness in several interviews. He usually does so with another shrug: "I did think this was a really big risk, but it was a risk worth taking. Even when I hear people arguing about the ending of the film, I like it because it means the movie hasn’t ended. . . that the film has a life in their minds." Many of Kiarostami’s films, such as 1987’s Where is The Friend's Home, feature children on  metaphorical journey whose real ends are not made clear. It has been a struggle, but Abbas Kiarostami has found a way, even under the eyes of the Iranian regime, to say exactly what he wants to say. That many of his films seem like elaborate, essentially wordless, parables is not coincidental. For all their seeming Otherness, believes Kiarostami, post-Revolutionary Iranians are walking a universal path. Theirs is the same slow, painful trudge across the forbidding mountains and into an ever-receding middle distance that all modern souls have to make. Thus, the journey of Taste Of Cherry is less an Iranian one than a human one. And by taking it, we may find commonality with a culture whose ways Westerners have yet to come to grips with.

The Bicycle Thief (Vittorio De Sica, 1948)

The Bicycle Thief is a gem attributed to the Italian Neo-realist movement. The film shows the creative bankruptcy of today's filmmakers. The film is slender and poetic. It tells a story that has universal appeal and is sure to touch hearts of all who have suffered misfortune and misery in a treacherous world, even once in their lifetime. By the measure of that metric only, the film is applicable to all. The beauty of the film lies in the simplicity of its screenplay. It shows how simplicity can achieve greatness, save the obfuscations of most modern day crap. The screenplay is not charmingly witty, not philosophically deep, not characteristically complex, not contemplatively silent. It is intensely emotional (without overdoing it) and fiercely personal. The story is rather simple: in post-World War Two Rome, Italy, jobs are scarce, and Antonio Ricci finally gets a job offer, as a billboard sign man, posting billboards about town, after waiting for months in front of the downtown labor office. One catch, he needs a bicycle. He has one, but it’s at a pawnshop. His wife, Maria, sells their good bedsheets so Antonio can get back his bike. The job is apparently a good one, as other workers anxiously vie for the job. Antonio suddenly feels human and dignified again, wearing a uniform, and being able to make money. Yet, on his first day at work, while pasting posters, his bike is stolen by a young man. Antonio has the weekend to get the bicycle back, so he can report to work on Monday with it. He gets his acquaintance, Baiocco, a garbageman, to help him look for the bike the next morning, along with some of his pals in the garbage company. But it is to no avail, so they keep on searching, and Antonio and Bruno have a number of encounters, such as seeing the thief with an old man, whom they track down to a church, but the old con man gives Antonio the slip, by saying he wants some of the free soup the church is offering. They do get a tentative address of the thief, and eventually Antonio catches up with him, and forces him back to his apartment, where his mother and neighbors declare him a good boy, an innocent. The vile wolfpack mentality closes in, and the thief plays his false innocence to the hilt, like the true professional grifter he is- likely having sold the bike already to another pawnshop, as a policeman is powerless to do anything, after they search the thief’s apartment. Antonio and Bruno eventually end up outside a soccer match, where hundreds of bikes are parked. He sees one in an alleyway, and, in a scene that shows a human desperation and honesty that are too often overlooked in art, Antonio gives Bruno some money to take a trolley home, and decides to steal the bike in the alley. Of course, he almost falls as he tries to pedal away, and the bike’s owner raises alarums, and this man’s neighbors chase and quickly capture Antonio- who is now pilloried as a bicycle thief, and a low man. He is so ashamed and without that he cannot even say a word. He is totally humiliated- all his honesty, honor, and playing by the rules have forced him into doing something wrong, and Bruno, who stayed behind, witnesses his father’s capture, runs to him, and weeps. The old man, whose bike it was, decides not to press charges, possibly out of pity for Antonio’s humiliation in front of his son, and Antonio walks away with his son, both weeping, yet hand in hand, having been defeated inside and out. Reputedly, none of the film’s actors were professionals, at the time. Antonio comes across so realistically, and wholly believably. Bruno is magnificent. He is wisecracking, but not in the annoying way Hollywood smart aleck kids are. There are numerous scenes that pinpoint the director's keen eye for details and highlight his tendency to maintain a desired balance between personal loss and humor, which relieves the viewer. Many critics have concluded that in The Bicycle Thief De Sica has tried to show that good and evil are relative. But nothing can be farthest from the truth. For instance, we know, all along, that the young professional thief would likely be a con man regardless as all of his neighbors are cheats and liars, and even his mother lies for her clearly guilty son. De Sica wants us to remind that sometimes evil can be born not out of pure evil, greed, and compulsive characteristic flaws, but can be born of different circumstances like desperation and poverty, as with Antonio. The Bicycle Thief is great art. It is not a political manifesto as many critics have vehemently suggested.The Bicycle Thief tells a simple tale, but it documents the crushing of the human spirit at the hands of poverty, indifference and misery.

Laptop (Kaushik Ganguly, 2012)

