Chris Knipp's 2012 MOVIE BEST LISTS

[Chris Knipp]

MY 2012 LISTS

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9279/tarantinodjango.jpg

This was clearly a good year for "foreign films," not a fair category to compare with the American ones, since it simply means "all the others," and releases come from various years. The Dardennes, Haneke, Audiard and Leos Carax -- the latter not having made a feature film in thirteen years -- are all great directors, and so are Joachim Trier and Mia Hansen-Løve, despite both of them still being young. Ursula Meier, a Swiss who makes the sixth in the list who works in French, is my discovery of the year, and she has brought with her, so to speak, an astonishing barely teenaged actor, Kacey Mottet Klein, in Sister, a film built around his performance as a boy surviving on the edge of a posh Swiss ski resort by stealing equipment.

Two terrifying and amazing adult male performances this year came from Joaqim Phoenix as the wild man who comes under the sway of Robert Seymour Hoffman's budding cult leader in The Master and Denis Lavant as the shape-shifting "actor" in Leos Carax's mind-boggling Holy Motors.

This had seemed like a patchy year for American movies for a while, except for a stream of good indie films, a field in which the most remembered may be Beasts of the Southern Wild. I have reservations about that film, but it takes us deep into the floodwaters of its outliers southern milieu. Usually the best American indie films are not flashy, but little, quiet, and specific. (See the list.) Whit Stillman and Todd Solondz are auteurs, with perhaps not their best work, but still unique (Stillman also coming back after thirteen years, like Carax. Let's hope he's got the juices flowing again now.)

In America we have masters too and the two Andersons, Wes and Paul Thomas, along with Quentin Tarantino made this a vintage year Stateside after all. Okay, Cronenbberg is Canadian, but the novelist he brought to the screen in Cosmopolis, Don DiLillo, is as American as Henry Miller or Philip K. Dick, and this is a pitch-perfect adaptation of a timely and under-appreciated novel. Movies look better when I see them in Paris, and that's where I saw Moonrise Kingdom, Rust and Bone, Avé, and Sister. They also look better at Lincoln Center in the New York Film Festival, or other series there, where I saw Life of Pi, Flight, Amour, Breathing, Barbara, Goodbye, First Love, I Wish, Neighboring Sounds, The Raid, Footnote, Twilight Portrait, Donoma, Snows of Kilimanjaro, Rebellion, This Is Not a Film. . . It's a constant film feast at Lincoln Center. I frankly have a good time at the movies, especially when I'm in those two cities. This is why I have so many lists; and I could add more, films that were fine, but didn't fit any particular list.

It's not very special when Spielberg makes a movie any more, Tintin and War Horse last year, now Lincoln this year, all old fashioned and well made and not very interesting. Not very exciting to have movies by Soderbergh either these days. Two this year, Haywire and Magic Mike, liked by some, but both, in my opinion forgettable; there is the feeling that he is cranking them out. On the other hand, when Wes or P.T. make a movie, it's news. And when Quentin makes one, it's big news. Django is almost as much of a mind-bender as Holy Motors. Enjoy.

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/5656/627rx.jpg

BEST AMERICAN
Moonrise Kingdom (Wes Anderson)
The Master (Paul Thomas Anderson)
Django Unchained (Quentin Tarantino)
Cosmopolis (David Cronenberg)
Silver Linings Playbook (David O. Russell)
Looper (Rian Johnson)
Life of Pi (Ang Lee)
The Sessions (Ben Lewin)
Flight (Robert Zemeckis)
Beasts of the Southern Wild (Benh Zeitlin)

http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/6600/704tokyo.jpg

BEST FOREIGN
Holy Motors (Leos Carax)
Amour (Michael Haneke)
Oslo, Aug. 31st (Joachim Trier)
Sister (Ursula Meier)
Rust and Bone (Jacques Audiard)
The Kid with the Bike (Dardennes)
The Deep Blue Sea (Terrance Davies)
Breathing (Karl Markovics)
Barbara (Christian Petzold)
Goodbye, First Love (Mia Hansen-Løve)
The Day He Arrives (Hong Sang-soo)
Elena (Andrei Zvigentsev)
Miss Bala (Gerardo Naranjo)
I Wish (Hirakazu Koreeda)
Neighboring Sounds (Kleber Mendoça Filho)
Wuthering Heights (Andrea Arnold)
The Raid: Redemption (Gareth Evans)
Footnote (Joseph Cedar)

BEST AMERICAN INDIE FILMS
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (Stephen Chbosky)
Damsels in Distress (Whit Stillman)
Dark Horse (Todd Solondz)
Being Flynn (Paul Weitz)
Middle of Nowhere (Ava DuVernay)
Safety Not Guaranteed (Colin Treverrow)
Smashed (James Ponsoldt)
Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris)
Jeff, Who Lives at Home (Jay, Marc Duplass)
For Ellen (So Young Kim)

BEST UNDISTRIBUTED IN THE U.S.
The Minister (Pierre Schöller)
Twilight Portrait (Angelina Nikonova)
Donoma (Djinn Carrénard)
Snows of Kilimanjaro (Robert Guédiguian)
Rebellion (Mathieu Kassovitz)
Avé (Konstantin Bojanov)
Bwakaw (Jun Robles Lana)
First Cousin Once Removed (Alan Berliner)
Camille Rewinds (Noémie Lvovsky)

BEST DOCUMENTARIES
How to Survive a Plague (David France)
Chasing Ice (Jeff Orlowski)
The Central Park Five (Ken, Sarah Burns, David McMahon)
The Gatekeepers (Dror Moreh)/The Law in These Parts (Ra'anan Alexandrowicz)
The Imposter (Bart Layton)
Step Up to the Plate (Paul Lacoste)
This Is Not a Film (Jafir Panahi)
Searching for Sugar Man (Malik Bendjelloul)
Photographic Memory (Ross McElwee)
The Waiting Room (Peter Nicks)

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/4623/amazingspidermanposters.jpg

BEST BLOCKBUSTERS
The Amazing Spider-Man (Marc Webb)
The Dark Knight Rises (Christopher Nolan)
Skyfall (Sam Mendes)
The Hunger Games (Gary Ross)

TURNOFFS OR DISAPPOINMENTS
The Campaign (Jay Roach)
The Dictator (Sasha Baran Cohen) (Enough, already!)
Easy Money (AKA Snabba Cash, Daniel Espinosa)
Haywire (Steven Soderbergh)
Hyde Park on Hudson (Roger Mitchell)
Rock of Ages (Adam Shankman)
Prometheus (Ridley Scott)
Seven Psychoaths (Martin McDonagh)
Take This Waltz (Sarah Polley)

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/2145/paperboykidmanefronunde.jpg

IN A CLASS BY ITSELF
Cloud Atlas (Wachowskis, Tykwer)
The Paperboy (Lee Daniels)

MOST OVERRATED
Argo (Ben Affleck)
Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (Nuri Bilge Ceylan)
The Cabin in the Woods (Drew Goddard)
Lincoln (Stephen Spielberg)
Magic Mike (Steven Soderbergh)
Compliance (Craig Zobel)
The Loneliest Planet (Julia Loktev) Overrated by some; many haven't seen it.

MISSED SO FAR
As of this list-making time I have not yet seen these highly recommended films:
Zero Dark Thirty (Kathryn Bigelow) Already overwhelmed by the controversy, but Bigelow is a fantastic action filmmaker.
Only The Young (Jason Tippet and Elizabeth Mims) Feature-like doc that sounds irresistible.
The Impossible (Juan Antonio Bayona) sounded good but now is sounding terrible the way the trailers (endlessly repeated) had made it look to begin with.

[oscar jubis]

Being someone who reads your reviews consistently, what surprised me from your list(s) is the inclusion of Looper as one of the 10 best American films of 2012. I remember a lukewarm response so I found your review, which is favorable but still characterizes the film as "a bit of a disappointment". If you don't mind my asking, I am curious about how films are judged and how that may evolve, did you watch the film again, or thinking about it afterward altered your opinion, were you won over by a review you read, or something else? I watched this well-made film on a big screen a couple of days ago and found it entertaining as long as you don't question its logic and plausibility but certainly not particularly edifying or impressive.

[Chris Knipp]

You are right: my review doesn't indicate that I would rate LOOPER so high. Certainly my mind kept going back to the film, and it stood as memorable and original and acquired a greater glow, despite my initial disappointment. I cannot say that my reviews always reflect my final view. My high rating may also be seen as a nod to the hip, younger audience that LOOPER is ideally suited for. Neither are my year's end lists written in stone, though there's not much point in changing them much after the fact, because to do so would only confuse people and shake whatever small degree of faith they may have in my judgment. But all these things are uncertain. LOOPER belongs up there.

If you wrote a longer review maybe we could have a discussion. I think it's pretty well agreed that LOOPER is ingenious and clever, and logic and plausibility shouldn't be made an issue. Not sure what "not particularly edifying or impressive" might mean in your case. If it's well made and pretty original, isn't that impressive? Why should any movie have to be edifying? Impressive might just mean good, but if you're looking for edification at the movies, you would often be coming to the wrong place, though not always, of course. Anyway, I think LOOPER has a lot of class. I'm not sure I can say exactly why. Partly I'm just looking for a range of stuff on my list. Anything below the first few on my American list is considerably less impressive in my mind. On the Foreign list, there are more items and I think very highly of the first not just three or four, but ten or twelve. Another thing is that this year I omitted having a "Shortlisted" list so I don't have a place for runners-up. But I have so many lists, that means I think well of a lot of films, but also that lessens the importance of any one list or any item on one of the lists. It's not like I pick ten. But I'd remind you that on my Best Movies of 2012 So Far thread, I posted a Ten Best of 2012 list that I made up for IndiWire, and that didn't include LOOPER. It was this:

1. HOLY MOTORS (Léos Carax)
2. MOONRISE KINGDOM (Wes Anderson)
3. AMOUR (Michael Haneke)
4. THE MASTER (Paul Thomas Anderson)
5. OSLO, AUG. 31ST (Joachim Trier)
6. SISTER (Ursula Meier)
7. RUST AND BONE (Jacques Audiard)
8. THE DEEP BLUE SEA (Terrence Davies)
9. DJANGO UNCHAINED (Quentin Tarantino)
10. COSMOPOLIS (David Cronenberg) + SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK (David O. Russell)

Obviously I've left ZERO DARK THIRTY off this list and all my lists because I didn't see it before I made them up, but I'm not worried about that because I think it's overrated and needs to be taken down a peg (I gave it a 7 out of 10 on another site).

[oscar jubis]

Thanks so much for your reply. I understand where you're coming from, so to speak. Your writing is important to me because your reviews are often the only ones I read (I read a lot of books and essays about film history, esthetics, theory, etc since it is my profession and vocation). To be honest, I would find it to be a chore to have to review contemporary films on a regular basis. You provide quite a service to me in terms of helping me choose which new releases to watch. I may not like movies like Looper and Holy Motors as much as you do but I know that if you really like a movie I will find it worth watching. The most important films I watch are old films that I discover for the first time, including silents. Two films from the 1960s (an era that interests you) that I watched for the first time in 2012 are more impressive to me than any of the new films. They are Alain Robbe-Grillet's L'Immortelle and Mario Monicelli's The Organizer. I recognize that my value to this site is diminished because I usually delay my viewing of new releases and watch less of them that I used to. A lot of my film watching nowadays is connected to the courses I am teaching, the courses I am designing to teach in the future, and films relevant to my dissertation. However, I do contribute my "two cents" whenever possible. I plan to watch Sister this weekend and will eventually catch up with the other films you list/recommend.

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks, Oscar. I'm surprised and pleased to learn you use my reviews of new movies as a reference. Your contributions here are valuable even if your work as a film scholar puts you behind on the latest releases. Watching those as much as I do can be a chore, I agree, but I've adapted to it. I pride myself on being ready to watch nearly anything.

Being in the Bay Area lately and not NYC I've had less to see in theaters and so I have caught up on a lot of Buñuel and Bergman on Netflix Criterion DVDs . So here's a sort of home viewing journal.

Believe it or not I had never seen all of L'AGE D'OR, or seen any of VIRIDIANA, DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID, THE EXTERMINATING ANGEL, THE PHANTOM OF LIBERTY, THE DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE. I re-watched BELLE DE JOUR. Also watched the documentary material about Buñuel on the Criterion DVDs. Then I re-watched several Ingmar Bergman films also on Criterion and caught up on ones I skipped when they came out, including AUTUMN SONATA, THE VIRGIN SPRING, SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE, FANNY AND ALEXANDER (these aren't in chronological order), and -- my favorite and biggest discovery -- Bergman's "Faith Trilogy," THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY, WINTER LIGHT and THE SILENCE. THE SILENCE doesn't quite fit; it feels like a Swedish knockoff of Antonioni with a touch of MARIANBAD, but it's good and the black and white images may be the most beautiful and stylized of any Bergman film. THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY and WINTER LIGHT, the latter especially, seem to me the purest Bergman, unadulterated nordic angst. PERSONA I also had not seen. I think he's trying too hard in that one, but it's groundbreaking in its way. In a CRIES AND WHISPERS I think he and the critics were fooled, that it's more an outline for a Bergman film than a real Bergman film, and he drifts into mannerism.

All in all I really dislike Buñuel's films and can see why I avoided going to most of the later ones when they came out, but I recognize his stunning originality. On the other hand from all the Criterion documentary material, I find Buñuel most sympathetic as a person and he probably would have been really fun to know. As for Bergman, it's the opposite. Though I only really may fully admire only half his films and think some are very much overrated, the ones I like, I totally love, like WILD STRAWBERRIES (which I also recently re-watched), THE SEVENTH SEAL, and I guess THE VIRGIN SPRING, as well as some of the contemporary relationship films and the Faith Trilogy. As for the man, it's the opposite. I can admire his high ambition, superb teamwork, and enormous output as a writer, theater director and filmmaker, but in human terms in his private life he was almost a total loss, a failure as a husband and a father whose selfishness and egncentrism were despicable. Yet being a bad human must have suited him: he was amazingly vigorous and intellectualy alert well into his eighties in his comfortable lonely exile on "his" island of Färo. I'm still watching a few more of his films. I'm going back to some of his earlier ones that I may or may not have seen, starting with SUMMERS WITH MONIKA (which I know I've seen). Also will watch SARABANDE again, which i think you defended and I thought lackluster originally. Maybe I'll like it better with SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE (plus the miniseries version) fresh in mind.

From my colleagues on the British site Flickfeast.uk, (http://flickfeast.co.uk/) where I hang out and contribute some of my reviews now, I learned about Alan Clarke, and I've just watched SCUM. I'm going to watch Clarke's other two big features, the one that featured a young Tim Roth, MADE IN BRITAIN, and the one with Gary Oldman, THE FIRM. Clarke clearly was a trailblazer who made strong statements about the British underclass. SCUM is a total classic and was Ray Winstone's debut.

Of course I saw BIG DEAL ON MADONNA STREET, but -- have I seen Monicelli's THE ORGANIZER? I reviewed his last film, DESERT ROSES, (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?2058-Open-Roads-New-Italian-Cinema-At-Lincoln-Center-2007&p=17996#post17996) as part of the 2007 Lincoln Center Open Roads Italian series. A related review was of Comencini's IN THE FACTORY (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?2293-Open-Roads-New-Italian-Cinema-At-Lincoln-Center-2008&p=20227#post20227) (Open Roads 2008). I've watched a couple of Italian Sixties films in the past year -- DIVORCE ITALIAN STYLE, VAGHE STELLE DELL'ORSA, SEDUCED AND ABANDONED -- and I'd like to watch more, catch up on ones I've missed. Visconti's VAGHE STELLE DELL'ORSA, also known as SANDRA (1965) I actually first watched in Perugia, Italy in 1966. A strange brooding piece, with beautiful black and white making remarkable use of dark shadows for thematic purpose. You can watch it in its entirety on YouTube here, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWBP2O6LO-k) if you haven't seen it (recommended). The dramatic shawdows remind me of another missing film of the period, Jean-Gabriel Albicocco's 1961 THE GIRL WITH THE GOLDEN EYES/LA FILLE AUX YEUX D'OR, which I have not been able to see since that time. I first excitedly watched that at a presentation of Amos Vogel's Cinema 16 in 1961, and later in a special series at the American University in Cairo in 1965. I found it very haunting and atmospheric and would love to see it again. But to get back to Monicelli, the Italians made some great comedies in the Sixties.

[Johann]

Just to let you know, I now live in Toronto.
Permanently.
TIFF will be covered in the fall.
WITHOUT accreditation. They can ram their press pass where the sun don't shine.

:)

[Chris Knipp]

I was glad to see you've moved there. It is reportedly a great movie town, even off-festival times. TIFF seems a daunting event, but I hope you can find ways and means of seeing some of the interesting screenings.

[Johann]

I'm hitting the ground running. I start tomorrow with the 70mm screening of THE MASTER and I'll be haunting the Bell Lightbox all year.
They have some great stuff lined up: 70mm 2001: A Space Odyssey, Larry Kent's THE BITTER ASH, Hollywood Classics, etc.
That's why I said it'll be a great year. Movies galore...

[Chris Knipp]

Lucky you! But you deserve it.

[oscar jubis]

Thanks, Oscar. I pride myself on being ready to watch nearly anything.
It's one of the things that gives you credibility and authority as a film critic.


Being in the Bay Area lately and not NYC I've had less to see in theaters and so I have caught up on a lot of Buñuel and Bergman on Netflix Criterion DVDs . So here's a sort of home viewing journal.
Great! I tend to appreciate Bunuel more but Bergman is just as great. I've been intending to rewatch F&A and haven't gotten around to it.



From my colleagues on the British site Flickfeast.uk, (http://flickfeast.co.uk/) where I hang out and contribute some of my reviews now, I learned about Alan Clarke, and I've just watched SCUM. I'm going to watch Clarke's other two big features, the one that featured a young Tim Roth, MADE IN BRITAIN, and the one with Gary Oldman, THE FIRM. Clarke clearly was a trailblazer who made strong statements about the British underclass. SCUM is a total classic and was Ray Winstone's debut.
I'm familiar with Alan Clarke but have yet to see his movies. A gap in my education no doubt.