Laptop, written and directed by Kaushik Ganguly, is an odd film. It is not a remotely great film. It is a bad film. It is thematically untenable, ethically ambiguous and condescending, technically ill conceived, and art-wise artsy. Period. There are four stories in the film that have been transplanted from various echelons of the modern day Bengali society and the stories are made to cross over with each other with the intervention of a stolen laptop, a symbol of emotional connectedness among characters and vacuity thereof. Lets start with the narrative. A laptop, a trove of confidential medical information belonged to the owner of an infertility clinic, is stolen by a taxi driver to pay for his wife's treatment at the clinic. The driver concocts a story and sells the laptop to a hotel manager, a languishing father who works in a dingy, musty low-scale hotel so that he can afford his engineer son a laptop. The boy discovers on the hard drive of the laptop a number of pictures of a good looking girl who is the daughter of the infertility clinic's owner. The boy chases the girl's car, traces the physical address of the girl, and is finally appointed as the computer teacher for the girl. They instantly develop a liking for each other.But the girl discover's the stolen laptop at the boy's house and dumps him (and her own bike for apparently no rhyme and reason). The laptop then travels to a visually challenged author (and his typist), as a debt-clearing-device by the manager, who resides in the house owned by the author. Subsequently, the machine ends in the hands of a divorced publisher, who is in search of the kid born as a result of his sperm donation. As the laptop traverses, it touches lives only to change them in some inexplicable ways. I have hardly known a “good” film that works with a bad script. The problem is that this film loses focus when it centers on lesser-written tales, which Ganguly does not make better, and on some tales which he actually makes worse. The director has little regard for character development. So we never know why a particular character engages in an immoral act. For example, we are not shown what causes the driver to engage in an unethical activity. Is he intrinsically immoral, unethical? There is zero information. The character of the driver comes and goes with the blink of an eye. Consider the character of visually challenged author, the most righteous and saintly figure in the film. Despite knowing the background tales about the laptop, he suffers from no moral scruple when accepting the laptop from his renter. The manager’s character also displays the same nonchalant sentiment towards a laptop, which has been supposedly left behind by an amnesic passenger. The manager reveals to his family that the laptop was mistakenly left behind a forgetful passenger in the taxi. But being a typical middle-class family, they decide to ignore the episode and the film jumps forward. These characters come from various socio-economic classes and all of them exhibit the same apathetic behavior toward the stolen laptop; accept without any compunction. Ahem! So, in a nutshell, as if, the whole gamut human species have submitted to complete moral corruption. That is just to difficult to swallow even if one hails from the most corrupt nation from the earth. But, Ganguly marches on because the laptop is the driving force of the plot. There are also a few other minuses there. The film fails to devote enough screenspace to characters that occupy central roles and, erroneously focus attention to plot points or characters that disappear without no apparent rhyme and reason. For example, the character of the divorced publisher occupies the last 20-30 minutes of the film, but we have no clue to his psychological dilemmas, pains, and aspirations. As a result, we are never emotionally invested in the character. On the other hand, the director spends considerable amount of footage on the understated chemistry between the visually-challenged author and his typist, but the whole episode ends with no major dramatic culminations. The same frustration grips us with the story of the young boy and girl or the hotel manager. They end too abruptly. It seems that the director was trying to connect stories that are apparently disconnected and one story lends its way another by the way of a laptop. Ganguly fails miserably on this front as well as the transition from one to another is either too haste or too sporadic for a cohesive plot. In this connection, an exemplary film that pulls it of gracefully is Jafar Panahi’s The Circle. Another minus is the film’s lack of cohesiveness. Some scenes are juxtaposed with one another to evoke emotional responses, but their placement is too arbitrary in nature, which can be attributed to bad editing. The music is suitable for the mood of the film. The camera movements are slow, in keeping with the underlying sensibility of the film. But Ganguly must know that slow-moving camera and heart-wrenching music are not the only property of a good film. That way a film can be artsy, but no further it can progress. Actors have very little scope to perform. Bose is artifical or does not know what to do. Ganguly’s character is too self-congratulatory, the actor playing the role of the wife of the tea estate couldn’t touch the nerve of her character. She is the weakest link in the film. The climax is utterly ridiculous. Overall, this is a Laptop that performs its best when untouched.

Short Cuts (Robert Altman, 1993)

There are ten stories and two dozen characters that fill Short Cuts, and a plenum of human melodrama, drama, and darkness that fill the screen: joy, sadness, jealousy, fear, reconciliation, pain, infidelity, and death-accidental, murder, and suicide are among them.To reproduce the episodic and multi-narrative entanglement would be an unproductive exercise here. In a nutshell, it is a modern-day angst movie, with people misunderstanding, begrudging, beguiling, disappointing -- and even killing -- one another. In a work this pervasive, some plots will be inevitably weaker than others. But the overall feeling is that Altman, maker of Nashville and The Player, has pulled off another ensemble coup, with commendable assistance from Lily Tomlin, Tim Robbins, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tom Waits, Bruce Davison, Fred Ward, Robert Downey Jr. and many others. Altman's movie is a harsh, almost fatalistic overview of modern-day sufferings in the less-exotic suburbs of California. After all the various plots have been introduced, developments (usually negative) cause many of them to intersect. The unfolding of events between Ward and wife Anne Archer who are invited to dinner for the first time with bickering spouses Julianne Moore and Modine is utterly mesmerizing. You watch enrapt, as these people experience the unrelenting tragicomedy of being alive. Although the omniscient design of Short Cuts is enthralling, it's indistinct. That indistinction leads us to believe we are watching something telling and profound. Short Cuts is a film almost wholly devoted to the written word, as all great films are, but its ‘little above average’ goodness, rather than greatness, stems from the fact that the words of Carver-as hit and miss in prose as Altman is on film, are never allowed their full power nor poesy.

Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005)

The story of Brokeback Mountain a familiar one. Ennis Del Mar and Jack Twist are two cowboys who are hired by Joe Aguirre to shepherd sheep up on a Wyoming mountain named Brokeback. After a half hour of lushly scenery, Jack takes Ennis seduces Ennis and within seconds, Ennis is inexplicably battering Jack. Inexplicably because, a few scenes earlier, Jack was cooking and Ennis stripped naked to bathe, and neither man takes mind of what the other is doing. This gives an impression of instant gays, which is utterly absurd. In one of the reuniting scenes later, they practically bite off each other’s lips, indicating the extent of passion. Is this real? In the film, neither actor emits chemistry with nor eros for the other. Decades go by, and these two men marry, use, and abuse the women in their lives. Ennis is the worse of the two, for his wife Alma actually seems to love him, while Jack’s wife, Lureen, a former cowgirl, accepts the fact that he’s queer, and is romantically involved with Ennis in Wyoming. The wives are mere plot points in the film, not worth developing, especially since the leads are left in emotional utero even longer. The two male leads, however, look ridiculous in their poor makeup jobs. Aging, for them, consists of growing sideburns, it seems.  Eventually, Ennis divorces his wife and Jack goes ‘full on’ in his quest for sexual quest, which eventually gets him to death at the age of thirty-nine. The best scene in the film is when Ennis calls Jack’s wife, after a postcard comes back marked deceased. Gyllenhaal is ok as Jack, but Heath Ledger totally butchers ‘cowboy’ lingo, constantly letting his Aussie accent seep through his near constant mumbling. On a social level, I am tired of films like this that indulges more gay stereotyping by making gay characters dying, murderous, depressed, deranged, victimized, or victimizer. And, ethically, the film does a lot of dancing around the ethics of adultery and lying in a marriage. For example, if this film were about two men who cheated on their wives with other women, would the film have portrayed their encounters so favorably? But, adultery is okay if gay, and letting your ‘true’ self be revealed. So, it’s ok to be a liar if queer, but if you lie and use women in your straight adultery it’s not ok? Brokeback Mountain is not a love story for the ages, but a tale of simple sexual obsession. This film simply subordinates whatever good artistic impulses the director may have had in favor of the Lowest Common Denominator import of the ‘message’. Were this a film whose leads were straight, the critics would have torn at it for being every bit as kitschy as the abominable Love Story was. Bad writing, and dubious moralizing, makes Brokeback Mountain every bit as bad a film as any other bad film. 