Of course I saw BIG DEAL ON MADONNA STREET, but -- have I seen Monicelli's THE ORGANIZER?
Trust me when I say that The Organizer is a major film that you will truly enjoy.
I don't know if you like the Nouvelle Roman but if you like Marienbad, you should check out the early movies directed by Robbe-Grillet too.
I also plan to watch Marguerite Duras' films soon.

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks. Any film critic who reviews new films has to be open to pretty much anything. When I asked that questoio about THE ORGANIZER I really meant I'm not sure I had seen it or not but I haven't. Lincoln Center had a Monicelli series (http://filmlinccom.siteprotect.net/archive/wrt/programs/1-97/monic/monic.htm)-- but it was in 1997! Maybe I can get it from Netflix. (No -- they list it but it's not available, though I see there is a Criterion DVD.) By the way one of Monicelli's films is CARO MICHELE, and I've read that Natalia Ginzburg novel in Italian. It's great that while he was making those solemn sick-soul-of-Europe films in the Sixteis, Mastroianni was also making great comedies in which he was hilarious.

Why do you like Buñnel more than Bergman?

I don't know of any Robbe-Grillet-directed films available for rental. Films directed by Duras if that's what you mean, only one is available on Netflix. So when you say I "should check out" these movies, there is no way I can.

[Chris Knipp]

Every since I've been spending key periods of the year in NYC gobbling movies to review I've followed Armond White, a brilliant, fiercely independent, provocative film critic who has few equals. You will find his annual "Better Than" list on City Arts here (http://cityarts.info/2013/01/09/better-than-list-2012/). White is a member of and has been chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle. Indeed as he says, you will find some of these films in his Better Than list you have not seen. I strongly disagree with some of his choices here -- I wouldn't rate LES MISERABLES above most anything, for instance -- and I haven't yet seen THE LADY, SACRIFICE, A THOUSAND WORDS, GHOST RIDER, DETENTION, TAKEN 2 or THE SKINNY. As usual some of these linkings are bafflingly off-the-wall; but that's part of the fun. White is following his own thoughts and his own perceptions. We know why he links HOLY MOTORS and COSMOPOLIS (both are trips in white stretch limos, obviously) and sure, HOLY MOTORS is the better film, by far, though COSMMOPOLIS has not been wrongly acclaimed as LINCOLN, COMPLIANCE, ARGO, THE LONELIEST PLANET and THE TURIN HORSE have been. I am with him on all of those. This list furthermore makes me realize that I've been wrong myself to list BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD among the years best and that I did it as a palliative to white liberals, and to its inde ambition, whereas I did not think it worthy of great acclaim. It didn't affect me emotionally and it has an ersatz Sundance importance about it.


Better-Than List 2012
by ARMOND WHITE on Jan 9, 2013

Armond White takes stock of the past movie year in annual list

In 2012, politics became personal fantasy. Movies weren’t just entertainment but were used to justify escapist (possibly even anti-social) points of view. Critics misread films to suit their politics, but they could do so only because filmmakers were similarly biased. The year’s movies glorified power, just in time for our presidential election (as when Spielberg’s Abe Lincoln replaced honesty with political chicanery). That heartbreaking reconfiguration of history parallels our distorted contemporary art and politics, which indeed was the subject of the year’s most masterly film, Andre Techine’s Unforgivable. Thus the 2012 Better-Than List salutes the movies that preserved aesthetic complexity, humane values and honesty. The best films weren’t necessarily apolitical, but their artistry transcended transitory politics. If you don’t know these movies it’s only because our slanted media constabulary favors crap.

Unforgivable > Zero Dark Thirty
Andre Techine tested political correctness against the difficulty of family/social life. It was the most sophisticated and morally challenging film of the year. Its essential politics exposed Kathryn Bigelow’s non-committal and unexceptional genre movie, a “mission accomplished” delusion. Techine showed how “family” and forgiveness are unfinished missions.

The Deep Blue Sea > The Loneliest Planet
Terence Davies’ gay sensitivity to sex roles (and memorable performances by Tom Hiddleston and Simon Russell Beale) bested Julia Loktev’s juvenile view of female infidelity and male weakness.

Sacrifice > The Master
Chen Kaige finds the roots of culture in patriarchal responsibility; P.T. Anderson loses culture’s meaning in anti-religious hysteria and high-art folly. Chen also featured superior acting by competing father figures You Ge and Xuegi Wang.

Holy Motors > Cosmopolis
Leos Carax’s dreamy limousine kineticism shamed Cronenberg’s oft-entrancing limousine stage drama. Carax parked and bloomed. Cronenberg parked then harangued.

Les Miserables > Once Upon a Time in Anatolia
Tom Hopper and cast preserved the power of pop opera, while Nuri Bilge Ceylan cynically, tediously observed man’s inhumanity to audiences.

Dark Horse > The Turin Horse
Todd Solondz’s modern soap opera steadily, comically bored into our self-deceptions, while Bela Tarr’s highbrow jape steadily bored us.

The Lady > Lincoln
Luc Besson’s bio-pic examined Aung San Suu Kyi’s marital and political commitment, while Spielberg’s unholy marriage to Tony Kushner pushed the cult of personality. Aphorisms vs. Propaganda.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, Taken 2 > Zero Dark Thirty
Neveldine-Taylor and Olivier Megaton revealed the post-9/11 zeitgeist in genre tropes, while Bigelow reduced the zeitgeist to an enigmatic comic strip, a “mission accomplished” delusion.

A Thousand Words > Argo
Brian Robbins and Eddie Murphy dared the most personal Hollywood critique since Clifford Odets’ The Big Knife; Ben Affleck trivialized Hollywood accountability.

Damsels in Distress > Compliance
Whit Stillman showed affection for female independence, while a po-faced indie’s misogyny masqueraded as class critique in the year’s worst film.

Moonrise Kingdom > Beasts of the Southern Wild
Wes Anderson’s fable of childhood innocence lifted the curse of racist liberal condescension preferred by Benh Zeitlin’s obnoxious, way-late Hurricane Katrina fantasy.

The Skinny > Django Unchained
Patrik Ian-Polk’s gay comedy expanded and enhanced black American life, while Quentin Tarantino treated blacks, whites and the history of slavery to comic violence.

Americano > Amour
Mathieu Demy sourced his family heritage (our cinema heritage), while Michael Haneke celebrated the end of life (and cinema). Joy vs. pessimism.

Detention > The Life of Pi
Joseph Kahn dared trace modern moral confusion to its pop culture source, while Ang Lee offered banal 3D philosophizing.

Chronicle > 21 Jump Street
Josh Trank’s existential teen flick achieved beauty, deeper than the adolescent nonsense of a TV-franchise movie that was the year’s second-worst film.

[Johann]

Armond wields a pretty considerable sword, doesn't he?

[Chris Knipp]

Yes, and I have hardly begun to comment on this list of his. I love his choice of CHRONICLE over 21 JUMP STREET; that's very smart. Of course DARK HORSE over THE TURIN HORSE is witty, as is HOLY MOTORS over COSMOPOLIS. Perhaps my favorite is DAMSELS IN DISTRESS (unjustly neglected by me, esp,. since I adore Whit Stillman) over COMPLIANCE -- and he is absolutely right: COMPLIANCE is a terrible movie!

Armond White thinks completely outside the box, especially important, essential really, during this terrible, boring, limited thing that is "awards season."

[Johann]

I love that he makes no bones.
He really gets down to it, which is what I want from a critic.
He provokes in a way that I really REALLY like.
He chooses his words well, and he could raise the ire of filmmakers in short order.
Nothing wrong with that.
That's my kind of guy.

[Chris Knipp]

Yes, Johann, Armond White is your kind of guy. Mine too. I like Walter Chaw too. Chaw is another independent American film critic. You'll find him and several colleagues online at Film Freak Central. (http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/) Not that White and Chaw are in any way similar, except in their outspokenness. In face, in Walter Chaw's 2012 Best Lists (http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2013/01/film-freak-centrals-top-10-of-2012.html), he includes in the top ten six of the films Armond White condemns. I think they both dislike BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD.