The Sweet Hereafter (Atom Egoyan, 1997)

Some films embrace style but lack substance and life. Others fumble by believing they can make an audience care for a character just by having a traumatic situation beleaguer him early on. The Sweet Hereafter by Canadian director Atom Egoyan suffers from all of the above syndromes. The Sweet Hereafter is not a bad film, but it certainly is not a great film. The film also suffers from some other minor flaws, as well; primarily an anomic screenplay by Egoyan, who adapted the novel of the same name by Russell Banks. The film follows the aftermath of a 1995 schoolbus crash that killed many of the children in a remote Canadian mountain town. A big city lawyer named Mitchell Stevens jumps on the case to extract compensations for the victims. His reason, other than greed, is that his daughter, Zoe is a drug addict who has been using him emotionally. Stevens is a small devious man and he gets a number of the local families who lost children to take up arms against the government. The film is non-linear, and herein lies a major problem. Not that linearity is the main problem of The Sweet Hereafter, for many films excel at non-linear structure. The film does not stay with Stevens, but jumps about to a host of characters who, after first viewing, we are left wondering who they are and what relation do they bear to the other characters. The Sweet Hereafter is plagued by script and character development problems. Then there is the unnecessary complication of a PC theme-incest, in which one of the older girls, Nichole Burnell hurt in the crash to the point of possibly being paralyzed for life, is being incested by her long haired dad, Sam. This leads to the culmination of the film, wherein the girl ultimately destroys Stevens’ case by lying about the crash being an accident, and blames the schoolbus driver, Dolores Driscoll, for speeding on an icy mountain road. The film leads us to believe via the theme music and lighting, that this lie is somehow a good thing, for it helps prevent her dad from getting a large settlement from the class action lawsuit Stevens is deposing her for. But, all it does is make her as bad as the rest of the greedy townsfolk, for she blames an innocent woman for the accident.Yet, just as the force-fed tale of Stevens and his daughter induces any empathy, neither does the incident of incest really move the viewer. Partly this is because the girl clearly engages in the fantasy element of the ‘romance,’ but the daughter’s receptivity to it (which seems forced, even though there are abused females who feel no ill will toward their abusers). These tales resolve themselves, but not in a realistic fashion. The girl is also hamhandedly used as a symbol when she recites the poem The Pied Piper Of Hamelin, by Robert Browning. The idea of lost children is so manifestly obvious in the film that the reason Egoyan adds this is puzzling, except that he bizarrely felt the loss aspect is not evident enough. It is. The opening scene of the film, where Stevens is in a car wash, heading out of the darkness and toward the light, is equally embarrassing in its condescension. The use of the non-linear structure also fails for a primary reason, it ruins the whole dramatic structure of the tale. Since we know what happens early in the film (save for a few minor details), because of Stevens’ reactions and body language, there is little drama in the girl’s testimonial lie. The whole flashback within the flashforward does not work for the lighting and dreaminess is so gauzey, saccharine, and so, ‘This is the big moment of the film,’ that the viewer almost feels embarrassed at Egoyan’s cluelessness at the inappropriateness of it all. The Sweet Hereafter simply is not that deep of a film, and had it gone a more standard route, it actually would have worked better. Simply put, a tragic subject matter does not automatically make for a deep film. The Sweet Hereafter does not rise to the heights of a film by a master like Ingmar Bergman, Michelangelo Antonioni, nor Yasujiro Ozu.

Still Walking (Hirokazu Koreeda, 2008)

Still Walking is throbbing with Yasujiro Ozu style - from its opening to its very last shot that overlooks a harbor, as a train passes by. The last scene almost reminds the viewer of Ozu’s ending to his masterpiece Tokyo Story. The only real difference is that Kore-eda’s camera is more fluid, scenes are less formally framed and the camera is not always held at the below waist level. Like the Ozu film, though, this film follows a family gathering on the anniversary of the eldest son’s death. The eldest son was died by drowning, while saving the life of a local boy, twelve years ago. That son, Junpei, was to follow in his father’s footsteps as a doctor. The doctor is now retired, and lives with his wife, and the two of them have a classic love and hate relationship with each other. The old man resents his two surviving children, Chinami, a happy go lucky housewife with a used car salesman husband, a son and daughter, and Ryota, an unemployed art restorer, who recently married a young widow, Yukari, who has a son, Atsushi. In all, the setup is a classic family gathering. What makes this film so great is that it is not melodramatic - there is no shouting nor infidelities revealed. It’s real. Such a film eliminates the necessity of discussing the plot, as the film is full of moments that reveal the characters and their interrelations. We see how Ryota is resentful of his father, who belittles his art restoring work, and tries to escape the situation by constantly being on his cell phone. We see how the father and mother resent his new wife and stepson. The father openly wishes that Ryota had been the son that died, and his contempt is on full display upon first seeing his son in his home again. His mother is even worse than his father in how she subtly denigrates both the wife and stepson with subtle digs and not so subtle acts. Chinami is the peacemaker, but recognizes her father’s resentment toward her, for living while Junpei dies, and also her and her husband’s and children’s impending move in to the family home. Her mother also berates her at every turn, and makes snide comments on her children and husband- most notably that when Chinami’s husband offers to fix some bathroom tiles for the mother, the mother refuses and says he’s a guest, only later to chide him for offering, not following through, and acting as if he was a ‘guest.’ But most of the doctor’s and mother’s resentment is turned toward Yoshio, the boy (now young man) whom Junpei saved. Once a year they invite him over to their home to, as the mother says, make him feel as badly as they do, because she needs to do so. When he leaves they mock him for his poor lot in life, being overweight, and call him ‘useless trash’; all except Ryota. Then there is the relationship between Ryota and Atsushi, who calls his stepfather Ryo, despite his mother’s asking him to call him dad. We later find out that the boy actually misses his dead father immensely- so much so that he wants to be a piano tuner, like his father, and recalls catching yellow butterflies with his father, after he sees the grandmother chasing a yellow butterfly and believing it is Junpei returned to her, because it lands on her dead son’s photo. This is important because the boy, earlier in the film, several times pretended to barely remember his father, only to later, in a private moment, in the middle of the night, in the backyard, reveal that it was all an act. Yet, only the audience learns this. At film’s end there’s an even further payoff for the yellow butterfly trope as we see Ryota, a few years later, forgetting where he heard a myth about yellow butterflies, that he tells to a daughter he later has, just as his mother forgets where she heard the myth she tells to Ryota. And this sort of moment is also echoed when both Ryota and the grandmother, after trying and failing to recall the name of a sumo wrestler both finally do, after they have said goodbye (by shaking hands- a fact the grandmother relishes in when the doctor suggests it could have hurt Ryota’s wife’s and stepchild’s feelings), and are headed their own ways. And, as if these touches were not enough to satisfy, there’s an added little moment where the parents, as they walk back, think that this trip is the start of regular visits from Ryota and his family, whom they expect back for New Years, whereas he is relieved, riding on the bus home, and declares to his wife and stepson that this trip obviates any necessity for them to make an obligatory visit for New Year’s. All these sorts of moments weave a real, but deft, drama, and we see moments that in lesser films, mere melodramas, would explode into ‘tense confrontations,’ but here, become revelations like the doctor’s liking popular music only up to The Beatles, and thinking rap is crap. The acting is fantastic in that it is all natural- there is no scenery chewing, and Kore-eda’s well-paced and naturalistic script, and the unobtrusive, yet evocative cinematography, all work synergistically, but in the curious way of adding up to less than the sum of their parts….which is somehow perfect, because less equals more, at least in terms of naturalism. There’s not a forced moment in the film, and it is not a tearjerker. This is because it is a deeply and genuinely affecting film. Still Walking is an example of cinemature in both senses of the term: mature filmmaking and literature-like in its depth and profundity.