[Chris Knipp]

_________________________________________________

R.I.P. AARON SWARTZ

News came to me today of the suicide in Brooklyn at age 26 of computer programming prodigy and internet freedom advocate Aaron Swartz. He was under threat of a big government suit, could have gone to jail for a long time for wire fraud and computer fraud (hacking JSTOR files via MIT, somewhat arbitrarily designated as a "felony"). He was also subject to depression. But mostly he was much beloved for his selflessness, kindness, and good character, and he fought hard for freedom of information and the freedom of the internet--from the age of 14! Worry over the impending trial and penalties and enormous cost of a defense probably contributed to his death. Aaron's family and business partner blame the government's aggressive stance (see article (http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/33965/title/JSTOR--Regretted--Fraud-Case/)). JSTOR, the organization that he was alleged to have wronged against, withdrew charges and was sorry to have brought them. The President of MIT has written expressing deep sympathy and regret. His parents' statement includes the statement, "Aaron’s death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach." You can see the government's direction in the threats against Julian Assange and the treatment of Bradley Manning and the harsh silencing of other whistleblowers. From Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/aaron-swartz/): "The world is robbed of a half-century of all the things we can’t even imagine Aaron would have accomplished with the remainder of his life. . .When he was 14 years old, Aaron helped develop the RSS standard; he went on to found Infogami, which became part of Reddit. . . .Among countless causes, he worked with Larry Lessig at the launch of the Creative Commons, architected the Internet Archive’s free public catalog of books, OpenLibrary.org, and in 2010 founded Demand Progress, a non-profit group that helped drive successful grassroots opposition to SOPA last year." Aaron was a hero for many. He used his prodigious talents for the common good. The program Democracy Now broadcast (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/1/14/freedom_to_connect_aaron_swartz_1986) this morning (13 Jan '13) a half-hour speech by him giving a lively account of the rise and fall of SOPA from his personal point of view. He was a vigorous, clear, and engaging speaker.

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/2978/aaronswartz.jpg
AARON SWARTZ (November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013)
Photo by Sage Ross

[cinemabon]

I listened to his speech after I saw the post on Saturday. He was pursuing acknowledgment that the copyright laws on the internet had huge holes in them. I found the link to his speech embedded in this story on Huff post, but I'm not certain if it's still there. I can't begin to express my dismay and sorrow and anger over the prosecutorial handling of this case and the treatment of Aaron Swartz. My condolences if you knew him, Chris.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz_n_2463726.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

[Chris Knipp]

I did not know him but I think we should all be sad. Even though he was only 26 he had had 12 years of activism. He is very widely admired and mourned.

[Johann]

Very tragic.

[Chris Knipp]

Yes, it is. It is a case when one so young has already done so much and yet feels beaten down by the system and by the repressive forces he sought all his life to oppose, that he became overwhelmed with frustration, anguish, and grief. He still leaves a legacy that's remarkable.

[Johann]

His is the kind of story movies are made of.
Tragic wake-up call movies.

The system is a Serpent.

[Chris Knipp]

It is worthy of a movie but how can you end this way?

[Chris Knipp]

From the Huffington Post Politics story (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz_n_2463726.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular), "Aaron Swartz, Internet Pioneer, Found Dead Amid Prosecutor 'Bullying' In Unconventional Case":


We need a better sense of justice, and shame. For the outrageousness in this story is not just Aaron. It is also the absurdity of the prosecutor’s behavior," Lessig wrote. "[Aaron] was brilliant, and funny. A kid genius. A soul, a conscience, the source of a question I have asked myself a million times: What would Aaron think? That person is gone today, driven to the edge by what a decent society would only call bullying."

Swartz's friend Henry Farrell, a political scientist at George Washington University, also pointed at the DOJ. "His last two years were hard, thanks to the U.S. Department of Justice, which engaged in gross prosecutorial overreach on the basis of stretched interpretations of the law," he told HuffPost. "They sought felony convictions with decades of prison time for actions which, if they were illegal at all, were at most misdemeanors. Aaron struggled sometimes with depression, but it would have been hard not to be depressed in his circumstances. As Larry Lessig has rightly said, this should be a cause for great shame and anger."



We do we crush the best and bravest people we have?

[oscar jubis]

It's great to see so much activity here at filmleaf as of late. I'm back to respond to CK's comment several posts earlier about the inability to "check out" films directed by Robbe-Grillet and Duras and indeed I should have known/mentioned that many (most) of their films have not been released on video in the US. Only Duras' impressive Nathalie Granger and Robbe-Grillet's not as impressive late films are available. Goes to show or evidence how many films are there waiting to be discovered! I mean, if a great French (Nouvelle Vague) film like L'immortelle (1963) is practically unknown in America, imagine how many films from other not-as-famous national cinemas, from other not-as-celebrated historical periods, are awaiting discovery...
I'm going to cop out of comparing Bunuel and Bergman or explaining why I prefer the former because the reasons have to do with personal sensibility rather than anything that would apply to anyone else.

[Chris Knipp]

That was what I thought; personal sensibility, or elective affinity. I had no intention of comparing Buñuel and Bergman. it's of no significance that I have happened recently to watch a lot of both. I'm aware that a lot of good French films are unknown over here and, correspondingly, unavailable.

[oscar jubis]

I should have added that in a way EVERYTHING (I mean everything that was ever released on any video format anywhere in the world) is available for download and transfer to disc. But it can be very complicated and I don't know how to do this (I have a friend who does). There are people who sell these films that are "unavailable" on DVD-R to the public online. Here's one: http://www.ioffer.com/selling/tjbcmx44?page=5

[Chris Knipp]

Yeah, in a way. But you're getting into a complicated, tricky topic there. THE GIRL WITH THE GOLDEN EYES/LE VILLE AUX YEUX D'OR, which I mentioned recently, is available on French DVD and so are a lot of great French films we can't get here on US DVD.

[oscar jubis]

I continue to catch up with the notable films of 2012 and today I finally watched the Cannes winner (film culture's biggest prize?) Amour. You list it 2nd best foreign film and call it masterpiece (which means something when the writer uses the term sparingly). Glad to find myself quite pleased, even overjoyed at such profound spectacle. The key moment of Amour for me is the decision to resuscitate Anne for the penultimate shot of the film because of the rhetorical and interpretative possibilities it creates. In such an austere film, as you rightly call it, the resonance of a moment like this one becomes amplified. By the way, I couldn't find an "Amour" thread, so I posted here. I'm going to watch Barbara this weekend, perhaps others.

[Chris Knipp]

It doesn't matter I guess, but the logical place to post on AMOUR would be the NYFF 2012 thread. (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?3329-Nyff-2012&p=29500&highlight=nyff+2012#post29500) where I just posted about the coming release of Garrone's REALITY -- because it was the one film I had expected to be in the NYFF (as AMOUR was) but didn't find there. What do you mean by: "The key moment of Amour for me is the decision to resuscitate Anne for the penultimate shot of the film because of the rhetorical and interpretative possibilities it creates"? How would that go in simple English?

[oscar jubis]

One major limitation of reviews is the prohibition against discussing the endings of films in detail (to avoid "spoilers"). Also, print reviews often have size limitations that prevent anything from being discussed in detail. I think the ending of the film is absolutely brilliant, and worthy of a serious essay. For now, a response to your questions and some brief notes.

Haneke doesn't want suspense or mystery regarding Anne's death thus he begins Amour by showing us her corpse. Then the film flashes back and moves in linear or straight chronology while adhering to strict realist logic. That is, until the next-to-last, 3-minute shot that finds George resting in bed then suddenly startled by the sounds of dishwashing. He gets up, walks to the kitchen and there is Anne talking to him as if it's all good. He is dumbfounded but continues to play along as she directs him to get his coat to go out and they disappear inside the elevator. The camera traces a "U" as it follows the action in one single take.

The preceding sequence should not go unremarked. Georges is writing when he notices that a dove has somehow gotten inside the apartment. Haneke dedicates more than 3 minutes of screen time to Georges catching and tenderly cradling the dove. Then he sits to continue writing (is it a letter, a diary, a suicide note?). He writes about the capture of bird and reveals that he set it free. This is where Haneke cuts to Georges resting in bed and the resuscitation of Anne that follows.

In the last scene, their daughter comes into the apartment. It is bathed in natural light, immaculately clean, with doors and windows open, still furnished but picked up, perhaps emptied out. No sign of Georges.

The scene in which Anne comes back to life is the key scene relative to thinking about what Haneke is trying to communicate (rhetoric) in Amour and how the viewer is meant to understand its succession of shots (interpretation). However, the preceding sequence and the last shot also serves to form and complicate meaning, of course, with the essential participation of the attentive viewer.

[Chris Knipp]

You said a mouthful. The "spoiler" rule is a great deadener, and of course a review of a limited length can't go into much detail. None of your discussion here could be presented in a conventional movie review, limited to 1,000 words usually. The final sequence you describe seems to me very typical of Haneke. Anyway, thanks for expanding. I'd forgotten some of the shots. It is all pretty confusing. Is the elevator metaphorical, a ride to heaven? The way the police are breaking into the apartment earlier indicates that George walled himself up inside and committed suicide. We don't want to go into the details further, to "protect" people who haven't seen the film; but of course we'd have to do so to have a real discussion. One remembers the mystification of CACHE'. The ending in particular, but all through. Is anything real? Does showing Anne's corpse at the outset really mean "Haneke doesn't want any suspense or mystery regarding Anne's death"? How do you really know that, when there are other mystifying moments? AMOUR isn't as straightforward as it may appear, particularly not in the ending and the framing. It's not "realistic" at all, but only appears so. The way Anne's initial "episode" (a stroke? some kind of cerebral incident) is also mysterious, because she simply goes dead, and then when Georgee returns she comes back to life, so to speak. It's not the way such things usually appear in real life. I'd say "that's just Haneke," and I don't like everything about his style by any means, even as I say this is a masterpiece (I think THE MASTER is a masterpiece too, but not as austere and elegant a one, simply a more alive and human one, perhaps). We could discuss this further but I'm interested in what you brought up and am glad to be reminded of it. Unfortunately while I see all the movies, I don't have the time to think about them in such detail, as a result.

[oscar jubis]

Haneke is a master at leaving what I like to call permanent gaps in exposition thus inviting the viewer to use his imagination to fill them. This aspect is most prevalent in films like Cache and The White Ribbon but it is true of his filmography, generally speaking. This opening up of interpretative space is something that Haneke stresses in interviews while simultaneously refusing to say much that would privilege one interpretation over others. I think it is important to point out that Haneke's films can be austere and realist, like Amour, but that serves to potentiate and call attention to moments that are anything but austere and realistic, moments that may carry the burden of meaning. I do believe there is a transcendental element in Amour that feels absolutely undeniable but I agree about the need to "protect" readers who haven't seen the film so they are free to read the film as it suits them. Many people who don't watch a lot of subtitled films are rushing to this one after the Oscar nomination. I hope that includes everyone who participates in our forums.

[Chris Knipp]

I would agree. The big question is the extent to which Haneke can be considered humanistic, as against just cold and off-putting, a god-like know-it-all, and so, is AMOUR warmer than his other films? And if so how and to what extent?

[oscar jubis]

"the extent to which Haneke can be considered humanistic, as against just cold and off-putting, a god-like know-it-all" (CK)
I guess some cinephiles find Haneke "cold and..." or did earlier in his career. I don't know how to respond without probing into that characterization of Haneke, which may refer to some of his films and not others. Is he "cold" because of the sadism in Funny Games and the depictions of affectless violence in Benny's Video and 71 Fragments for a Chronology of Chance? Is it perhaps the refusal to be explicit about the cause of the apocalypse in Time of the Wolf or the reason for a family suicide in The Seventh Continent? Can a filmmaker be deeply concerned with the state of humanity and use a "cold" or clinical (provocative?) approach to reveal his concerns? I have more questions than answers.

Rosenbaum has championed The 7th Continent and Code Unknown but sometime around the release of The White Ribbon he called Haneke "our pious admonisher" and compared him to Stanley Kramer... (not a compliment)

[Chris Knipp]

"Our pious admonisher," yes, that's right. He has a snooty, know-it-all quality about him, in which somewhere also his greatest strength may also lie. His films have hints of profundity, greatness, but if they do not sing it is because they are so sad. He hurts but he hurts so good, we love it. THE SEVENTH CONTINENT was the most depressing movie I had ever seen. Most of Haneke's films are basically depressing. They are often hard to watch. That are also often marvelous.

I haven't seen Benny's Video and 71 Fragments for a Chronology of Chance? , or I may have started watching and then given up, I'm not sure. His FUNNY GAMES is punishing and the what could be more punishing than to do it all over again in America?

When THE WHITE RIBBON won at Cannes some thought it too conventional, not very exciing, and his filmmaking isn't very free or bold.

Can a filmmaker be deeply concerned with the state of humanity and use a "cold" or clinical (provocative?) approach to reveal his concerns?

Yeah, why not? I'm not sure whether your question is whether Haneke is really cold, which really is just something one feels, or whether Haneke logically should be cold given what you think are his concerns. Maybe you misconstrue his concerns, or fail to sere the loftiness of his admonishing.

I have a lot of reservations and/or don't find him particularly appealing, but Hanake still seems to me as to the Cannes juries one of the great filmmakers of our era.

[oscar jubis]

I will be writing about three or four of his films for my dissertation (and reading the ample bibliography on Haneke). I am definitely a fan. I think Code Unknown and The White Ribbon are "as good as it gets". Amour is not far behind in my estimation. I find Benny's Video and both versions of Funny Games intolerable. Cache is very good, and everything else is interesting. His adaptation of Kafka's The Castle for Austrian TV is supposed to be very good. Apparently it ends in mid-sentence like Milos Forman's Black Peter.

[Chris Knipp]

I agree. He is good to write about and good to teach. Some good films it's hard to find much to say.

[Johann]

Can a filmmaker be deeply concerned with the state of humanity and use a "cold" or clinical (provocative?) approach to reveal his concerns?

Oh Yes.
Kubrick and Lars von Trier do it with every film.
Haneke is too depressing for me. I do not deny his genius, I just don't like such sustained plays on my psyche. ;)

[Chris Knipp]

You're lumping together very different artists. I don't see Kubrick as trying to make pronouncements at all; the other two are, but Lars is the more provocative, Michael the colder. There's no chill like the chill of Haneke. I see Kubrick as very warm a lot of the time. The intensity of his style generates heat. Anyway Oscar is asking a question about the compatibility of coldness of view and real concern about humanity, and that's a good one.

[Johann]

Kubrick made huge pronouncements. HUGE. And so does Lars von Trier- directly about humankind.
Stanley was labelled as cold and clinical his whole career. You and I know he packs supernova heat, but not many others.
Human beings are mostly unconscious easy-to-please saps and are not good for much. Look around you.

[Chris Knipp]

I didn't know Kubrick made huge pronouncements. I thought of him buried in the complex craft of which he was a master. What are some of them? Or where can I find them?

[Johann]

Paths of Glory: War can be insanely unjust
Lolita: Can or should a grown man lust after a young girl
Dr. Strangelove: Atom bomb threat is no joke when Leaders don't take it serious enough
2001: A Space Odyssey: Intelligent life may be out there, and if it is, man's technological achievements are MOOT
A Clockwork Orange: How sacrosanct is the STATE in rehabilitating criminals? Are their methods more evil than the criminals?
Barry Lyndon: How has social mobility changed from Napoleon's time to today? NOT MUCH AT ALL.
The Shining: If ghosts exist, then that is a POSITIVE sign for something beyond. RIGHT?
Full Metal Jacket: War can be insanely unjust. (The anti-Rambo film)
Eyes Wide Shut: Humans can't see the forest for the trees.

[Johann]

I feel compelled to add that Kubrick said:

Gentiles don't know how to worry.
and
There is no timetable for Salvation.

Those are two keys to him in my opinion.
Kubrick was seduced by very powerful people after he made Strangelove.
He was "their man".
"They" are the beautiful woman in The Shining who seduces Jack Nicholson in the bathroom,
WHO TURNS INTO AN OLD HAG, LAUGHING RIGHT IN HIS FACE.

[Chris Knipp]

Obviously PATHS OF GLORY, DR. STRANGELOVE, and FULL METAL JACKET are strong anti-war, anti-military statements. On that, Kubrick definitely put commitment into work and like all his movies they are definitive statements about what they focus on.

Otherwise, of course Kubrick's films contain ideas -- how could they not? -- but some of those are questions, not pronouncements, and LOLITA doesn't really specifically ask that, besides which it's Nabokov's story, not Kubrick's. Does LOLITA ask a question, or is it simply morally ambiguous?

That said, looking into his "Gentiles don't know how to worry" reveals he did take life very seriously. However, in my view if I'm not being too literal, Gentiles do know how to worry. My mother was living proof of that. That's a funny statement, but I don't know where to go with it. One way apparently is Kubrick's fanaticism, and another is his inability to confront the Holocaust, discussed in this connection in a book by Geoffrey Cocks: (http://books.google.com/books?id=nJ9h50sMkOMC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=kubrick+gentiles+don't+know+how+to+worry&source=bl&ots=5eyEJ2y5Bl&sig=PTMHiUAWd0-DnULietrHgqrH6u0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oZsaUa2aDdHH0AGV3oCQCQ&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=kubrick%20gentiles%20don't%20know%20how%20to%20w orry&f=false) called THE WOLF AT THE DOOR: STANLEY KUBRICK, HISTORY, AND THE HOLOCAUST

[Johann]

Lolita was hampered, and yes, it was Nabokov's. That title we can leave out.

Kubrick had a lot to say, but he needed others to give him the inspiration to say it.
He wrote nothing original himself, but he always wrote his screenplays himself, often with another notable author.
He is on record as saying if a director does not write his own screenplay (original or adapted) then he never wants to meet him.
He only met PT Anderson because Paul wrote his own films.
If you didn't write your own film, Kubrick dismissed you like a cockroach.

The Holocaust is a major part of Kubrick's life. He wondered how human beings could do this to other human beings.
He got very depressed while preparing it and had to abandon it, ultimately saying How can I even FILM it?
He also trumpeted Raul Hilberg's trilogy of books: THE DESTRUCTION OF THE EUROPEAN JEWS, a work he said was "Monumental".
Edgar Reitz' German HEIMAT film series also riveted Kubrick. (available on DVD by Facets)
He saw the world in motion, in action and in TOTEM.
Whether or not he was correct in his reflection of that in his films will always be fine fodder for cinephile discussion.
And it shouldn't be any other way.
:)

[Chris Knipp]

What about the Claude Lanzman documentary SHOAH, which I saw a year or so ago for the first time? Another monument on the Holocaust. Kubrick, Kubrick, Kubrick. One could make him one's life's work, the way Kevin Brownlow has Abel Gance's NAPOLEON. Personally I admire directors who do their own writing, either from scratch or from a borrowed work, but if they don't, I see no reason to send them to Attica. Film writers are an abused group, as the Coens' BARTON FINK dramatizes, but I see no reason to banish them entirely.