Satantango (Béla Tarr, 1994)

Counting his production of Macbeth for Hungarian television, Tarr has directed nine films since 1979. Tarr's early works are rooted in common, insular social environments. Tarr's later films are similarly distinctive but their visual styles are often characterized by frequent long takes that recall the work of Andrei Tarkovsky. This rigorous style is on display throughout the director's seminal Sátántangó, a film that is routinely lauded in film circuits but has rarely been seen by the public. Sátántangó begins with a formidable opening shot that is hypnotic: within a rural farming community, a single take captures a herd of cattle as they exit a warehouse pen. Some roam about and graze inattentively while others impulsively copulate. The entire herd moves between houses and barns, and slowly moves toward the horizon. This action is stark, unusual and darkly satiric. In these opening minutes the farmers' livestock is able to freely move around, however, it is this option of freedom that no human character in the film shares. Rain is a constant companion in the film, and Tarr seems to analogize it with poverty. Most of the film's principle characters develop a scheme to rob a sum of money that has been promised, in shares, to each farmer. The possibility of wealth fosters greed, deceit, and infidelity. Futaki and Mrs. Schmidt are seen plotting, and are interrupted by Mr. Schmidt, another secret conspirator who unknowingly reveals his scheme to a hiding Futaki. One sin leads to another and deceit interconnects each person in the entire community. The characters in Sátántangó are assembled in a hierarchy of domination and betrayal; it's a trap where even the most secret conspiracy is disruptively repercussive. At the fringe of this web is the young Estike. She has been fleeced of her modest savings by her bother, and this loss results in frustration. She latches on to a pet cat, terrorizing it and finally forcing its head into a bowl of poisoned milk. Afterward she fashions an identical elixir for herself. In this manner, betrayal inevitably tenders the highest cost for the lowest-tiered conspirator. The tragedy affects everyone. The entire film is stitched together from a series of long shots—a minute number in proportion to the film's epic length. This cinematographic tactic visually manifests the film's thematic intentions. There are numerous instances of this visual signature, and the effect is hypnotic: sunrises occur in real time; figures move toward distant horizons and diminish; close-ups track along walking heads that bob vertically—and endlessly—in and out of frame. These actions are all captured with bold, static patience, and are demonstrative of the ennui of the film's deprived community. Sátántangó is structured in a repetitive chronology that apes the rhythmic tally of the tango. Episodes are followed or preceded by others that transpire simultaneously but from different perspectives, and passages without action (for example, a lengthy scene where characters engage in the titular dance) are supplementary to ones that precede or follow. Slowly, the viewer is informed of every betrayal and lie, of every deceit in a community that relies, ironically, upon faith. The film is divided into 12 episodes, some of which only indirectly convey the film's signifying theme of desperation. In illustrative contrast to Estike's desperate violence, a community doctor, a voyeur who records the actions of neighbors through his window, fumbles through his every scene in a permanent vodka-induced stupor. He is as poor and desperate as any other character, yet his behavior is comic in what is an otherwise tragic film. Sátántangó is a compilation of such stark and discriminated pieces. It's the cumulative alliance of a number of contrasted themes that derives the film's irony: it is at once sympathetic and patronizing, both tragic and satiric. It is this insidious yet ambiguous political nature that characterizes Sátántangó as a Hungarian film, in turn perpetuating its obscurity and qualifying its art.

The Man from London (Béla Tarr, Ágnes Hranitzky, 2007)

After the more complicated narratives of Satantango and Werckmeister Harmonies, Hungarian filmmaker Bela Tarr reduces down a Georges Simenon novel to a few elemental essentials the center of which deals with a railway worker in a musty and run down port town, who witnesses a murder while stationed on a tower and then stumbles into a stack of cash. The Man from London is about staring, listening, and living with a guilt-ridden heart accompanied by a suggestive minimalist soundtrack and ravishing black-and-white cinematography. Tarr's superglacial camera movements and long-drawn-out shots generate a hypnotic sense of curiosity, giving us enough moments to think and always implying far more than they show. The Man from London is grave and intense, but not particularly involving, and its hard to evaluate the actors work because theyre given so little to say. Like all of Tarr's films, The Man from London is an auteurist creation par excellence, with Tarr in complete control of space, light, sound, and camera movement. But the sum of all turns out to be a test of viewers threshold of tolerance. The Man from London wished to explore some existential concerns other than offer a compact, emotionally capricious, and somber piece in which the aesthetics occupy center stage at the expense of substance.

A List of 100 Films from 2000

 

Not necessarily in this order:

  1. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - (2003, Peter Jackson) (Elijah Wood, Sean Astin)
  2. City of God - (2002, Fernando Meirelles) (Jonathan Haagensen, Alexandre Rodrigues)
  3. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon - (2000, Ang Lee) (Chow Yun-Fat, Michelle Yeoh)
  4. The Pianist - (2002, Roman Polanski) (Adrien Brody, Frank Finlay)
  5. The Departed - (2006, Martin Scorsese) (Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon)
  6. Mystic River - (2003, Clint Eastwood) (Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Kevin Bacon)
  7. No Country for Old Men - (2007, Ethan & Joel Coen) (Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin)
  8. Pan's Labyrinth - (2006, Guillermo del Toro) (Ariadna Gil, Ivana Baquero)
  9. Brokeback Mountain -(2005, Ang Lee) (Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Williams)
10. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Rings - (2001, Peter Jackson) (Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen)
11. There Will Be Blood - (2007, Paul Thomas Anderson) (Daniel Day-Lewis, Martin Stringer)
12. Traffic - (2000, Steven Soderbergh) (Michael Douglas, Benicio Del Toro)
13. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - (2007, Julian Schnabel) (Mathieu Amalric, Marie-Josée Croze)
14. Gladiator - (2000, Ridley Scott) (Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix)
15. Yi Yi - (2000, Edward Yang) (Wu Nien-Jen, Kelly Lee)
16. The Hurt Locker - (2009, Kathryn Bigelow) (Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie)
17. Letters From Iwo Jima - (2006, Clint Eastwood) (Ken Watanabe, Kazunari Ninomiya)
18. Avatar - (2009, James Cameron) (Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver)
19. Mulholland Dr. - (2001, David Lynch) (Naomi Watts, Laura Elena Harring)
20. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - (2002, Peter Jackson) (Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen)
21. Children Of Men - (2006, Alfonso Cuaron) (Clive Owen, Julianne Moore)
22. Chicago - (2002, Rob Marshall) (Catherine Zeta-Jones, Renee Zellweger)
23. Slumdog Millionaire - (2008, Danny Boyle) (Dev Patel, Anil Kapoor)
24. Capote - (2005, Bennett Miller) (Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Chris Cooper)
25. Lost in Translation - (2003, Sofia Coppola) (Bill Murray, Scarlett Johnansson)
26. Moulin Rouge - (2001, Baz Luhrmann) (Nicole Kidman, Ewan McGregor)
27. Sideways - (2004, Alexander Payne) (Paul Giamatti, Thomas Haden Church)
28. Spirited Away - (2001, Hayao Miyazaki) (Rumi Hiiragi, Miyu Irino)
29. A Beautiful Mind - (2001, Ron Howard) (Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly)
30. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - (2004, Michael Gondry) (Jim Carrey, Kate Winslet)
31. Million Dollar Baby - (2004, Clint Eastwood) (Clint Eastwood, Hilary Swank)
32. The Dark Knight - (2008, Christopher Nolan) (Christian Bale, Heath Ledger)
33. Precious - (2009, Lee Daniels) (Gabourey Sidibe, Mo'Nique, Paula Patton)
34. Crash - (2005, Paul Haggis) (Sandra Bullock, Don Cheadle, Matt Dillon)
35. Ray - (2004, Taylor Hackford) (Jamie Foxx, Kerry Washington, Regina King)
36. Gangs of New York - (2002, Martin Scorsese) (Daniel Day Lewis, Leonardo DiCaprio)
37. The Aviator - (2004, Martin Scorsese) (Leonardo Dicaprio, Cate Blanchett)
38. Munich - (2005, Munich) (Eric Bana, Geoffrey Rush, Daniel Craig)
39. Inglourious Basterds - (2009, Quentin Tarantino) (Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz)
40. In the Mood for Love - (2000, Kar Wai Wong) (Maggie Cheung, Tony Leung Chiu Wai)
41. Shrek - (2001, Andrew Adamson) (Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz)
42. Almost Famous - (2000, Cameron Crowe) (Patrick Fugit, Kate Hudson)
43. Memento - (2000, Christopher Nolan) (Guy Pearce, Carrie-Anne Moss)
44. Babel - (2006, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu) (Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Mohamed Akhzam)
45. Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone - (2001, Chris Columbus) (Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint)
46. Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World - (2003, Peter Weir) (Russell Crowe, Paul Bettany)
47. Talk to Her - (2002, Pedro Almodovar) (Javier Camara, Dario Grandinetti)
48. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - (2004, Alfonso Cuaron) (Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint)
49. Cinderella Man - (2005, Ron Howard) (Russell Crowe, Paul Giamatti)
50. Adaptation - (2002, Spike Jonze) (Nicolas Cage, Meryl Streep)
51. Up - (2009, Pete Docter) (Animated - Edward Asner, Christopher Plummer)
52. The Hours - (2002, Stephen Daldry) (Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep)
53. Pride & Prejudice - (2005, Joe Wright) (Keira Knightley, Donald Sutherland)
54. Dancer in the Dark - (2000, Lars von Trier) (Bjork, Catherine Deneuve)
55. Hotel Rwanda - (2004, Terry George) (Don Cheadle, Joaquin Phoenix)
56. Walk the Line - (2005, James Mangold) (Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon)
57. O Brother, Where Art Thou? - (2000, Joel Coen) (George Clooney, John Turturro)
58. Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl - (2003, G. Verbinski) (Johnny Depp, G. Rush)
59. Gosford Park - (2001, Robert Altman) (Maggie Smith, Michael Gambon)
60. Good Night and Good Luck - (2005, G. Clooney) (David Strathairn, George Clooney, Patricia Clarkson)
61. Little Miss Sunshine - (2006, Jonathan Dayton) (Greg Kinnear, Alan Arkin)
62. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - (2002, Chris Columbus) (Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint)
63. Oldboy - (2003, Chan-wook Park) (Min-sik Choi, Ji-tae Yu)
64. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith - (2005, G. Lucas) (Hayden Christensen, Ewan McGregor)
65. Seabiscuit - (2003, Gary Ross) (Tobey Maguire, Jeff Bridges)
66. The Class - (2007, Ilmar Raag) (Vallo Kirs, Pärt Uusberg)
67. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days - (2007, Cristian Mungiu) (Anamaria Marinca, Laura Vasiliu)
68. Crazy Heart - (2009, Scott Cooper) (Jeff Bridges, Maggie Gyllenhaal)
69. The Passion of the Christ - (2004, Mel Gibson) (James Caviezel, Monica Bellucci)
70. Spider Man 2 - (2004, Sam Raimi) (Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst)
71. The Royal Tenenbaums - (2001, Wes Anderson) (Ben Stiller, Gene Hackman)
72. Atonement - (2007, Joe Wright) (Keira Knightley, James McAvoy)
73. WALL-E - (2008, Andrew Stanton) (voices- Ben Burtt, Elissa Knight, Fred Willard)
74. Before Night Falls - (2000, Julian Schnabel) (Javier Bardem, Olivier Martinez)
75. Kill Bill Vol. 1 - (2003, Quentin Tarantino) (Uma Thurman, Vivica A. Fox)
76. Kill Bill Vol. 2 - (2004, Quentin Tarantino) (Uma Thurman, David Carradine)
77. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - (2008, David Fincher) (Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett)
78. 21 Grams - (2003, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu) (Sean Penn, Naomi Watts)
79. Amelie - (2001, Jean-Pierre Jeunet) (Audrey Tautou, Mathieu Kassovitz)
80. Frost/Nixon - (2008, Ron Howard) (Frank Langella, Michael Sheen)
81. Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street - (2007, T. Burton) (Johnny Depp, Helena B. Carter)
82. Donnie Darko - (2001, Richard Kelly) (Jake Gyllenhaal, Mary McDonnell)
83. Collateral - (2004, Michael Mann) (Tom Cruise, Jamie Foxx, Dennis Farina)
84. Spider Man - (2002, Sam Raimi) (Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst)
85. The Wrestler - (2008, Darren Aronofsky) (Mickey Rourke, Marisa Tomei)
86. Monster's Ball - (2001, Marc Forster) (Billy Bob Thornton, Halle Berry)
87. Black Hawk Down - (2001, Ridley Scott) (Josh Hartnett, Ewan McGregor)
88. In the Bedroom - (2001, Todd Field) (Tom Wilkinson, Sissy Spacek)
89. Cast Away - (2000, Robert Zemeckis) (Tom Hanks, Helen Hunt)
90. The Blind Side - (2009, John Lee Hancock) (Sandra Bullock, Quinton Aaron)
91. A History of Violence - (2005, David Cronenberg) (Viggo Mortensen, Maria Bello, Ed Harris)
92. The Others - (2001, Alejandro Amenabar) (Nicole Kidman, Christopher Eccleston)
93. Finding Nemo - (2003, Andrew Stanton) (Albert Brooks, Alexander Gould)
94. The Prestige - (2006, Christopher Nolan) (Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale)
95. Before Sunset - (2004, Richard Linklater) (Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy)
96. Cold Mountain - (2003, Anthony Minghella) (Nicole Kidman, Jude Law, Renée Zellweger)
97. Erin Brockovich - (2000, Steven Soderbergh) (Julia Roberts, Albert Finney)
98. An Education - (2009, Lone Scherfig) (Carey Mulligan, Olivia Williams)
99. Finding Neverland - (2004, Marc Forster) (Johnny Depp, Kate Winslet)
100. The Constant Gardener - (2005, Fernando Meirelles) (Ralph Fiennes, Rachel Weisz, Hubert Koundé)

A List of 100 Films from 1990

  Not necessarily in this order:

  1. Schindler's List - (1993, Steven Spielberg) (Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Ben Kingsley)
  2. GoodFellas - (1990, Martin Scorsese) (Robert DeNiro, Joe Pesci, Ray Liotta)
  3. Saving Private Ryan - (1998, Steven Spielberg) (Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore)
  4. Pulp Fiction - (1994, Quentin Tarantino) (John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson)
  5. The Silence of the Lambs - (1991, Jonathan Demme) (Anthony Hopkins, Jodie Foster)
  6. Fargo - (1996. Joel Coen) (Frances McDormand, William H. Macy, Steve Buscemi)
  7. Unforgiven - (1992, Clint Eastwood) (Clint Eastwood, Gene Hackman)
  8. Shawshank Redemption - (1994, Frank Darabont) (Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman)
  9. Malcolm X - (1992, Spike Lee) (Denzel Washington, Delroy Lindo)
10. American Beauty - (1999) (Sam Mendes) (Kevin Spacey, Thora Birch)
11. Dances With Wolves - (1990, Kevin Costner) (Kevin Costner, Mary McDonnell)
12. Forrest Gump - (1994, Robert Zemmeckis) (Tom Hanks, Gary Sinese)
13. Sling Blade - (1996, Billy Bob Thornton) (Billy Bob Thornton, J.T. Walsh, John Ritter)
14. Titanic - (1997, James Cameron) (Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet)
15. Braveheart - (1995, Mel Gibson) (Mel Gibson, Sophie Marceau)
16. The Usual Suspects - (1995, Brian Singer) (Kevin Spacey, Gabriel Byrne)
17. The Sixth Sense - (1999, M. Night Shyamalan) (Bruce Willis, Haley Joel Osment)
18. Reservoir Dogs - (1992, Quentin Tarantino) (Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth)
19. Barton Fink - (1991, Joel Coen) (John Turturro, John Goodman)
20. Boyz 'N The Hood - (1991, John Singleton) (Ice Cube, Cuba Gooding Jr.)
21. JFK - (1991, Oliver Stone) (Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman)
22. Se7en - (1995, David Fincher) (Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman)
23. Dead Man Walking - (1995, Tim Robbins) (Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon)
24. Toy Story - (1995, John Lasseter) (Tom Hanks, Tim Allen)
25. The Piano - (1993, Jane Campion) (Holly Hunter, Anna Paquin)
26. The Nightmare Before Christmas - (1993, Henry Selick) (Chris Sarandon, Catherine O'Hara)
27. The Thin Red Line - (1998, Terrence Malick) (James Caviezel, Sean Penn)
28. The Green Mile - (1999, Frank Darabont) (Tom Hanks, Michael Clarke Duncan)
29. Howards End - (1992, James Ivory) (Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson)
30. Quiz Show - (1994, Robert Redford) (John Turturro, Ralph Fiennes)
31. Terminator 2: Judgment Day- - (1991, James Cameron) (Arnold Schwarzenegger)
32. Jurassic Park - (1993, Steven Spielberg) (Jeff Goldblum, Sam Neill)
33. The Matrix - (1999, Andy & Larry Wachowski) (Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne)
34. Ed Wood - (1994, Tim Burton) (Johnny Depp, Martin Landau)
35. Being John Malcovich - (1999, Spike Jonez) (John Cusak, John Malcovich)
36. The Crying Game - (1992, Neil Jordan) (Stephen Rea, Jaye Davidson)
37. Leaving Las Vegas - (1995, Mike Figgis) (Nicolas Cage, Elisabeth Shue)
38. Magnolia - (1999, Paul Thomas Anderson) (Tom Cruise, Jason Robards)
39. The Remains of the Day - (1993, James Ivory) (Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson)
40. The Big Lebowski - (1998, Joel Coen) (Jeff Bridges, John Goodman)
41. Jackie Brown - (1997, Quentin Tarantino) (Samuel L. Jackson, Pam Grier)
42. Shakespeare in Love - (1998, John Madden) (Gwyneth Paltrow, Joseph Fiennes)
43. Short Cuts - (1993, Robert Altman) (Andie McDowell, Bruce Davison)
44. The English Patient - (1996, Anthony Minghella) (Ralph Fiennes, Juliette Binoche)
45. L.A. Confidential - (1997, Curtis Hanson) (Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe)
46. Glengarry Glen Ross - (1992, James Foley) (Al Pacino, Jack Lemmon)
47. Good Will Hunting - (1997, Gus Van Sant) (Matt Damon, Robin Williams)
48. The Fugitive - (1993, Andrew Davis) (Harrison Ford, Tommy Lee Jones)
49. Fight Club - (1999, David Fincher) (Edward Norton, Brad Pitt)
50. Four Weddings and a Funeral - (1994, Mike Newell) (Hugh Grant, Andie MacDowell)
51. Wag the Dog - (1997, Barry Levinson) (Dustin Hoffman, Robert DeNiro)
52. Scream - (1996, Wes Craven) (Neve Campbell, David Arquette)
53. Beauty and the Beast - (1991, Gary Trousdale, Kirk Wise) (Paige O'Hara, Robby Benson)
54. The Player - (1992, Robert Altman) (Tim Robbins, Greta Scacchi)
55. Dead Man - (1995, Jim Jarmusch) (Johnny Depp, Gary Farmer)
56. Mad Dog and Glory - (1993, John McNaughton) (Robert DeNiro, Bill Murray, Uma Thurman)
57. Philadelphia - (1993, Jonathan Demme) (Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington)
58. Rushmore - (1998, Wes Anderson) (Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray)
59. Scent of a Woman - (1992, Martin Brest) (Al Pacino, Chris O'Donnell)
60. Shine - (1996, Scott Hicks) (Geoffrey Rush, Armin Mueller-Stahl)
61. Thelma and Louise - (1991, Ridley Scott) (Geena Davis, Susan Sarandon)
62. Casino - (1995, Martin Scorsese) (Robert DeNiro, Joe Pesci, Sharon Stone)
63. Deconstructing Harry - (1997, Woody Allen) (Woody Allen, Billy Crystal)
64. The Age of Innocence - (1993, Martin Scorsese) (Daniel Day Lewis, Michelle Pfeiffer)
65. The Godfather part III - (1990, Francis Ford Coppola) (Al Pacino, Diane Keaton)
66. The Sweet Hereafter - (1997, Atom Egoyan) (Ian Holm, Sarah Polley)
67. Trois Couleurs: Rouge - (1994, Krzysztof Kieslowski) (Irene Jacob, Jean-Louis Trintignant)
68. The Grifters - (1990, Stephen Frears) (John Cusak, Angelica Huston)
69. Toy Story 2 - (1999, John Lasseter, Lee Unkrich, Ash Brannon) (Tim Allen, Tom Hanks)
70. The Lion King - (1994, Roger Allers, Rob Minkoff) (Matthew Broderick, Jeremy Irons)
71. Heat - (1995) (Michael Mann, Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro)
72. Breaking the Waves - (1996, Lars von Trier) (Emily Watson, Stellan Skarsgard)
73. Secrets and Lies - (1996, Mike Leigh) (Brenda Blethyn, Marianne Jean-Baptiste)
74. American History X - (1998, Tony Kaye) (Edward Norton, Edward Furlong)
75. In the Name of the Father - (1993, Jim Sheridan) (Daniel Day Lewis, Pete Postelthwaite)
76. Groundhog Day - (1993, Harold Ramis) (Bill Murray, Andie MacDowell)
77. Miller's Crossing - (1990, Joel Coen) (Gabriel Byrne, Albert Finney)
78. Hamlet - (1996, Kenneth Branagh) (Kenneth Branagh, Derek Jacobi)
79. Babe - (1995, Chris Noonan) (James Cromwell, Christine Cavanaugh)
80. Three Kings - (1999, David O. Russell) (George Clooney, Ice Cube)
81. Eyes Wide Shut - (1999, Stanley Kubrick) (Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman)
82. The Fisher King - (1991, Terry Gilliam) (Jeff Bridges, Robin Williams)
83. Edward Scissorhands - (1990, Tim Burton) (Johnny Depp, Winona Ryder)
84. Raise the Red Lantern - (1991, Zhang Yimou) (Gong Li, He Caifei)
85. Dazed and Confused - (1993, Richard Linklater) (Jason London, Wiley Wiggins)
86. Donnie Brasco - (1997, Mike Newell) (Al Pacino, Johnny Depp)
87. As Good As It Gets - (1997, James L. Brooks) (Helen Hunt, Jack Nicholson)
88. The Apostle - (1997, Robert Duvall) (Robert Duvall, Farrah Fawcett)
89. Princess Mononoke - (1997, Hayao Miyazaki) (Yoji Matsuda, Yuriko Ishida)
90. Out of Sight - (1998, Stephen Soderbergh) (George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez)
91. Apollo 13 - (1995, Ron Howard) (Tom Hanks, Kevin Bacon, Bill Paxton)
92. The People vs Larry Flint - (1996, Milos Forman) (Woody Harrelson, Courtney Love)
93. A Few Good Men - (1992, Rob Reiner) (Jack Nicholson, Tom Cruise)
94. Slacker - (1991, Richard Linklater) (Richard Linklater, Marc James)
95. Boogie Nights - (1997, Paul Thomas Anderson) (Mark Wahlberg, Burt Reynolds)
96. 12 Monkeys - (1995, Terry Gilliam) (Bruce Willis, Brad Pitt)
97. Jerry Maguire - (1996, Cameron Crowe) (Tom Cruise, Rene Zellweger)
98. Bob Roberts - (1992, Tim Robbins) (Tim Robbins, Brian Doyle-Murray)
99. The Last of the Mohicans - (1992, Michael Mann) (Daniel Day Lewis, Madeleine Stowe)
100. Clerks - (1994, Kevin Smith) (Brian O'Halloran, Jeff Anderson)