[Johann]

It's hard to even get a screenplay SEEN, let alone made.
Kubrick just felt that if you had no hand in the writing then you have no handle on the picture, your personal stamp is greatly diminished.
He felt one man should make a film. ONE.
Film is the ultimate in collaboration, but the Director is sacrosanct at the end of the day.
The movies' success rests with him.
And so does its failure.

I've never seen SHOAH.
Should I see it?

[Chris Knipp]

One can obviously see the value of putting an individual stamp on every aspect of the collective effort that is a film, especially the crucial element of the writing, but great directors nonetheless do seem to often work with screenplays written by others than themselves. It makes a lot of sense to have another writer or writers, an adaptor if it's an adapted screenplay, but for the director to collaborate in the writing and do some final editing. I think that was usually the case with Hitchcock, Kurosawa, and others. Real "auteurs" like the two Andersons, Tarantino do their writing, but in the great Hollywood studio days, surely writers were always on hand, abused and tormented though they were (BARTON FINK). My favorite film, Kurosawa's IKIRU, was co-scripted. A Hitchcock film I've always personally liked, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, is from the novel by Patricia Highsmith but was adapted by Raymond Chandler. Fellini's LA DOLCE VITA was co-scripted. Often the director comes up with the original story idea and then has it turned into a screenplay by a writer. The point is there is no one way to do it, and declaring that only the director must write his own screenplay and nothing else has any value is an authoritarian, absolutist remark that ill fits with the complexity and flexibility of the filmmaking process. Kubrick was obviously passionate about his methods and his standards and required an intense amount of control.

You should see SHOAH if you have any interest in the Holocaust and in documentary filmmaking. It's a classic. It was re-released by IFC and I saw it at the IFC Center in NYC in late 2010. I didn't write about it. It's all been said. The notable things are that it is very long, it took 20 years to make, and it uses nothing but interviews, not one frame of archival footage. Some of the testimony is harrowing for both the speaker and the viewer. I will never forget a Polish former officer remembering the streets of the Warsaw ghetto and the living dead who wandered them. Unquestionably one of the world's great documentary films. It was shown in two segments when I saw it, with mid-way breaks in them. 503 minutes.

[Johann]

That is a long running time for Shoah.
But the subject is extremely important.
No footage is needed to be shown to anyone.
I've seen real footage of the camps. There are bootleg DVD's out there of incomprehensible things, and anti-semites/neo-nazi sick fucks keep it in circulation. And I've seen "marches", where they stripped groups of women of their clothing and shot them all, their bodies piled on top of each other. Sheer horror. The emaciated people..sad beyond belief. Just skeletons, with SS Officers walking tall around the genocide. It will put a knot in your stomach so hard and fast it's not funny.

No footage is needed. Testimony is fine enough. I will look for it, but not with any joy.

[Johann]

there is a new documentary that you should seek out Chris: WEST OF MEMPHIS.

It's about the West Memphis Three, 3 youths who were charged and convicted of murder in Arkansas when they didn't do it.
My Man Henry Rollins made a benefit album to free them called RISE ABOVE, and they are now out of prison.
Peter jackson produced it, and it has high-profile people like Eddie Vedder and Henry speaking in the film.
It's playing here in Toronto and I'll try to see it tonite. If not, then by weekend's end.
The soundtrack aparently has a track by Henry that is AMAZING. (and he doesn't do music anymore-so it must be)

[Chris Knipp]

I know about it and it's been much talked about but I have not had the opportunity to see WEST OF MEMPHIS. Its Metacritic rating is 79, the same as the much praised and awarded (and excellent) SEARCHING FOR SUGAR MAN and the ditto CENTRAL PARK FIVE.

By the way did I mention that the Metacritic rating of SHOAH is 99? That puts it in a small list of under a dozen in their system that got 99 or 100.

[Johann]

Wow. That is a high rating.
I noticed that Marcel Ophuls called it the greatest documentary ever made.
If he says that, then it must be something significant.
I'll look to buy it- that's one thing about Toronto I love: you can find almost any film here on DVD.

[Chris Knipp]

SHOAH I find on Amazon US they have a deal, 4 discs for $29. That's quite a bargain. New. List price about a hundred bucks.

[cinemabon]

You could say "Spartacus" was an anti-war picture as well.

[tabuno]

Until I had watched Django Unchained which I deposited the Blockbuster rental back tonight, I couldn't in good conscience present my list of best movies. But perhaps as a self-fulfilling prophecy, the movie didn't impress me that much and I found a variety of problems with it which I already know is much admired by most on this site. But it is with the following consideration, my opinion of the best movies of last year.


1. Les Miserable (2012). This musical epic brings forth a richness and detail that enhances the original Broadway version in its descriptive emotive understanding of the feelings and ideas and themes of each of primary character’s motivations and sufferings. Rivaling the spectacle of Doctor Zhivago (1965) and Moulin Rouge (2001) the large screen is filled with compelling visual humanity equivalent to Shakespeare’s pen bringing forth the written word and transporting its audience into a world of live spectacle of invaluable proportions. Except for a few voice-over musical spots detracting from the intimate power of the movie. Oscar Best Picture, Actor Nominee, Golden Globe Best Picture Musical or Comedy Nominee, Actor Comedy or Musical [12/25/12]. 9/10.

2. Hitchcock (2012). This movie provokes intense visceral human emotions of sorrow, fear, passion, and redemption packaged in a movie premised around a horror film. The subtle acting, the tight editing, the storyline incorporates horror images and the humanity behind the faces on the screen, a richness, a feeling of a real human being behind the actor acting the actor. This movie contends a rich vibrant period piece that still delivers an emotive message of universality about aging, about relationships, about the feelings behind the façade of people. Hitchcock is easily among such dramatic, insightful, and involving movies as Anthony Hopkin's own Slip Stream (2007), or Helen's Mirren's own The Queen (2006), Changeling (2008), The Aviator (2004) as well as the surprise silent stand out The Artist (2011). Hitchcock offers much in the way of revealing more about others and ours selves, bringing out thoughts and emotions of value as George Clooney in Up In The Air (2009) or the surprising performance of Adam Sandler in Punch-Drunk Love (2002) or the intimate revealing relationship in The Cooler (2003) all with the finesse of Lost in Translation (2003) and the emotive impact of Black Swan (2010). Golden Globe Best Actress Drama Nominee, [Reviewed 12/16/12]. 10/10.

3. Silver Lining Playbook (2012). The best theatrical portrayal of mental illness in an outpatient setting, his family, and the resultant impacts on his relationships and society in general. This compelling and sometimes seemingly authentic and raw American look at the intensity of mental tragedy without the cliques and caricatures is emotively visceral and redeeming of the soul. Oscar Best Picture, Director, Actress Winner, Actor Nominee, Golden Globe Best Picture Musical or Comedy, Best Actor and Actress Comedy or Musical Nominee [Reviewed 12/2/12]. 10/10.

4. Argo (2012). With an excellent tight and well edited script by Chris Terrio and direction by Ben Affleck of an unique and real espionage event surrounding the rescue of six American Embassy employees during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Argo becomes a gripping, well told event movie that is both dramatically gripping and emotionally compelling on a very human level. Oscar Best Picture Winner, Golden Globe Best Picture Drama, Director Nominee, [Reviewed 10/14/12]. 10/10.

5. Cloud Atlas (2012). A movie for the ages, spanning 500 years and six different stories with actors playing multiple roles that captures both the eternal bonds of love and individuality along with individual and corporate corporation or control. A visually dizzying, sometimes raw, and at time funny look at individuals and their convoluted relationships and their environments. [Reviewed 10/28/12]. 9/10.

6. Moonrise Kingdom (2012). Reminiscent of Stand By Me (1986), A Christmas Story (1983), and Juno (2007), this story of two runaways on an island community is a contemporary fairy tale of a entertaining, captivating cinematic experience loaded with stylized humor and presentation. Golden Globe Best Picture Musical or Comedy Nominee, [Reviewed 6/22/12]. 9/10.

7. Looper (2012). Similar to Bruce Willis in 12 Monkey’s (1995), this fusion of time travel, action, mystery thriller, and family drama incorporates more layered characters and emotionally riveting scenes thanks to director Rian Johnson. The acting is solid and the script is cerebral, taut, and substantive. Except for an “initial” futuristic set design that is too heavy on its reliance from other sci fi movies and an unnecessary looper wannabe character’s persistent overuse, Looper is defined by intense universal themes of sacrifice and personal dreams of love and humanity. [Reviewed 9/30/12]. 9/10.

8. Safety Not Guaranteed (2012). Using time travel as a backdrop, Safety Not Guaranteed is about regret, about the deeply personal experiences of "love" and the stuff we carry around with us that we make us embarrassed or afraid, ignoring the possibility of acting on the own stuff. This movie offers a fusion of normal and abnormal behavior, everyday life along with the comedic and dramatic surprises, even tragic, that life drops in on people from time to time. The movie incorporates conspiracy theory, mystery thriller, and romance and comedy (the last two aptly displayed separately). The movie keeps the audience guessing, leaping from one belief about sanity to another belief about insanity, keeping the audience feeling uncomfortableness, entertainment, and being off-balance – to almost a dizzying sense of a delicious mixture of sweet and sour, hot and cold. What's special about this movie is that it doesn't explain explicitly and allows the audience to become immersed into the film experience and discovery and speculate in their own time and in their own way. The only distracting element was the sync over musical scene that distanced and partial broke the magical immersion into the movie and instead flipped the audience back into more outside perspective looking into the scene. What the audience is allowed to come away with is the mixture of the past and the present and how one's experiences the now that may offer another future. In the end this movie is about going it alone or with a partner, when if one chooses a partner, you have compromises and sacrifices but also someone their to cover your back. [Reviewed 2/7/2013]. 9/10.

9. The Dark Knight Rises (2012). The movie unfolds almost like a human mystical fairy tale with all the tortuous agonies of human angst experiences in everyday life. Even with its technical flaws like There Will Be Blood (2007), this movie is able to over come them with its qualitatively deep characters, a densely morally ambiguous theme about rich and poor, about good and bad, and a cerebral undercurrent and a well executed, edited dramatic action thriller along with a summertime climax. [Reviewed 7/21/12]. 9/10.

10. Life of Pi (2012). A storyline that is powerful enough to transcend the 3-D flaws, the censored natural violence, the unnecessary and sometimes distracting flashback technique, and underdeveloped religious fusion, evolving into an epistemological and spiritually nurturing conundrum involving man and beast, man and nature. Oscar Best Picture, Director Nominee, Golden Globe Best Picture Drama, Director Nominee, [Reviewed 12/15/12]. 9/10.

11. The Devil’s Carnival (2012). This odd crazed fantasy with hideously florescent garish colors with incredibly few special effects and mostly set design throws the audience into a dark circus-like nightmare of the devil to test the souls of three people. With off-balance trapping like the animated Coraline (2009) and the exaggerated, over the top Billy Flynn's Chicago (2002) flash, and even echos of television's Buffy The Vampire Slayer's "Once More, With Feeling" 2001 musical episode, The Devil's Carnival offers a strange, but captivating nightmarish brush with emotive intensity. From the female selfish thief, to the naive young girl, to the grief-stricken father each has the tale to tell in trials that aweigh them. This short, low-budget movie moves smartly in a well paced, off-kilter musical bonanza of sight and sound...a less sexy version of The Rocky Horror Picture Show of today but with as much if not more underlying substance and as shockingly different and innovative as Dogville (2004). [Reviewed 11/10/12]. 9/10.

12. Big Miracle (2012). A compelling and one of the few recent movies to be well edited in its pacing that sustains a dynamic riveting tension reminiscent of A24" without physical action and violence. Based on a real-internationally news broadcast animal event, Drew Barrymore and cast provide a family drama that captures its audience wholesale. [Reviewed 1/5/12]. 9/10.

13. Salmon Fishing in the Yemen (2012). As the sheik would say this movie is about faith and fish and science. Within this film unfolds a breadth of human emotional experiences that reveal a depth and substance usually lacking in most light-weight comedies. It deals with relationships and their intensely riveting impacts on the human soul, about international politics, pain of war, political marketing and imaging, about assumptions and motivations of other people and work and "sandwiches," and cultural suspicion and awareness, about tragic death, killing and hope, about loss and reclamation (of life) and loss again, overcoming challenges and adversity, about peace and the human dreams of something more unifying offering up understanding and resonating, compelling but simple emotions. Perhaps the only weakness would be the somewhat underdeveloped relational partners in the movie. Additionally, within this film the director has made great use of cinema with timely snatches of animation bubbles, subtitles, and little photographic effects (such as the pan in from a huge distance, split-screen, or even plain video) that don't intrude upon but enhance the movie, used with a confident flair, instead of a pretentious, insecure one interspersed throughout the movie. Only a few movies of note have similar themes: The Shipping News (2001); The Secret of Roan Inish (1994); A River Runs Through It (1992) ; Seducing Doctor Lewis (2003). [Reviewed 1/13/2013]. 9/10.

Honorable Mention

Brave (2012). An animated medieval coming of age movie that particularly highlights the mother-daughter relationship, with great visuals in 2D, strong storyline, good editing, liberal dose of humor, a strong message, and good action that makes great use of the animated medium. Strong, nearly top ten outcome. Best Animated Oscar. [Reviewed 6/24/12]. 9/10.

Dark Shadows (2012). An uneasy, but successful blend of comedy, drama, horror, and thriller in this Tim Burton/Johnny Depp adaptation of the television series. Mr. Burton has carefully incorporated the old and the new, making more sharp and poignant the essence of vampirism and the connection to the core of eternal love. A close top ten movie. [Reviewed 5/13/12]. 9/10.

Lincoln (2012). Daniel Day Lewis offers up a fine performance in this political drama concerning the passage of the 14th Amendment towards the end of the Civil War. Nevertheless the unveiling of the behind the scenes political machinations omits the more balanced coverage of the totality of events during this time and gives too short shrift to the backstories of the primary characters in the movie. It is the momentous, fascinating events themselves and Lewis’s performance that carry this movie, not the actual direction nor script itself that make this movie that shows through despite its weaknesses. Oscar Best Picture, Director, Actor Nominee, Golden Globe Best Picture Drama, Director, Actor Drama, Nominee, [reviewed 11/18/12]. 8/10.

Lucky One, The (2012). A carefully, well edited, and solid romantic drama with the nicely underplayed rich storyline. Except for the need for unnecessary, dramatic or more stereotypical ending, this movie may have been able to capture a top-ten movie listing. [Reviewed 4/22/12]. 8/10.

Men In Black III (2012). Another solid, fun, and entertaining sci fi action comedy adventure with Josh Brolin putting in a for seamlessly younger Agent K. This movie’s strong plotline, nice twist, and a trans-temporal character make for a crisp, new adventure with this well-paced, and interested. The movie is weakened in the beginning by Tommy Lee Jone’s character seemingly oddly aged and dull listless performance in the beginning of the movie, along with an inordinately harsh and violent opening, and an underdeveloped Emma Thompson as Agent O. But in the end, the movie was well worth the money spent and engaging throughout. [Reviewed 5/27/12]. 8/10.

Mirror, Mirror (2012). Tarsem Sigh has directed a lavish and difficult live action fairy-tale with remarkable acuity incorporating Julia Roberts evil persona with a dramatic, humorous dose of fantasy that never is broken in its presentation. [Reviewed 3/30/12]. 8/10.

Odd Life of Timothy Green, The (2012). This family drama is a fusion of August Rush (2007), a young adult version of Meet Joe Black (1998) and Heaven Can Wait (1978). What makes this particular movie stand out is how it avoids the traditional sweet syrupy sludge of typical feel good juvenile movies. Instead the script incorporates a more encompassing view of life, including its funny moments, innocent experiences as well as the drama of hurt, sadness, and loss. In sort, this is a very nicely balance movie that includes a slice of life look at our own experiences but through the lens of honesty and the hopes and dreams of many parents and their children as well. This is a movie about what can be and is. [Reviewed 8/26/12]. 8/10.

People Like Us (2012). This relatively straight-forward family drama has Chris Pine having to decide about following his deceased father’s desires for him to give a large inheritance to a sister he never knew he had. With a new focus on brother-sister, mother-son, this mainstream but edgy movie brings forth strong emotion resonance involving relational issues that many of us at one or another must face ourselves. [Reviewed 6/30/12]. 9/10.

Total Recall (2012). Using the same fascinating plot points of the original (1990), this remake can easily stand on its own with this nicely layered Blade Runner (1982) setting admit a innovative jump in the futurist and logically believable car chase and remaining plot editing. Unfortunately, the psychological twists have already been revealed for old-timers, taking some of the unpredictable, suspense our of the movie. [Reviewed 8/4/12]. 8/10.

Rock of Ages (2012). Tom Cruise, Alec Baldwin, Catherine Zeta-Jones (in a limited role), and new comers Julienne Hough and Diego Boneta offer strong vocal performances in this movie for the aging that nevertheless bring new life to the lyrics of love and pain. A few weaknesses in production number balance, a clashing number on a billiard table scene take a bit of the shine of the Rock in this movie. [Reviewed 6/17/12]. 8/10.

Safe House (2012). Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds star in this solid espionage action thriller that has great cinematography and gritty action. Unfortunately a few weaknesses and an overly American ending keep this movie from being a qualitatively and consistently step above even The Bourne Identity (2001). [Reviewed 2/12/12]. 8/10.

Zero Dark Thirty (2012). The beginning part of the movie offers unnecessary chaotic audio-only track, while the much talked about controversial torture scenes were tame compared to the fictional violence of most action, adventure thrillers such as Daniel Craig's brutal beating in Skyfall (2012) and even such actions as urinating on the detainees which was widely reported by the news media at the time were omitted. Jessica Chastain's character was uncharacteristically stereotypical during the early torture scenes and subsequently underdeveloped. There is the bus explosion that was inconsistently muted and only indirectly shot. The movie strengthens towards the end with the final insurgent sequences with some minor editing and logical problems. Oscar Best Picture, Actress Nominee, Golden Globe Best Picture Drama, Director, Actress Drama Nominee. [Reviewed 2/23/2013]. 8/10.