A List of 100 Films from 1980

  Not necessarily in this order:


  1. Raging Bull - (1980, Martin Scorsese) (Robert DeNiro, Joe Pesci)
  2. E.T. The Extra Terrestrial - (1982, Steven Spielberg) (Henry Thomas, Dee Wallace)
  3. Raiders of the Lost Ark - (1981, Steven Spielberg) (Harrison Ford, Paul Freeman)
  4. Amadeus - (1984, Milos Forman) (F. Murray Abraham, Tom Hulce)
  5. Platoon - (1986, Oliver Stone) (Tom Berenger, Willem Dafoe, Charlie Sheen)
  6. Cinema Paradiso - (1988, Giuseppe Tornatore) (Philippe Noiret, Salvatore Cascio)
  7. Once Upon a Time in America - (1984, Sergio Leone) (Robert DeNiro, James Woods)
  8. Blade Runner - (1982, Ridley Scott) (Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer)
  9. Ran - (1985, Akira Kurosawa) (Tatsuya Nakadai, Akira Terao)
10. Do the Right Thing - (1989, Spike Lee) (Spike Lee, John Turturro)
11. Blue Velvet - (1986, David Lynch) (Kyle MacLachlin, Dennis Hopper)
12. The Empire Strikes Back - (1980, Irvin Kershner) (Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford)
13. The Elephant Man - (1980, David Lynch) (John Hurt, Anthony Hopkins)
14. The Shining - (1980, Stanley Kubrick) (Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall)
15. Full Metal Jacket - (1987, Stanley Kubrick) (Mathew Modine, Adam Baldwin)
16. Brazil - (1985, Terry Gilliam) (Jonathan Pryce, Robert DeNiro)
17. Airplane! - (1980, Jim Abrahams) (Robert Hays, Julie Hagerty)
18. Das Boot - (1981, Wolfgang Peterson) (Jurgen Prochnow, Herbert Gronemeyer)
19. Tootsie - (1982, Sydney Pollack) (Dustin Hoffman, Jessica Lange)
20. The Untouchables - (1987, Brian De Palma) (Kevin Costner, Sean Connery)
21. The Terminator - (1984, James Cameron) (Arnold Schwarzenegger, Linda Hamilton)
22. Die Hard - (1988, John McTiernan) (Bruce Willis, Alan Rickman)
23. The Last Emperor - (1987, Bernardo Bertolucci) (John Lone, Joan Chen)
24. Gandhi - (1982, Richard Attenborough) (Ben Kingsley, Candice Bergen)
25. Raising Arizona - (1987, Joel Coen) (Nicolas Cage, Holly Hunter)
26. The Princess Bride - (1987, Rob Reiner) (Cary Elwes, Robin Wright Penn)
27. The Big Chill - (1983, Lawrence Kasdan) (Kevin Kline, Glenn Close)
28. Fast Times at Ridgemont High - (1982, Amy Heckerling) (Sean Penn, Jennifer Jason Leigh)
29. Scarface - (1983, Brian De Palma) (Al Pacino, Steven Bauer)
30. A Christmas Story - (1983, Bob Clark) (Peter Billingsley, Melinda Dillon)
31. Poltergeist - (1982, Tobe Hooper) (Craig T. Nelson, JoBeth Williams)
32. Terms of Endearment - (1983, James L. Brooks) (Debra Winger, Shirley MacLaine)
33. This Is Spinal Tap - (1984, Rob Reiner) (Michael McKean, Christopher Guest)
34. Crimes and Misdemeanors - (1989, Woody Allen) (Woody Allen, Martin Landau)
35. sex, lies, and videotape - (1989, Steven Soderbergh) (James Spader, Andie MacDowell)
36. Back to the Future - (1985, Robert Zemeckis) (Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd)
37. Rain Man - (1988, Barry Levinson) (Dustin Hoffman, Tom Cruise)
38. Ordinary People - (1980, Robert Redford) (Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore)
39. Who Framed Roger Rabbit? - (1988, Robert Zemeckis) (Bob Hoskins, Christopher Lloyd)
40. Hannah and Her Sisters - (1986, Woody Allen) (Woody Allen, Mia Farrow)
41. When Harry Met Sally - (1989, Rob Reiner) (Billy Crystal, Meg Ryan)
42. Henry V - (1989, Kenneth Branagh) (Kenneth Branagh, Derek Jacobi)
43. Blood Simple - (1984, Joel Coen) (John Getz, Frances McDormand)
44. The Right Stuff - (1983, Philip Kaufman) (Scott Glenn, Ed Harris)
45. The Color Purple - (1985, Steven Spielberg) (Danny Glover, Whoopi Goldberg)
46. Kagemusha - (1980, Akira Kurosawa) (Tatsuya Nakadai, Tsutomu Yamazaki)
47. Wings of Desire - (1987, Wim Wenders) (Bruno Ganz, Solveig Dommartin)
48. The Little Mermaid - (1989, Ron Clements, John Musker) (Jodi Benson, Sam Wright)
49. Tender Mercies - (1983, Bruce Beresford) (Robert Duvall, Tess Harper)
50. Chariots of Fire - (1981, Hugh Hudson) (Ben Cross, Ian Charleson)
51. Salvador - (1986, Oliver Stone) (James Woods, James Belushi)
52. Atlantic City - (1980, Louise Malle) (Burt Lancaster, Susan Sarandon)
53. My Left Foot - (1989, Jim Sheridan) (Daniel Day Lewis, Fiona Shaw)
54. Glory - (1989, Edward Zwick) (Matthew Broderick, Morgan Freeman)
55. Jean de Florette - (1986, Claude Berri) (Gerard Depardieu, Yves Montand)
56. The Killing Fields - (1984, Roland Joffe) (Sam Waterston, John Malcovich)
57. The Last Metro - (1980, Francois Truffaut) (Gerard Depardieu, Catherine Deneuve)
58. A Room With a View - (1986, James Ivory) (Maggie Smith, Helena Bonham Carter)
59. A Passage to India - (1984, David Lean) (Judy Davis, Victor Banerjee)
60. Missing - (1982, Costa Gavras) (Jack Lemmon, Sissy Spacek)
61. Places in the Heart - (1984, Robert Benton) (Sally Field, John Malcovich)
62. A Soldier's Story - (1984, Norman Jewison) (Adolph Caesar, Howard E. Rollins)
63. Prizzi's Honor - (1985, John Huston) (Jack Nicholson, Kathleen Turner)
64. A Fish Called Wanda - (1988, Charles Crichton) (Kevin Kline, John Cleese)
65. Witness - (1985, Peter Weir) (Harrison Ford, Kelly McGillis)
66. Driving Miss Daisy - (1989, Bruce Beresford) (Morgan Freeman, Jessica Tandy)
67. Fanny and Alexander - (1982, Ingmar Bergman) (Pernilla Allwin, Bertil Guve)
68. Return of the Jedi - (1983, Richard Marquand) (Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford)
69. A Nightmare on Elm Street - (1984, Wes Craven) (John Saxon, Robert Englund)
70. Broadcast News - (1987, James L. Brooks) (William Hurt, Holly Hunter)
71. The King of Comedy - (1983, Martin Scorsese) (Robert DeNiro, Jerry Lewis)
72. Bull Durham - (1988, Ron Shelton) (Kevin Costner, Tim Robbins)
73. The Vanishing - (1988, George Sluizer) (Bernard-Pierre Donnadieu, Gene Bervoets)
74. Hope and Glory - (1987, John Boorman) (Sebastian Rice Edwards, Sarah Miles)
75. My Dinner with Andre - (1981, Louise Malle) (Wallace Shawn, Andre Gregory)
76. Field of Dreams - (1989, Phil Alden Robinson) (Kevin Costner, James Earl Jones)
77. Hoosiers - (1986, David Anspaugh) (Gene Hackman, Dennis Hopper)
78. Ghostbusters - (1984, Ivan Reitman) (Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray)
79. The Breakfast Club - (1985, John Hughes) (Judd Nelson, Emilio Estevez)
80. Big - (1988, Penny Marshall) (Tom Hanks, Elizabeth Perkins)
81. Caddyshack - (1980, Harold Ramis) (Chevy Chase, Rodney Dangerfield)
82. Arthur - (1981, Steve Gordon) (Dudley Moore, Liza Minnelli)
83. Kiss of the Spider Woman - (1985, Hector Babenco) (William Hurt, Raul Julia)
84. The Color of Money - (1986, Martin Scorsese) (Paul Newman, Tom Cruise)
85. She's Gotta Have It - (1986, Spike Lee) (Tracy Camilla Johns, Spike Lee)
86. Body Heat - (1981, Lawrence Kasdan) (William Hurt, Kathleen Turner)
87. The Executioner's Song - (1982, Lawrence Schiller) (Tommy Lee Jones, Rosanna Arquette)
88. Moonstruck - (1987, Norman Jewison) (Cher, Nicolas Cage)
89. The Stunt Man - (1980, Richard Rush) (Peter O'Toole, Steve Railsback)
90. Local Hero - (1983, Bill Forsyth) (Burt Lancaster, Peter Riegert)
91. Melvin and Howard - (1980, Jonathan Demme) (Jason Robards, Paul Le Mat)
92. Dangerous Liaisons - (1988, Stephen Frears) (Glenn Close, John Malcovich)
93. Ferris Bueller's Day Off - (1986, John Hughes) (Matthew Broderick, Alan Ruck)
94. The Road Warrior - (1981, George Miller) (Mel Gibson, Syd Heylen)
95. The Last Temptation of Christ - (1988, Martin Scorsese) (Willem Dafoe, Harvey Keitel)
96. Mona Lisa - (1986, Neil Jordan) (Bob Hoskins, Michael Caine)
97. Fatal Attraction - (1987, Adrian Lyne) (Michael Douglas, Glenn Close)
98. Out of Africa - (1985, Sydney Pollack) (Meryl Streep, Robert Redford)
99. Stand By Me - (1986, Rob Reiner) (River Phoenix, Corey Feldman)
100. Lost in America - (1985, Albert Brooks) (Albert Brooks, Julie Hagerty)