Good But Failed to Make the Grade

The Amazing Spiderman (2012). The movie’s plot weaknesses can’t make up for a sincere attempt at a slightly darker and grittier Spiderman in the way The Dark Knight transformed into a much more human Batman (2008). [Reviewed 7/7/12]. 7/10.

The Avengers (2012). A rather chaotic and disparate collection of superheroes that Joss Whedon, director and writer can’t quite get the ensemble cast smoothly working together even as actors. Somewhat enjoyable, but too many characters and subplots to be supremely satisfying. [Reviewed 5/6/12]. 7/10.

Bourne Legacy (2012). This fourth Bourne movie without Jason Bourne is also a great script with an adequate director and performance by its cast making for many missed opportunities to raise the level of action thrillers. Adding in a rather unspectacular ending, the movie can only offer some tantalizing glimpses of a Bourne movie scenario that takes as its fascinating premise a real-time side-by-side playbook of Bourne Legacy co-existing with the Bourne Ultimatum story line. [Reviewed 8/28/12]. 7/10.

Jack Reacher (2012). Oddly enough a decent movie but with flaws, with a nice ending. This Tom Cruise action vehicle sustains its suspense, but contains district plot weaknesses. [Reviewed 12/29/12]. 7/10.

Django Unchained (2012). While a decent spaghetti Western from Quintin Tarantino, it over-rated and filled with overly pretension attempts at cuteness along with a variety of weak plot points or cinematic flaws that detract from the basic storyline and presentation. Oscar Best Picture Nominee, Golden Globe Best Picture Drama, Director Nominee. [Reviewed 4/28/13]. 7/10.

Snow White and The Hunter (2012). An unwieldy attempt at producing a mature version of Snow White that although exciting at times, unsuccessfully humanizing the evil queen, fails to retain the original magic and fantasy of the original. [Reviewed 6/3/12]. 7/10.

Disappointments

Prometheus (2012). Another fabulously amazing visual experience that can’t hide the blemishes of a weak plot that becomes two-dimensional by the end of the movie. [Reviewed 6/10/12]. 6/10.

Redlights (2012). A promising occult psychological horror that like Event Horizon (1997) degenerates into another psycho-wannabe. [Reviewed 1/22/12]. 6/10.

Skyfall (2012). Oddly enough the aging Bond theme unlike Sean Connery in Never Say Never Again (1983) is perhaps too successful in this movie in that this latest version seems tired and worn out, containing big explosions as if to make up for the loss of connective tissue in this movie. Oddly enough this humanizing version of Bond as well as its limp attempt a incorporate some of Roger Moore’s humor doesn’t work well and the emotional connection remains distant, disconnected. The Bourne Supremacy (2004) angle does work well here but Bourne’s crisp, tight, cerebral script is lacking in Skyfall. [Reviewed 11/9/12]. 6/10.

Terrible

Lockout (2012). An inane attempt to replicate an espionage action thriller in outer space using Escape from New York (1981) and Outland (1981) as beginning points. But the flawed plot continuity or logic and the one dimensional characters make this movie mostly unwatchable. [Reviewed 12/12/12]. 2/10.

Loneliest Planet, The (2012). The most boring, confusing, inane movie produced. [Reviewed 12/30/12]. 1/10.

Missed/Haven=t Seen Yet

Hyde on the Hudson (2012), a comedy about an FDR love affair, Golden Globe Best Actor Comedy or Musical Nominee.
Promised Land (2012)

[oscar jubis]

Thanks for sharing your list, TabUno.

I was deeply moved by the performances in Les Miserables, especially Hugh Jackman's and Anne Hathaway's. They get a lot of well-deserved close-ups.

I finally watched Hitchcock last week. Honestly I was afraid the film would be grossly mean, salacious and inaccurate about the famous but misunderstood master and it is not; not grossly so. It is actually quite enjoyable in ways you explain well.

My faves from your list are Silver Linings and Moonrise.

I haven't seen Cloud Atlas but I read a review that called it: "incomprehensible". Now I am intrigued by it.

I also just watched Django. I found some of the most amusing lines of dialogue I heard all year. I got off on the acknowledgement of certain conventions of spaghetti westerns, a fresh sense of how to marry image to popular (and semi-popular) music, and Tarantino's usual juvenile playfulness. However, and expectedly, the pleasures are skin-deep. The film's violence is also more explicit than I prefer and the film is longer than the premise can sustain.

[cinemabon]

You and I couldn't disagree more on several films, but that is water under the bridge.

Under the category: flawed and horrible I would have to put "Hitchcock" as number one.

Most highly overrated film of the year? Argo (f**k yourself - the subtitle Ben Affleck gave his film)

You missed the boat on "Django Unchained" as Tarantino created what may be arguably his best film ever.

"Skyfall" was the best Bond to come along since "Goldfinger." If you knew anything about the franchise, you'd have to agree.

If "Les Miserables" was a good musical then I will hand in my horn for blowing the "musical note" on this website for over a decade.

Picks where we agree were "Silver Linings Playbook" and "Moonrise Kingdom" both of which relied on superb acting and excellent direction.

I found "Looper" refreshingly new twist on the time travel sci-fi genre; but any "Batman" movie relies too much on the original treatment Burton gave that tired old franchise.

"Life of Pi" was not only original in scope and visually stunning, but its examinations were personal and touching. A better "Best Picture" than "Argo" could ever hope to be.

[Chris Knipp]

I find considerable common ground with cinemabon this year, but like him, don't see any logic in tabuno's likes and dislikes, which seem sensible at times and daft at others. So it goes. De gustibus.

[cinemabon]

De mortuis nil nisi bonum

[oscar jubis]

My friend and colleague Ian lists END OF WATCH as one of his favorite films of 2012. I don't recall any reviews or comments about it here. Has anyone seen it? I haven't, but plan to. I also plan to watch Mirror, Mirror and Safety Not Guaranteed based on TabUno's recommendation.

I have difficulty understanding the extreme appreciation of LES MISERABLES and HITCHCOCK as either "best" movies or "horrible" movies.

[cinemabon]

"Don't get me started..." the famous line used by so many characters as it came from our parents.

"Hitchcock" has so many flaws in relation to the real Alfred Hitchcock that I don't know where to begin and the film is so presumptuous as to make it ridiculous in its assertions.

Tab and I debated the highs and lows of "Les Miz" on this site for weeks. We went back and forth so much that we finally called a truce. I feel the director made a crucial mistake by letting his actors sing on set to make it real. Tab felt it was a new innovation that breathed new life into the old medium. We both made points.

Chris, whose contributions to this site far outweigh anything any of us has ever made, stayed on the sidelines and offered sympathy to both parties. Go down the list and take a peek at what was said at the time, Oscar. Some of it is quite amusing. Some of it profound.

Where Tab and I agree were the films that brought us unique blends of styles, such as "Moonrise Kingdom." I believe all of us felt it was an under-appreciated film that should have received more recognition. I will certainly want to see "Mirror, mirror" and "Safety Not Guaranteed" as well because while I might disagree with my learned colleagues on this site from time to time, I respect the fact that they love cinema and I do reach each post with that same reverence as if I had written it, knowing they would appreciate my participation in any commentary based on mutual experience.

[Chris Knipp]

I applaud cinemabon's wise and diplomatic remarks and his sensible reminders of our earlier discussions.

I saw END OF WATCH. Committed acting, but not much memorable in the movie. MIRROR, MIRROR didn't sound worth the bother. SAFETY NOT GUARANTEED is a cute little indie film, worth seeing. Maybe save your time for better stuff though. Ars longa, vita brevis est. (Art is long, life is short.)

[tabuno]

I wish I could be as expressively honest and non-antagonistic as cinemabon. His writing is so honest but without demeaning the messenger. I wonder if he is married, if so, I could imagine how wonderful it would be, especially if his ability to communicate here transferred over to relationships (not that I'm suggesting anything, my wife wouldn't approve).

My review of Django Unchained may come out one of these days, but the movie and my reaction to it required another one of those extensive note takings, about four pages worth. It may take a lot of condensing. As I suspected, it was among one of the most difficult film experiences I've had to force myself through.

[cinemabon]

Sorry to hear that, Tab, as you've been perfectly expressive in the recent past (your review of "Oz" was spot on).

I was once elected as a delegate to the state convention (precursor to the national convention). I found politicians even more superficial and egocentric than actors! Me, me, me, me... blah, blah, blah... so I became a film director instead. Talk about being a traffic cop! Oiy ve! "Would you please look up toward this light when you get to this part of your line... you should be thinking about so and so." I felt as I was Stanislavsky and James Lipton rolled into one... and that was just commercials!

Film criticism is safer and far more removed (although I would love to travel with Chris sometime when he flies to France; i.e. Cannes... just once). I miss Filmex in LA. I miss going to the theaters in Seattle and LA. I miss the bustle of Hollywood and running into someone famous now and then. I miss my old friends, too. Water under the bridge, my friend.

It's good to be alive, healthy and going to the cinema... I love to read Chris Knipp, Oscar Jubis, Johann and you. Keep sharing, my friend... but edit before you post.